Ok! Now what? Qasab is out of the way, virtually. It may take some time before he makes it to the top of the charts (a spot to die for); there's a chance he might appeal against the verdict, but he shouldn't get his hopes up. So, Qasab is pretty much hanging by a thread right now.
Ok! Now what? Qasab is out of the way, virtually. It may take some time before he makes it to the top of the charts (a spot to die for); there's a chance he might appeal against the verdict, but he shouldn't get his hopes up. So, Qasab is pretty much hanging by a thread right now.
There are many who consider no noose as good news. Personally, I have no doubts, that Qasab deserved the maximum possible punishment provided for in the penal code.
That it's death, in many ways, perhaps exhibits a lack of imagination. I am not squeamish about it. But just how much of a deterrent death sentence is for a fidayeen is something to ponder over at a later date.
Islamabad could cast aspersions that Qasab, a foreign national, was found guilty, while two Indians were let off
That the court has exonerated the two alleged co-conspirators, describing the 26/11 attacks as having been planned and executed entirely by foreign nationals, is significant too.
While India could use it to put pressure on Pakistan and play up the fairness aspect of our justice system before the world, the move could backfire too.
Islamabad could cast aspersions on the judgment citing the fact that Qasab, a foreign national, was found guilty, while the two Indians were let off.
If India didn't have enough evidence to nail the two alleged co-conspirators, how can it vouch for the accuracy of the dossiers it handed over to Pakistan, etc.
Goes without saying that when it comes to diplomacy, our neighbour has more often than not had the upper hand.
ADVERTISEMENT
That the verdict came within a year of the commencement of legal proceedings against Qasab is laudable, especially when you consider the 14-year trial in the 1993 serial blasts case that took place in the same city.
u00a0
But the investigating agencies are under the scanner once more.
Nailing Qasab was pretty much a given he was nabbed at the spot, there were some 650 witnesses against him; he pleaded guilty (later retracting his statement).
But if the prosecution was so definite regarding the involvement of Sabauddin and Fahim Ansari, how is it that the court acquitted the duo, describing the evidence against them as 'weak' and 'unreliable?'
Could it be that the prosecution hadn't factored in the fair play of the judiciary in a terrorism case? Was it too busy with Qasab? Did the speedy trial prove to be a bane? Questions like these have already surfaced.
u00a0
Answers are not forthcoming. And let's not bring up the larger question of internal security. We all know the answer. And we just don't want to hear it.
Pathikrit Gupta is Senior Sub-Editor, MiD DAY, Delhi
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
