The CBI counsel mentioned the case is a critical one that might have an effect on nationwide safety. File
Kochi:
The CBI right this moment opposed the anticipatory bail pleas made within the Kerala Excessive Courtroom by three former cops of Kerala and a retired official of the Intelligence Bureau (IB) in reference to the ISRO conspiracy case.
The investigating company mentioned overseas intelligence businesses like ISI, Pakistan, had plotted to derail growth of cryogenic know-how in India and the accused wanted to be interrogated to seek out out the mind behind the operation.
The submission was made earlier than Justice Ashok Menon by Extra Solicitor Common (ASG) S V Raju, showing for the CBI, who advised the courtroom that the case was a critical one that might have an effect on nationwide safety.
It was additionally submitted that the accused — cops S Vijayan, Thampi S Durga Dutta and R B Sreekumar and retired IB official P S Jayaprakash — shouldn’t be granted any aid because the investigation was nonetheless at a nascent stage.
The ASG mentioned if anticipatory bail was granted, the accused wouldn’t disclose something and essential proof can be misplaced.
“We can’t have the ability to discover out who had been the brains behind the conspiracy,” he added.
The accused refuted the declare by the CBI and contended that it was coming with a brand new story of involvement of the ISI when the central company didn’t discover something in its probe in 1994-95.
They mentioned the CBI was making allegations with none materials to help the fees and that custodial interrogation wouldn’t serve any goal.
After listening to the arguments, the courtroom listed the matter for August 11 and prolonged the interim safety from arrest that was granted to the 4 until then.
However, the courtroom mentioned, this aid to the 4 wouldn’t preclude them from cooperating with the CBI probe into the case it registered below the Indian Penal Code towards 18 accused, together with the 4, for numerous offences comparable to felony conspiracy, kidnapping and fabrication of proof.
The CBI registered the case towards the 18 in reference to the arrest and detention of former ISRO scientist Nambi Narayanan within the 1994 espionage case.
Throughout the more-than-two-hour lengthy listening to right this moment, the legal professionals for the accused denied any custodial torture or harassment of Mr Narayanan and the 2 Maldivian girls — Mariyam Rasheeda and Fouziyya Hassan — who had been additionally arrested and detained within the 1994 case.
The legal professionals contended that the report of the Supreme Courtroom-appointed committee headed by Justice (retired) D Okay Jain can’t be the only real foundation for the CBI probe.
They mentioned even the highest courtroom had just lately mentioned the CBI can’t solely depend on the report of the committee because it has to gather proof by itself to substantiate the conspiracy angle to the case.
The accused additional contended that they carried out their duties in accordance with the regulation and as per the directions of their superiors and shouldn’t be held at fault.
To this, the CBI mentioned the highest courtroom had held that Mr Narayanan suffered psychological torture, harassment and humiliation on account of the allegations of spying and had awarded him Rs 50 lakh as compensation.
Counsel for Mr Narayanan opposed the anticipatory bail pleas of the 4 accused whereas the Excessive Courtroom mentioned it will hear on the following date the arguments of advocate Prasad Gandhi on behalf of the 2 Maldivian girls.
The Supreme Courtroom had, on April 15, ordered that the report of the committee on the position of erring police officers within the espionage case referring to Mr Narayanan be given to the CBI and directed it to conduct additional investigations into the difficulty.
The espionage case pertained to allegations of switch of sure confidential paperwork on the house programme of India to overseas nations by two scientists and 4 others, together with the 2 Maldivians.
The CBI, in its probe at the moment, had held that prime police officers in Kerala had been chargeable for Mr Narayanan’s arrest which the company mentioned was unlawful.
Discover more from News Journals
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
