13 Nov 13 2002

IFTIKHAR GILANI REFUSED BAIL, MOVES SESSIONS COURT

From Our Delhi Bureau

NEW DELHI: Ignoring Police itself retracting and admitting only a day earlier that the controversial military document recovered from journalist Iftikhar Gilani's computer was extracted from a publication, a Delhi court on Wednesday refused him bail saying "prima facie the circumstances and conduct is enough to draw a presumption against him."

In a clear case of non-application of mind, Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM) Sangita Dhingra Sehgal refused to accept even the telltale evidence in the chargesheet. The 6-page order declining grant of bail refers to some of the charges that were admitted by Police itself as wrong or irrelevant during the hearing on the bail application that went on for five long months.

An application was immediately moved before the Sessions Court of Mr S N Gupta, challenging the order and praying for bail, and the case is most likely to be listed for hearing on Friday.

The CMM in the meanwhile remanded Iftikhar Gilani, The Kashmir Times's Delhi Bureau, to further judicial remand up to November 25 when it would hear arguments on framing of the charges. Iftikhar is charged with violation of the Official Secrets Act on the basis of the seizure of the document showing deployment of forces in Jammu and Kashmir.

Prosecution had suo moto filed Monday evening additional arguments after the bail hearing was closed for orders to admit that the controversial military document was not secret but identical to a published document, raising hopes that the torment of Iftikhar Gilani will be finally over.

A special hearing was held on Tuesday on this admission by Police but the CMM refused to buy it as she underlined, in her order, the part of the Military Intelligence report that the information was compiled by agent specifically trained to observe and report the strength and location of the troops directly and information contained therein is directly useful to the adversary."

In the course of arguments before the CMM's court, Advocate V K Ohri had cited the e-mail used against Iftikhar Gilani to show his "inclination towards liberation of Kashmir" refers to the killings in the Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) and that too by the Pakistani forces and not in Jammu and Kashmir by the Indian forces.

As if she did not bother to read the e-mail, CMM asserted in her order that it is about killings "in encounter by Indian Forces." Even the email received by Iftikhar from one of his editors in Pakistani daily "The Nation" to follow activities of slain Hurriyat leader Lone has been cited by her as if he had anything to do with Lone's murder.

The judge has also ignored the evidence of the manager of Agra's Hotel Mughal Sheraton recorded by Police to clear Iftikhar of the charge that he had taken hospitality of the Pakistan High Commission as her order simply says "when verified it was revealed that Gilani had enjoyed his stay in Mughal Sheraton on the expenses of Government of Pakistan during the visit of General Musharraf to India."

While accepting Ohri's submission that the prosecution had taken "too long" to get verified the source of the information contained in the military document by the Ministry of External Affairs since the publication came from Pakistan and that it is still awaited even after five months, the judge did not choose to comment on this lapse.

In the application filed before the Sessions Judge, it has been pointed out that the information was not secret but downloaded from the Internet and it is available in a publication of the Institute of Strategic Studies, Islamabad and moreover even the prosecution had agreed in its submission on November 11 that the information was identical to the extracts of the publication submitted by the accused.

The application stressed that the CMM did not consider the plea that the Police had made blatant lie in the chargesheet that Iftikhar's Agra hotel expenses were paid by the Pakistan Government and that the chargesheet did not mention any person other than him though an offense under section 120-C IPC of conspiracy has been alleged.

It is further argued in the application that the CMM also failed to consider the fact that the accused is in no position to tamper with the witnesses who are all police/Income Tax officials and also failed to appreciate that he is honourably employed and settled at Delhi, and is not likely to run away from facing the trial. The Court could have slapped conditions if so desired to ensure his presence during the trial, the application said.

It was further pointed out that refusal of bail will cause Iftikhar to undergo detention for an alleged of fence "which is purely a matter of technical interpretation of possession of information obtained from public domain." END