Breach in attacker’s defence

The judge said Kazmi had acted irresponsibly and lied to court by saying he had not been aware the prosecution would present affidavits with the testimony of some witnesses,rather than producing the witnesses in court.

The prosecution’s case will continue. It failed to conclude,as planned,to produce all its evidence on the anniversary of the attacks. Chief investigating officer Ramesh Mahale remained to be examined.

The drama over Kazmi began after the court told special public prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam to file the 340 affidavits before examining his last witness,which would have meant closure of the prosecution’s case.

The judge asked Kazmi whether he accepted the affidavits provided by the prosecution or wanted to examine them. Kazmi then stood up and said,“I had not taken serious note of the affidavits as the prosecution had not moved an application and the affidavits were not part of court records. Since it was a voluminous document,I have not gone through them.”

The judge said Nikam had earlier made clear his intention of examining formal witnesses through affidavits,rather than court appearances. Kazmi replied,“If the prosecution had informed the court well in advance,then why did they wait so many months? Why this date,26/11? Inferences can be made.”

The judge directed Kazmi to return the affidavits immediately to the Crime Branch. He observed in his roznama that Kazmi was non-cooperative and wanted the prosecution to write an application even when he had been given an opportunity to study the affidavits well in advance.

“I will have to decide whether an advocate appointed by the court and who has the audacity of telling lies before the open court should be allowed to continue as a lawyer in the case. Without holding any inquiry I will pass an order on Friday,whether Kazmi will continue defending or not,” the judge said.

In the court,Kazmi said he was ready to quit and the court should decide. Outside,he told journalists,“Do I look like the sort who will withdraw? Do you think I will apologise?”

If the court does sack Kazmi,it will delay the trial as the court will need to appoint a replacement. Since 271 witnesses have already been examined,the new lawyer will seek time to go through the evidence to prepare his final arguments. Otherwise the court can tell lawyer K P Pawar,who is assisting Kazmi,to take over. Earlier,Anjali Waghmare,who had been appointed to defend Kasab,was sacked for professional misconduct.

Senior lawyer Mahesh Jethmalani said,“It is a practice to hand over documents of evidence which is formal in nature to defence lawyers. However,it is the right of the lawyer to accept the evidence submitted under section 296 of the CrPC or call the witnesses for cross-examination.”