Filegfhfg

Mohd. Ajmal Amir Kasab v. State of Maharashtra, (2012) 9 SCC 1

Penal Code, 1860

S. 302 r/w Ss. 120-B, 109 & 34 and Ss. 307, 397, 324, 341, 342 & 364 - Mumbai Terrorist Attack case - Sole terroristcaptured alive out of total of ten - Conviction of - Bold and voluntary confession, by said sole surviving Pakistani terrorist(TA-1 or tried Accused 1) under S. 164 CrPC corroborated by ocular evidence of eyewitnesses who had life and deathencounters with TA-1 and DA-1 (deceased-Accused 1), both of whom as a pair had been on a killing spree with highlylethal weapons at public places in Mumbai for about 3 hours, and further corroborated by forensic evidence, ballisticevidence, DNA evidence and a huge amount of other evidence - All such eyewitnesses easily identifying TA-1 anddistinguishing him from DA-1 (due to sharp contrast in their height) - Conviction confirmed by High Court for followingoffences, therefore, upheld: for multiple murder, murder with common intention and abetment, attempt to murder withcommon intention and abetment, abducting in order to murder, robbery with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt, andseveral other allied offences under IPC, committing terrorist acts punishable under S. 16 of Unlawful Activities(Prevention) Act, 1967, as well as offences under Explosives Act, 1884, Explosive Substances Act, 1908, and Arms Act,1959 [Ed.: remaining offences of which TA-1 has been found guilty have been dealt with in other Shortnotes], (2012) 9SCC 1-A

Evidence Act, 1872

Ss. 60, 45, 35, 65-B, 3, 5, 7, 24 and 27 - Best evidence - Reliable ocular evidence/eyewitness testimony - Primacy of -Large number of eyewitnesses deposed - Huge amount of other evidence on record, such as articles recovered, medicaland forensic reports, CCTV recordings, phone call records, station diary entries, police logs, etc. - Accused alsoconfessed in entirety before Magistrate under S. 164 CrPC - Since facts confessed to by accused were fully proved andcorroborated by ocular testimony, not necessary to refer to other evidence, (2012) 9 SCC 1-B

Criminal Trial

Identification

Identification of dead body in morgue and identification of photograph in fake identity card worn by accused who waskilled, in court, by persons who had encountered said accused before he was killed, relied upon as corroborativeevidence, (2012) 9 SCC 1-C

Criminal Trial

Identification

Gun (AK-47 rifle) whether swapped by accused when it ran empty with gun of same make of police officer killed by saidaccused - Determination of - Numbers on rifle, magazines, armoury records, ballistic analysis of dead bodies of personsshot by either weapon - Such evidence matching confession made by another accused person (TA-1) who hadaccompanied accused (DA-1) who had swapped rifles, (2012) 9 SCC 1-D

Penal Code, 1860

Ss. 121, 121-A, 122 to 126 and 302 r/w Ss. 120-B, 109 & 34 - Larger conspiracy to wage war against India - Separateattacks by 5 pairs of terrorists - Accused, TA-1 being a member of one such pair, confessing about larger conspiracy toMagistrate - Evidence that may be examined - Evidence relating to attack by other 4 pairs of terrorists at other places,held, is relevant for proving larger conspiracy and therefore, must be examined (though only TA-1 out of the ten terroristshad survived) - It is necessary to examine evidence of carnage at other venues committed by other four pairs (DA-2 toDA-9) to prove involvement of TA-1 and DA-1 in the larger conspiracy (though without such evidence their involvement inlarger conspiracy was also proved) - It was not, however, necessary to discuss evidence relating to other four pairs ofterrorists in great detail as they were dead and were not under trial, (2012) 9 SCC 1-E

The Practical Lawyer

http://www.supremecourtcases.com Eastern Book Company Generated: Sunday, January 10, 2016

Penal Code, 1860

Ss. 121, 121-A, 122 to 126 and 302 r/w Ss. 120-B, 109 & 34 - Larger conspiracy to wage war against India - Separateattacks by 5 pairs of terrorists - Involvement of TA-1 (member of one of the five pairs) in larger conspiracy, whetherproved - First important piece of evidence being confession of TA-1 before Magistrate about the entire planning andpreparation for attack in pursuance of larger conspiracy - Said confession being corroborated by enormous amount ofevidence of all kinds relating to involvement of TA-1 and DA-1 in larger conspiracy (when the duo, TA-1 and DA-1 wereplaying out their role assigned in pursuance of larger conspiracy as per TA-1's confession) - Evidence relating to other 4pairs (deceased co-conspirators) indicating mass killing of Indians and a few foreigners by them (166 being killed and238 injured), destroying property (worth Rs 150 crores), attempting to instigate communal riots within country by trying tocreate malicious false impression that attack was by Indian Muslims, embarrassing India by killing foreign nationals andspreading terror and taking foreign nationals as hostages so that pressure could be mounted on Government of Indiaand the States in respect of Kashmir - Most important piece of evidence being intercepts of telephonic conversationswhich deceased co-conspirators had with their handlers across the border in Pakistan - Involvement of TA-1 in largerconspiracy, held, established from enormous evidence of all kinds - TA-1, while shooting at CST Railway Station, CamaHospital, and at other public places along with DA-1 had connection with the attacks taking place at other places (TajHotel, Nariman House, Hotel Oberoi, etc.) by other 8 deceased co-conspirators (DA-2 to DA-9) - From intercepts oftelephonic conversations which deceased co-conspirators had with their collaborators across the border in Pakistan it isevident that the conspiracy did not stop with the 10 terrorists leaving Pakistani shores or TA-1 and DA-1 separating fromthem - It continued developing and growing while the larger conspiracy was under execution - The conspiracies came toan end only when all the remaining terrorists were killed at the places where they were holed up, (2012) 9 SCC 1-F

Penal Code, 1860

Ss. 121, 121-A, 122 to 126 and 302 r/w Ss. 120-B, 109 & 34 - Larger conspiracy to wage war against India - Separateattacks by 5 pairs of terrorists - Involvement of TA-1 in larger conspiracy, whether indicated from intercepts of telephonicconversations of co-conspirators - Motive of co-conspirators (DA-2 to DA-9) as indicated in intercepts of telephonicconversations being to spread wrong message that Indian Muslims were involved in Mumbai Terrorist Attack, bargainingor putting pressure on Governments in India by taking hostages (Indian and foreigners) so that Kashmir issue could beinfluenced - Motive as indicated by TA-1 in his confession also same - Effect and implications, (2012) 9 SCC 1-G

Penal Code, 1860

Ss. 121, 121-A, 122 to 126 r/w Ss. 120-B, 109 and 34 - Waging war against India - Terrorist attack in financial capital ofIndia (Mumbai) by 10 terrorists arriving by sea - Terrorists whether foreign nationals - Co-conspirators and collaboratorswho from a location outside India provided moral support, tactical advice and guidance by means of mobile phones toterrorists while terrorists were carrying out attack in Mumbai - Determination of nationality of terrorists, co-conspiratorsand collaborators - Terrorists whether from State of Pakistan - Co-conspirators and collaborators whether had providedsaid guidance from inside Pakistan - Determination of - Indian fishing boat (Kuber) hijacked by terrorists on high seas tocome to India and, thereafter by rubber boat/dinghy and its outboard motor by which they actually disembarked inMumbai, recovered with various articles belonging to or used by terrorists while travelling in Kuber and said rubberboat/dinghy - All articles indicated that they were from Pakistan - Routes taken by Kuber and rubber dinghy plotted basedon analysis of waypoints from mobile devices recovered from Kuber and dinghy (satellite phone and GPS devices) usedby terrorists to navigate their way to India - Said routes showed terrorists had made their way to India by sea fromPakistan via Gujarat near Porbandar (where Kuber had been hijacked) and then to South Mumbai - Outboard motor ofrubber dinghy of Yamaha make, established to have been dispatched to vendor in Karachi, Pakistan from Japan -Telephone intercepts of conversations of 5 pairs of terrorists while carrying out the attack with their collaborators inPakistan recorded, thereby establishing that in fact the terrorists' interlocutors were speaking from inside Pakistan,though various deceptive/masking devices had been used to try and show that the terrorists' interlocutors had Indiannames and were sitting in United States - Held, in light of the overall facts and circumstances, it is conclusive thatterrorists were Pakistanis, and co-conspirators and collaborators of the 10 terrorists with whom they were in constanttouch while the terrorists were carrying out the attack in Mumbai at various locations and from whom they wereconstantly receiving moral support, tactical advice and guidance, were sitting in a foreign land, which could only bePakistan, (2012) 9 SCC 1-H



Criminal Trial

Clues and Tell-Tale Signs/Forensics

Path taken by accused (terrorists) across the seas to come to India to commit terrorist attack - Determination of -Waypoints found from recovered satellite phones and GPS devices, used as basis to plot said path, (2012) 9 SCC 1-I

Criminal Trial

Identification

Articles of clothing, blankets, etc. matched with accused based on DNA test using stains of sweat, saliva and otherbodily secretions found on said articles and DNA samples taken from their dead bodies, (2012) 9 SCC 1-J

Criminal Trial

Identification

Provenance of article/place where article manufactured and then shipped to - Outboard motor/engine of a particularmake (Yamaha) manufactured by a multinational/transnational company - Determination of - Serial number used todetermine, upon video conferencing examination of expert of company concerned outside India, (2012) 9 SCC 1-K

Criminal Trial

Identification

Common substance used by a group of accused (group of terrorists) - Matching of different samples to link the accused- Matching of hue (appearance) and physico-thermal characteristics - Differential thermal analyser technique - Pink foamused to provide padding and cushion to explosive devices (IEDs) and hand-grenades to prevent them from explodingaccidentally while terrorists were carrying them around - Abovesaid techniques relied on to determine that various foampieces recovered from different crime scenes/persons were from same source, (2012) 9 SCC 1-L

Evidence Act, 1872

Ss. 10, 65-B and 7 - Conspiracy - Proof of - Intercepted telephone/mobile phone calls - Relied on, to prove existence ofconspiracy and to determine motive of conspiracy, (2012) 9 SCC 1-M

Criminal Trial

Motive

Intention - Inference of - Bases for - Intercepted telephone/mobile phone calls, (2012) 9 SCC 1-N

Criminal Trial

Clues and Tell-Tale Signs/Forensics

Intercepted telephone/mobile phone calls - Deception/masking devices to hide actual persons by or to whom and placefrom where or to where telephone calls were being made - Unmasking of - Use of proxy locations, fake names, domainname in another country, etc. - Place where mobile phones manufactured - Relevance, (2012) 9 SCC 1-O

Constitution of India

Arts. 21, 22(1) and 39-A - Right to free legal aid - Scope of - Legal representation/counsel at pre-trial/investigation stage



- Entitlement to, if any - Confession made to Magistrate when accused had no legal counsel - If vitiated trial - Need toshow material prejudice, (2012) 9 SCC 1-P


Arts. 21, 20(3), 22(1) and 39-A - Right to free legal aid, right to consult and be defended by a lawyer - Legalrepresentation/counsel at pre-trial/investigation stage - Scope and purpose of, in Indian context as found in Indianstatutes, clarified and distinguished from scope and purpose of right against self-incrimination principles as laid down byUS Supreme Court in Miranda, (1966) 16 L Ed 2d 694 - Sufficiency of Indian statutory protection against self-incrimination even in absence of a lawyer at pre-trial/investigation stage, pointed out, (2012) 9 SCC 1-Q


Arts. 21, 22(1) and 39-A - Right to free legal aid, right to consult and be defended by a lawyer - Evolution of right inIndian context and its implication - Right to legal aid under Constitution - Manner of interpretation - Organic structure andevolution of constitutional laws and rights for the benefit of Indian people, discussed and resultant manner ofinterpretation - Art. 22(1) is not merely an enabling provision - Access to lawyers is imperative due to indigence andilliteracy of vast majority of Indians - Such right (especially at trial and during the trial) cannot be taken away or whittleddown simply to deal with one terrorist (as in present case), (2012) 9 SCC 1-R


Arts. 21, 22(1) and 39-A - Right to free legal aid, right to consult and be defended by a lawyer - When arises andcorresponding duty of Magistrate in this regard, clarified and directions issued - Said right, held, arises when a personarrested in connection with a cognizable offence is first produced before a Magistrate - The role of a lawyer is mainlyfocused on court proceedings like demanding bail or resisting police/judicial custody - Accused would need a lawyerwhen the charge-sheet is submitted and Magistrate applies his mind to the charge-sheet with a view to determine thefuture course of proceedings - Accused would need a lawyer at the stage of framing of charges against him and would,of course, need a lawyer to defend him in trial - The lawyer also can advise an accused, for example he can advise aboutthe legal consequences of making a confession under S. 164 CrPC - But under Indian statutory Scheme, a Magistratealso has a compulsory obligation to advise the accused regarding legal consequences of making a confession under S.164 CrPC - It is the duty and obligation of Magistrate at this stage to make the accused fully aware of said right and tomake him aware that if he has no means to engage a lawyer, a lawyer would be provided at State expense - AllMagistrates of country directed to strictly and faithfully discharge the said obligation, on failure to discharge whichMagistrate concerned would be liable for departmental proceedings, (2012) 9 SCC 1-S


Arts. 21, 22(1) and 39-A - Right to free legal aid, right to consult and be defended by a lawyer - Trial stage - Duty ofMagistrate - Held, at the commencement of trial, Magistrate has a constitutional duty to provide an accused with a lawyereven if he does not ask for one and remains silent, unless the accused voluntarily in clear/unambiguous terms makes aninformed decision to defend himself personally without assistance of a lawyer - Failure to discharge such duty properly byMagistrate would vitiate trial, (2012) 9 SCC 1-T


Arts. 21, 22(1) and 39-A - Right to free legal aid - Consequences of failure to provide a lawyer at pre-trial stagecompared with such failure at trial stage - At trial stage such failure always vitiates trial unless accused voluntarily inclear/unambiguous terms makes an informed decision to defend himself personally without assistance of a lawyer -However, at pre-trial stage such failure may not vitiate trial and would depend upon facts of each case - Such failure at



pre-trial stage would vitiate trial if such failure has caused some material prejudice to accused - However, such failure,whether at pre-trial or trial stages, may entitle accused to claim compensation from State and may make Magistrateconcerned liable for disciplinary proceedings, (2012) 9 SCC 1-U


Art. 20(3) - Right against self-incrimination - Sufficiency of statutory safeguards in Indian law - Rules laid down in CrPCand Evidence Act, held, alone are sufficient for protecting right against self-incrimination - Additional safeguards built intoSs. 32(2) to (5) and 52 POTA (S. 32(1) POTA itself providing for a major departure from the general law) are notapplicable over and above provisions of CrPC for protecting said rights - Miranda, (1966) 16 L Ed 2d 694, rules are alsonot required to be followed - Rationale for, explained by examining legal system prevalent in America at time of Mirandadecision, (2012) 9 SCC 1-V

Criminal Trial

Defence

Whether sufficient time was allowed for preparation of case - Court allowed 8 days' time during which there were briefhearings on issues relating to juvenility of accused - Defence lawyer (though not a non-complaining type) not complainingabout not being given sufficient time - A chart showing day-to-day development in trial and hours of court proceedings oneach day indicating that defence lawyer was given ample time for preparation - When defence lawyer had asked foradjournment for cross-examination of important witnesses, court accommodating him on most occasions - Held, it cannotbe held that defence lawyer was not allowed sufficient time for preparation of case and that trial was vitiated by denial ofsufficient time, (2012) 9 SCC 1-W

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973

S. 164 - Confession before Magistrate - Whether voluntary and truthful - Some reference in confession about co-accused (TA-2 and TA-3 who were involved only in preparation of maps and not in actual attacks) being unsatisfactory -But regarding rest of confession, held, there is no reason to doubt that it was not made voluntarily and without anyinfluence or duress from any external agency - Magistrate fully resorted to all safeguards under S. 164 CrPC and gaveTA-1 sufficient time (i.e. 3 days' time) to reflect as to whether he really wanted to make the confession, (2012) 9 SCC 1-X


S. 164 - Voluntariness of confession - Foreign terrorist trying to prove his foreign identity, when his country denied thesame - Detailed references to family, friends and their addresses and phone numbers to prove Pakistani identity, whenPakistani authorities denied his Pakistani identity, held is understandable and does not mean that confession was notvoluntary, (2012) 9 SCC 1-Y


S. 164 - Voluntariness of confession - Accused picking up words he would normally not use and which prosecutionmight have used during long repeated interrogation - Effect - Use of negative word like ``sahzish'' (when accused, in hisconfession was boasting of his patriotic sacrifice) and foreign word like ``POK'' instead of native word like ``AzadKashmir'', held does not mean that confession is not voluntary - TA-1 might have picked up these words from theprosecution during long interrogation, (2012) 9 SCC 1-Z




S. 164 - Voluntariness of confession - Committed member of terrorist organisation having conspired to die in course ofattack revealing the names, positions, roles of important members of terrorist organisation - As TA-1 not being amercenary and there being no plan of his being caught alive, voluntariness of said confession, held, cannot be doubtedon ground that he knew of such roles, names and positions, (2012) 9 SCC 1-ZA


Ss. 164 and 161 to 163 - Voluntariness of confession - Confession under S. 164 confirming to confession made beforepolice - Said confirmation, held, does not mean that confession was not voluntary - Rather said confirmation goes to thecredit of investigation, (2012) 9 SCC 1-ZB


Ss. 164, 161 to 163 and S. 173 - Voluntariness of confession - Though accused desiring to make confession inDecember, police sending him to Magistrate for recording of such confession after a delay of 2 months i.e. aftercompletion of investigation and just prior to submission of charge-sheet - Said delay in sending accused, held, does notmean that confession was not voluntary - Said procedure adopted by police is not unjust, (2012) 9 SCC 1-ZC


Ss. 164 & 161 to 163 and S. 229 - Retracted confession - Admissibility and stage at which admissible - Recording of asecond confession (admitting guilt) at a stage when recording of evidence of witness is going on (i.e. when stage of S.229 is over), held, is permissible, (2012) 9 SCC 1-ZD


S. 164 - Retracted confession - Extent of admissibility - Second confession trying to dilute offences committed (firstconfession being voluntary and without duress) - Effect, (2012) 9 SCC 1-ZE

Penal Code, 1860

S. 120-B r/w Ss. 121 to 126 - Proof of conspiracy - Things said by conspirators in reference to common design afterarrest of one co-conspirator - Such things said post arrest if could be used against arrested co-conspirator - Interceptedtelephonic conversation of co-conspirators while on their attack mission (waging war against India), post arrest ofappellant-accused co-conspirator (TA-1) - Whether can be used against TA-1 - Co-conspirators (terrorists) fighting policeby taking positions in hotels and important buildings - Accused (TA-1) getting caught prior to said co-conspirators beingcaught/killed - Transcripts of intercepted mobile phone/telephonic conversation, which said co-conspirators had with theirhandlers, held, can be used against TA-1 - There is no reason not to take said transcripts/intercepts into consideration insupport of charge of conspiracy against TA-1 - Phase of planning the attack and training for it, which form core ofconspiracy, took place in Pakistan, and the terrorists, including TA-1, came to Mumbai in execution of main objects ofconspiracy - TA-1 was apprehended while he was on a killing spree in execution of objects of conspiracy - Transcripts ofphone conversation of co-conspirators with their foreign collaborators, relate to a time when speakers were not only freebut were actively involved in trying to fulfil objects of conspiracy - Transcripts are by no means any confessionalstatements made under arrest and they are fully covered by provisions of S. 10 of Evidence Act, (2012) 9 SCC 1-ZF

