Premium
This is an archive article published on March 19, 2003

CBI ‘misinterprets’ hijack accused

The defence counsel for those accused of hijacking an Indian Airlines plane from Kathmandu to Kandahar moved an application on Monday, seeki...

.

The defence counsel for those accused of hijacking an Indian Airlines plane from Kathmandu to Kandahar moved an application on Monday, seeking permission to inspect the entire court file of the case, alleging his clients were interrogated by a foreign agency without his knowledge and their statements were ‘‘wrongly interpreted’’.

H.V. Rai, representing Dalip Kumar Bhujel and Bhupai Man Damai who are in Central Jail, said his clients told him on Sunday that FBI investigators had grilled them in January this year.

Madras HC raps judge for POTA case on juvenile
Chennai: The Madras High Court on Tuesday rapped Special Judge for POTA cases L. Rajendran for issuing a notice against a juvenile under the provisions of POTA. The high court said a juvenile must be proceeded against only under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2000.
Disposing of a writ petition filed by 15-year-old Prabhakaran, who was arrested along with some ‘‘Naxalites’’ by the Othankarai Police on November 24 last and on whom POTA was slapped by the ‘Q’ Branch police, Justice K. Sampath said the POTA court had exceeded its jurisdiction in agreeing to proceed against a juvenile under POTA.
‘‘The POTA court, in the present case, has exceeded its jurisdiction and trespassed into another territory and the mischief has to be undone,’’ Justice Sampath said in a 137-page order. In effect, the order would mean that the POTA charges against the boy should be dropped and only provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act should be applicable against him.
In the petition, Prabhakaran prayed to the HC that the special court be prohibited from proceeding with an inquiry and all future proceedings with regard to the teenager.
The petition said Prabhakaran was arrested by a team of police officials from his home during a combing operation on November 24, 2002. A case against him was filed in the Othankarai Police Station under various sections of the IPC, Indian Explosives Act and Indian Arms Act. He was presented before the Oothankarai Judicial Magistrate on November 25 that year and was remanded to judicial custody without checking if he was a minor.

Story continues below this ad

He moved an application at the special court of District and Sessions Judge S.N. Aggarwal, appending a six-page objection that he has sent to the US Ambassador in Delhi.

Rai has requested the Ambassador to ask the FBI to interrogate his clients again in the presence of their attorney since their statements had been wrongly recorded due to ‘‘wrong interpretations’’ made by a CBI team, taking advantage of the poor literacy of his clients.

In his application, Rai has also contended that a foreign investigating agency can only interrogate an undertrial after taking permission from the government of that country. He alleged that in this case all such rules were ignored.

The FBI found direct access to his clients and he got no intimation about it. Under the circumstances, Rai has demanded to inspect all records of the court file and documents relating to the case.

Story continues below this ad

He has cited the interim order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court which says that the defence lawyers would join all further proceedings of the trial commencing from March 24 till the final orders in the writ petition were passed.

The accused — Abdul Latif, Bhupai Man Damai and Dalip Kumar Bujel — have been charged under Sections 120b and Sections 302/307/323/326/342/363 and 506 of the IPC, Sections 4 and 5 of the Anti-Hijacking Act, 1982, and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act.

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement