2008 Malegaon blast case: Bombay HC seeks untruncated witnesses' statements

Agencies
July 22, 2019

Mumbai, Jul 22: The Bombay High Court on Monday adjourned till August 2 the hearing on the application moved by Prasad Purohit, an accused in the Malegaon blast case, seeking untruncated copies of the witnesses' statements that are part of the charge sheet.

The matter was adjourned by a division bench of Justice Indrajit Mohanty and Justice AM Badar after the counsel for the National Investigation Agency sought a week's time to decide on the application moved by the accused. The agency also sought time to provide the list of those prosecution witnesses whose names have been truncated from the charge sheet.

"Names of the witnesses were given in International terror cases such as 26/11 Mumbai attacks and 1993 Mumbai blasts. The truncated list of witnesses was even given to Kasab. Why can we not get it?" counsel for Purohit contended before the court.

Sameer Kulkarni, who is representing himself in the case, argued that the agency is not following the orders of the high court.

"Examination of un-truncated witnesses has also not been conducted, which is further delaying the matter," he contended.

Besides Kulkarni and Purohit, BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur, retired Major Ramesh Upadhyay, Sudhakar Dwivedi, Ajay Rahirkar and Sudhakar Chaturvedi are also accused in the case.

They have been charged under various sections of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), the Explosive Substances Act and the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The charges include sections 16 (committing terrorist act) and 18 (conspiring to commit terrorist act) of the UAPA and sections 120 (b) (criminal conspiracy), 302 (murder), 307 (attempt to murder), 324 (voluntarily causing hurt) and 153 (a) (promoting enmity between two religious groups) of the IPC.

Six people were killed and over 100 injured when an explosive device strapped to a motorcycle went off near a mosque in Malegaon, a town in north Maharashtra, on September 29, 2008.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 26,2024

Palakkad: Three voters from Palakkad, Malappuram and Alappuzha, and a polling agent in Kozhikode died in seperate incidents in Kerala on Friday.

A man collapsed and died after casting his vote at Vani Vilasini in Chunangad, Ottapalam here on Friday. The deceased Chandran (68) hailed from Modernkattil  in Chunangad. Though rushed to the Ottapalam taluk hopsital, he was declared dead on arrival. Palakkad had recorded a high temperature of 40 degree Celsius on Thursday.

A Madrassa teacher, who came home after voting, collapsed and died. The deceased Alikkannakkal Tharakkal Siddhique (63) was the first voter at the polling station in Vallikkanjiram School at Niramaruthur Grama Panchayat in Tirur.

Kakkazham Veiliparambu Somarajan (82), who voted and returned home from the Kakkazham SN VT High School in Alappuzha also collapsed and died. He was a voter from booth 138.

In another instance, a polling agent died after collapsing at a booth in Kuttichira, Kozhikode on Friday. Maliyekkal Anees (66), a retired KSEB engineer from Haluwa Bazaar, was LDF's polling agent at the 16th booth in Kuttichira Government Vocational Higher Secondary School. He collapsed while doing his duty in the polling booth by 8.30 am. Though rushed to the Government General Hospital, he died by 9.15am. He is survived by wife Adakkani Veettil Zereena, childrens  Fayis Ahammed, Fadhil Ahammed, Akhil Ahammed and Bilal Ahammed.

A man also died in bike accident en route to polling booth in Malappuram on Friday. The deceased is Saidu Haji (75) of Neduvan. The bike rammed a lorry near BM School in Parappanangadi.

Polling began at 7am in all 20 Lok Sabha constituencies in Kerala on Friday. 

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 26,2024

evm.jpg

The Supreme Court of India on Friday, April 26, rejected pleas seeking 100% cross-verification of votes cast using EVMs with a Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) and said “blindly distrusting” any aspect of the system can breed unwarranted scepticism.

A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta delivered two concurring verdicts. It dismissed all the pleas in the matter, including those seeking to go back to ballot papers in elections.

An EVM comprises three units – the ballot unit, the control unit and the VVPAT. All three are embedded with microcontrollers with a burnt memory from the manufacturer. Currently, VVPATs are used in five booths per assembly constituency.

EVM VVPAT case: Supreme Court issues two directives

1.    Justice Khanna directed the Election Commission of India to seal and store units used to load symbols for 45 days after the symbols have been loaded to electronic voting machines in strong rooms.

2.    The Supreme Court also allowed engineers of the EVM manufacturers to verify the microcontroller of the machines after the declaration of the results at the request of candidates who stood second and third. The top court said the request for the verification of the microcontroller can be made within seven days of the declaration of the results after payment of fees.

Option for candidates to seek verification of EVM programmes

•    Candidates who secure second and third position in the results can request for the verification of burnt memory semicontroller in 5% of the EVMs per assembly segment in a Parliamentary constituency. The written request to be made within seven days of the declaration of the results.

•    *On receiving such a written request, the EVMs shall be checked and verified by a team of engineers from the manufacturer of the EVMs.

•    Candidates should identify the EVMs to be checked by a serial number of the polling booth.

•    Candidates and their representatives can be present at the time of the verification.

•    After verification, the district electoral officer should notify the authenticity of the burnt memory.

•    Expenses for the verification process, as notified by the ECI, should be borne by the candidate making the request.
What did the Supreme Court say?

•    "If EVM is found tampered during verification, fees paid by the candidates will be refunded," the bench said.

•    "While maintaining a balanced perspective is crucial in evaluating systems or institutions, blindly distrusting any aspect of the system can breed unwarranted scepticism...," Justice Datta said.

Who filed the petitions?

NGO Association for Democratic Reforms, one of the petitioners, had sought to reverse the poll panel's 2017 decision to replace the transparent glass on VVPAT machines with an opaque glass through which a voter can see the slip only when the light is on for seven seconds.

The petitioners have also sought the court's direction to revert to the old system of ballot papers.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 25,2024

EVM.jpg

Electronics Corporation of India Ltd and Bharat Electronics Ltd have refused to disclose the names and contact details of the manufacturers and suppliers of various components of EVMs and VVPATs under the RTI Act citing "commercial confidence", according to RTI responses from the PSUs to an activist.

Activist Venkatesh Nayak had filed two identical Right To Information applications with the ECIL and BEL, seeking the details of the manufacturers and suppliers of various components used in the assembling of the electronic voting machines (EVMs) and voter-verifiable paper audit trail (VVPATs).

The VVPAT is an independent vote verification system which enables electors to see whether their votes have been cast correctly.

The ECIL and the BEL, public sector undertakings under the Ministry of Defence, manufacture EVMs and VVPATs for the Election Commission.

Nayak also sought a copy of the purchase orders for the components from both PSUs.

"Information sought is in commercial confidence. Hence details cannot be provided under Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act," BEL said in its response.

A similar response was sent by ECIL which said the details requested are related to a product which is being manufactured by ECIL, and third party in nature.

"Disclosing of details will affect the Competitive position of ECIL. Hence, Exemption is claimed under section 8(1) (d) of RTI ACT, 2005," it said.

In response to the purchase order copies, ECIL's central public information officer said the information is "voluminous" which would disproportionately divert the resources of the Public Authority.

"Further, the information will give away the design details of EVM components. The same may pose a danger to the machines produced. Hence, the exemption is claimed U/s 7(9) and under section 8(1)(d) of RTI Act, 2005," ECIL said.

Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act exempts from disclosure the information, including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information.

Section 7(9) of the Act says the information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question.

"I don't know whose interests they are trying to protect against the right to know of close to a billion-strong electorate. ECIL said that disclosure of the purchase orders will reveal the design details of the components and this may pose a danger to the machines produced. ECIL did not upload even a signed copy of its reply on the RTI Online Portal," Nayak said.

He said it is reasonable to infer that the two companies are not manufacturing every single item of the EVM-VVPAT combo or else the two companies would have replied that they are manufacturing all these components internally without any outsourcing being involved.

"But the electorate is expected to take everything about the voting machines based on what the ECI is claiming in its manuals and FAQs," Nayak said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.