Penal Code, 1860



Ss. 121 to 126 r/w S. 120-B - ``Waging war'' - What is - Striking at sovereignty of State - Foreign enemy killing Indianpeople only because they were Indian or foreigners only because they were on Indian soil - Offence of waging waragainst India, whether proved - Held, TA-1 has been rightly held guilty of waging war against India and rightly convictedunder Ss. 121, 121-A and 122 - Primary and the first offence that TA-1 and his co-conspirators committed was offence ofwaging war against India - In ``waging war'', intent of foreign enemy is not only to disturb public peace or law and order orto kill many people - A foreign enemy strikes at sovereignty of the State, and his conspiracy and actions are motivated bythat animus - It also does not matter if different targets were assigned to the conspirators - If people are killed onlybecause they are Indians or foreigners only because they are on Indian soil, the attack can be said to be mainly directedat India and Indians and amounts to waging war against India, (2012) 9 SCC 1-ZG

Penal Code, 1860

Ss. 121 to 126 r/w S. 120-B - Offence of waging war against Government of India - ``Waging war'' - What is -``Government of India'' - Scope of - Whether includes execution of a conspiracy to kill Indian people and foreigners inIndia with objective of putting pressure on Government in respect of Kashmir issue - Expression ``Government of India''under S. 121, held, is not used in a narrow sense to mean only executive wing of State - Wider meaning of saidexpression, explained - Said expression in its wider meaning includes People of India because People of India are truerepository of sovereignty of India - This wider meaning can also be inferred from substitution of the word ``Queen'' withexpression ``Government of India'' by Adaption of Laws Order of 1950 (i.e. after India became a democratic republic), (2012) 9 SCC 1-ZH

Criminal Law

Terrorism and Organised Crime

S. 15 - ``Terrorist acts'' and ``waging war'' - Relationship inter se and limited overlapping of, pointed out - A terrorist actunder S. 15, held, does not automatically fall outside umbrage of S. 121 IPC, (2012) 9 SCC 1-ZI

Penal Code, 1860

Ss. 302, 40, 121 to 126 r/w Ss. 120-B, 109 and 34 - Whether rarest of rare cases for imposition of death penalty -Unprecedented and overwhelming aggravating circumstances - Only mitigating circumstance being age of accused -Accused TA-1 not having any regret for his actions, rather wanting others to follow in his footsteps in killing Indians andbecome a fidayeen like him - Thus there being no possibility of his being reformed - TA-1 being clever, shrewd, having atough mind and determination and casually killing without slightest twinge of conscience and without any provocationunknown harmless victims just because they happened to be Indians - Accused showing unprecedented degree ofcruelty, brutality and depravity - Hence, there was no question of TA-1 being led as it were by destiny or that he wasbrainwashed because of his poverty/illiteracy - Acts committed by him were expressions of his free will - Conspiracy andprevious planning behind Mumbai Terrorist Attack of which TA-1 was a part was deep, large, vicious and unprecedented - Element of waging war against Republic of India, magnitude of attack and shock to collective conscience of people ofIndia is unprecedented - TA-1 was personally responsible for killing at least 7 people - Jointly along with otherconspirators, TA-1 was responsible for killing 166 people (of whom 18 were policemen or security personnel and 26 wereforeign nationals), injuring 238 (of whom 37 were policemen or security personnel and 21 were foreign nationals) anddestroying property worth Rs 150 crores - Hence, death sentence on five counts imposed and upheld by High Courtconfirmed - Elements of aggravating circumstances pointed out - Further held, death penalty is constitutionally valid - Tohold back death penalty on facts of present case (when every single reason assigned by Supreme Court for awardingdeath sentence is found in this case in a more magnified manner) would amount to obdurately declaring that SupremeCourt rejects death as a lawful penalty even though it is on statute book and held valid by Constitutional Benches ofSupreme Court, (2012) 9 SCC 1-ZJ

