Image Source : FILE

1993 trains blast case: SC irked as accused jailed for 11 years with out framing of fees

“Convict him or acquit him,” an anguished Supreme Court noticed on non-framing of fees on an accused jailed for 11 years over serial blasts in a number of Rajdhani Express and different trains in 1993.

Underlining the proper to speedy trial, the highest court docket sought a report from the particular Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act court docket decide in Ajmer explaining why fees haven’t been framed in opposition to Hameer Ui Uddin.

“The Special Judge, Designated Court, Ajmer, Rajasthan is directed to submit a report to this Court within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order…The report shall clarify why charges have not been framed,” a bench of justices DY Chandrachud and M R Shah stated.

In its order handed just lately, the bench stated that to facilitate the submission of the report expeditiously, the registrar (judicial) will talk a duplicate of the order to the decide instantly in addition to via the Registrar (Judicial) of the High Court of Rajasthan.

During the listening to, advocate Shoeb Alam, showing for Hameer Ui Uddin stated the petitioner has been in custody since 2010 however fees haven’t been framed and trial is but to begin.

He stated that detaining an accused indefinitely with out trial is a gross abuse of rights of a person underneath Article 21.

Alam contended that the particular TADA court docket must have granted bail to the petitioner as there isn’t a prospect of the conclusion of the trial within the close to future.

“The allegations are yet to be proved in trial and there is no justification of pre-trial incarceration for 11 years,” he stated.

Advocate Vishal Meghwal, showing for the State, admitted that that fees haven’t been framed in opposition to the accused, however contended he was absconding for practically 15 years.

The bench then requested why the costs haven’t been framed when he has been in custody since 2010.

“He is entitled to speedy trial. Convict him or acquit him, we have no problem with that but at least hold the trial. He cannot be kept in custody indefinitely without trial,” the bench noticed.

Meghwal contended that the principle cause for the delay in framing of fees is that one of many co-accused Abdul Karim Tunda is lodged within the Ghaziabad jail.

“Then either you separate the trial or club the trial with his case but at least start the trial,” the bench stated.

Alam stated the Tunda case isn’t talked about by the state in its counter-affidavit. In his plea filed via advocate Farrukh Rasheed, the petitioner has challenged the TADA court docket of March 27, 2019 rejecting his bail software.

As per the prosecution case, on December 5-6, 1993, serial bomb blasts came about in Rajdhani specific trains — Bombay to New Delhi, New Delhi to Howrah, Howrah to New Delhi — Surat-Baroda Flying Queen Express and Hyderabad-New Delhi AP Express.

Two passengers misplaced their lives within the blasts and 22 suffered accidents. Five completely different instances have been registered at respective police stations in Kota, Valsad, Kanpur, Allahabad and Malkaj-Giri.

These instances have been later transferred to the CBI and re-registered underneath TADA at Jaipur, Ahmedabad, Lucknow and Hyderabad. Investigation discovered that the bomb blasts have been final result of 1 single conspiracy and therefore all instances have been clubbed collectively.

On August 25, 1994, the CBI filed chargesheet in opposition to 13 accused, who have been arrested, and 9 different absconding accused.

Hameer Ui Uddin was proven absconding. The cost sheet alleged that he was one of many accused who carried bomb gadgets and explosive substances to Kanpur on December 5, 1993.

Hameer Ui Uddin was arrested by the Uttar Pradesh Police and Lucknow Special Task Force on February 2, 2010 and was produced earlier than the Ajmer TADA court docket on March 8, 2010 which remanded him to judicial custody.

In 2010, an 8000-page cost sheet was filed in opposition to him underneath varied provisions of TADA and Explosive Substance Act, Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act and the Indian Railways Act. 

ALSO READ | Supreme Court to resume physical hearing from Sept 1, issues SOP

ALSO READ | 1993 Mumbai serial blasts convict dies


Latest India News

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *