Sign In / Register
Make This My Home Page | Feedback |RSS
You are here: IE »   Story

26/11 trial: Accused moves HC, says no confidence in judge

  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
  • Taj attack
    26/11: Faheem has submitted that he did expect justice from the trial judge M L Tahaliyani.

    In a new twist to the 26/11 terror attack case, Faheem Ansari, accused of facilitating the crime perpetrated by terrorists, has moved the Bombay High Court seeking re-trial on the ground that he had no confidence in the judge.

    Hearing Faheem's petition sent through the jail authorities, Justice J N Patel and Justice Amjad Sayed directed additional public prosecutor Rajesh More to file a reply within two weeks.

    The High Court has also ordered appointment of a lawyer from the legal aid cell to argue the case on Faheem's behalf. Faheem has submitted that he did expect justice from the trial judge M L Tahaliyani as he felt that the proceedings were not being recorded properly.

    In the petition, hand written in English, Faheem urged that the Judge be replaced and that the High Court should stay the trial until his plea is heard and disposed of.

    Ads by Google

    Faheem has also urged for an audio-video recording and live telecast of the trial court proceedings alleging that the evidence was not being recorded properly.

    Comments
    Post comment

    Be the first to comment.

    Post a Comment
    Name:
    Email:
    Title:
    Maximum characters allowed     
    Comment:
    TERMS OF USE:
    The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
    I agree to the terms of use.