Criminal Law

Terrorism and Organised Crime

Plea on behalf of accused TA-1 that his acts were not expressions of his free will but in some way predetermined, being



based on philosophical doctrine of predetermination/destiny/fate - Untenability - Whether TA-1 was pushed by destiny tocommit offence of waging war against India and killing innocent Indians and foreigners as part of a large-scaleconspiracy - Court, held, must judge actions of present accused and offences committed by him as expressions of hisfree will, for which he alone is responsible and must face the punishment - Philosophical doctrine of predetermination,rejected - Further plea that TA-1 was brainwashed because of his poverty/illiteracy or was a mere tool of LeT (terroristorganisation in Pakistan which had masterminded entire larger conspiracy and Mumbai Attack), also rejected, (2012) 9SCC 1-ZK

Criminal Trial

Proof

Absolute proof - If ever available - Per Prasad, J. (supplementing), in all human affairs absolute certainty is a myth -Hence, law accepts for it probability as a working substitute and the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt incriminal cases - However, in case in hand, from evidence, oral and documentary, it can be said with absolute certaintythat the planning and conspiracy to commit the crime were hatched in Pakistan, perpetrators of crime were Pakistanistrained at different centres in that country, and devastation which took place at various places in city of Mumbai, wereexecuted by TA-1 and the other nine in furtherance thereof, (2012) 9 SCC 1-ZL

Penal Code, 1860

Ss. 121 to 126 and 302 r/w Ss. 120-B, 109 and 34 - Mumbai Terrorist Attack case - TA-2 and TA-3 allegedly providingmaps of Mumbai and ancillary logistical support to ten terrorists who had come from Pakistan who actually carried outattack - There being insufficient evidence against TA-2 and TA-3 - Testimony of an important witness not being credible -Concurrent acquittal by trial court and High Court not disturbed, (2012) 9 SCC 1-ZM

Armed Forces

Duties of

Policemen and security personnel who showed exemplary courage and laid down their lives to protect innocent peoplein Mumbai Terrorist Attack hailed for their heroic martyrdom - Salute raised by Supreme Court on behalf of People ofIndia, (2012) 9 SCC 1-ZN

Press and Media Laws

Ethics

Heroism shown by press photographers in photographing terrorists on their killing spree regardless of risk to their ownlives in Mumbai Terrorist Attack case, hailed, (2012) 9 SCC 1-ZO

Courts, Tribunals and Judiciary

Judicial Process

Generally - Conduct of proceedings by trial Judge in case having international ramifications and credibility of India as anation governed by rule of law - Quality of record maintained by him - Trial Judge hailed as true flag-bearer of rule of lawin India, and trial court records of this case directed to be included in curriculum of various Judicial Academies in country, (2012) 9 SCC 1-ZP

Courts, Tribunals and Judiciary

Judicial Process

Case having international ramifications and credibility of India as a nation governed by rule of law - Congeniality ofatmosphere during entire conduct of arguments and proceedings in Court - Quality of documentation, preparedness andresourcefulness of counsel and assistance rendered to Court - Deep appreciation expressed by Supreme Court, (2012)



9 SCC 1-ZQ

Advocates

Amicus curiae

Token fees directed to be paid by State, (2012) 9 SCC 1-ZR


Arts. 19(1)(a) & (2) and 21 - Mumbai Terrorist Attack case - Media role - Reckless media coverage - Irresponsibility ofmedia, strongly deprecated - Collaborators of ten terrorists carrying out attack in Mumbai, who were sitting in Pakistanwere watching full show on TV in their hideouts across the border - They also made fun of speculative TV reports -Collaborators were watching every movement of security forces being broadcast live on Indian TV - Based on this livecoverage collaborators alerting holed-up terrorists to plan/movement of security forces, thus significantly thwarting effortsof security forces and endangering them - Reckless TV coverage just for profit sake (without any consideration fornational security) simply to raise the viewer ratings of respective TV channels, deprecated - This is a case againstargument that regulatory mechanism for media must come from within and not from Government, (2012) 9 SCC 1-ZS



Filegfhfg

Documents

Transcript of Filegfhfg