Undertrial criticises priority to Shah case

MUMBAI: Fed up of being carted to the special MCOCA court (Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act) every day, only to be herded back to Arthur Road jail on account of yet another adjournment, an accused applied to the high court for bail early this month.
Ramesh Kisani, the accused, told the high court that his trial was being delayed because of the priority given to the Bharat Shah case and also because the police officer concerned had remained absent on 24 hearings.
Acting on Mr Kisani’s bail application, the Bombay high court recently directed the MCOCA court to complete his trial by October 2002. Mr Kisani was arrested on March 24, 2001 along with 13 others for possessing counterfeit currency.
Although justice S.S. Parkar of the high court refused to release Mr Kisani on bail, the court ruled that in no event should the trial extend beyond November 2002, failing which Mr Kisani would be entitled to apply for appropriate interim relief.
Justice Parkar took a serious view of the lackadaisical attitude of the prosecution which was apparent from the fact that the police officer concerned remained absent on 24 occasions.
Justice Parkar directed the prosecution not to seek adjournments on account of absence of witnesses, especially police witnesses.
The recording of evidence had to be postponed on these grounds which certainly infringed the fundamental right of the applicant for a speedy trial, the court noted.
The prosecution’s case is that Rs 21.5 lakhs of counterfeit currency in the denomination of Rs 500 notes, smuggled from Dubai, was recovered from Mr Kisani’s premises.
On August 7, he was produced in the high court and argued his own case. Mr Kisani, who maintained a diary of the trial, told the court that the special court heard the Bharat Shah case in the morning session from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m.
The court heard the counterfeit case from 2 p.m. onwards. Both the cases were being heard on a day-today basis.
Mr Kisani said when his turn came, the trial was held for only 15-20 minutes or even adjourned because a witness had failed to appear.
For the same reason, he said, the recording of evidence of the second prosecution witness went on from March 21 to July 3, 2002. At this rate, the trial would not be over by March 2003, he argued.
Opposing the contention, prosecutor P.H. Kantharia told the court that the prosecution was not likely to examine all the 51 witnesses in the case. She said the 14th witness was being examined and only 15 more witnesses might be examined. As such, the trial would be over in three months, she added.
Judge Bhangale noted that the Shah trial was being expedited as per the directives of the supreme court. He asked the parties in the counterfeit case to be ready with their witnesses in case there were no witnesses in the Shah case.