Author: Anjali Mody
Publication: The Hindu
Date: December 22, 2002
URL: http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2002/12/22/stories/2002122204190800.htm
In the course of the December 13
Parliament attack trial, issues of admissibility of certain types of evidence
that could benefit some accused were raised. The decision on whether such
evidence could or could not be admitted was to be decided by the Judge,
S.N. Dhingra.
One such piece of evidence was an
interview given by Mohammed Afzal to the Aaj Tak news channel while he
was in police custody and which contained a reference to S.A.R. Geelani.
The videotape was played in court. A transcript of the interview:
Aaj Tak: Your friend Geelani. Some
literature pertaining to Osama bin Laden was found with him. Does he support
Laden?
Mohammed Afzal: Who? Geelani? Basically
Geelani is a professor. I never shared information about this with him.
Meaning, I knew him as a professor. That's it. I never shared any information
with him. But one day he told me: `Afzal, you are up to some mischief'.
That day I came to know that he knew something about me but not from me;
he actually knows this from Shaukat. So then to keep him at bay I told
him that there were two Pakistanis with me, who I had brought from Kashmir.
They basically want to go to UAE; so to keep him at bay, I told him this
much."
Mr. Justice Dhingra, in his judgment,
accepted this evidence as admissable and gave this interpretation: "Counsel
for the accused relied upon the testimony of the Defence Witness 4, Shams
Tahir Khan, and DW7, Manish Pandey. Shams Tahir Khan and Manish Pandey
are the two reporters who were present when the police produced the accused,
Mohammed Afzal, before the media and allowed them to interview him. Afzal
made a confession to the media at that time.
"The confession made by the accused
when he was in police custody is not admissible. However, the co-accused,
Geelani, wants to rely upon this confession to show that Afzal had exonerated
him in the interview. Shams Tahir Khan had stated that when he asked a
question about Geelani to Afzal, ACP Rajbir Singh was there and Afzal answered
the question but the ACP shouted at him that he was not to say anything
about Geelani.
"The answer which has been given
by Afzal in respect of Geelani is in tape, which is exhibit DW4/A. The
answer is that Geelani had doubted the intention of Afzal and made a query
to Afzal. Afzal learnt that Geelani had come to know something and that
it was Shuakat who had told Geelani.
"It is settled law that in a conspiracy,
only those conspirators are not liable who enter the conspiracy in the
beginning. Conspirators may keep on coming and leaving the conspiracy,
still each conspirator would be equally liable for the conspiracy.
"In this case, the entire circumstances
proved by prosecution show that initially it was the accused Afzal who
was baptised by Ghazi Baba. He in turn baptised Shaukat. Shaukat was close
to Geelani and it is Shaukat who baptised Geelani for the mission. Ultimately
all got together into this conspiracy; that is the reason Afzal thought
that Geelani had learnt about his activities from Shaukat. But thereafter
they all started working together for the five Pakistan terrorists. Afzal
has not stated the time when the knowledge was gained by Geelani. If it
had been mere learning and mere knowledge of the accused Gilani, he would
not have made a call to the accused Shaukat on midnight of December 12
and December 13, 2001."
