GujCTOC accused withdraws lawyer after Gujarat court rejects plea

Ahmedabad: A UAPA and GujCTOC accused, who was arrested in connection with Dhandhuka’s controversial Kishan Bharwad murder case has conveyed to the special court that he did not have faith in it and asked his lawyer not to represent him in the case.

The cleric, Kamargani Usmani, has been lodged in the Sabarmati Central Jail, from where he filed an application raising multiple grievances against the jail administration and the Anti-Terrorism Squad. The court rejected the application, and Usmani sought a review of the order, and his second application too was turned down by the special court.

Usmani filed an application last year, alleging administrative harassment inside the jail, illegal interference by the ATS, denial of legal access, and sought preservation of CCTV footage. He also asked for an independent investigation, contending that action should be initiated against the officials to restore his faith in the court.

The jail authorities denied his allegations and submitted that Usmani has been found violating jail discipline and abusing the jail officials on many occasions. He was once found supplying certain documents, which he was not supposed to send outside the prison, to his lawyer.

The ATS also defended itself by informing the court that an assistant sub-inspector, Gopal Sharma, has been deployed at the jail to keep a watch on the persons who come to meet prisoners accused in Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organised Crime (GujCTOC) Act, Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), Arms Act and fake currency cases. But the officer remained outside the prison and denied the allegations of the agency’s interference in the jail affairs.

The court rejected Usmani’s application on March 11, and he filed another application seeking review of the order. During a hearing, he told the court that he had no faith in the court and asked his lawyer not to represent him in the trial. His advocate, M C Hakim, retired from the case and mentioned in his retirement pursis (written statement or communication submitted by a party or their advocate to the court during proceedings) that the accused had said that he has no faith in this court.

Special judge K M Sojitra took serious note of Usmani’s behaviour and stated, “At the first instance, the court deprecates the conduct of the applicant-accused, at least to his submission made before the court through jail video conferencing that ‘he will go on hunger strike, he will not remain present before the court for trial and if anything happens to him during his hunger strike he will also involve the court’.”

The court further said that the accused’s approach is not only contemptuous but also amounts to overreaching the due process of the court proceedings.

The court rejected Usmani’s review application, and said, “If no appearance is made on behalf of applicant-accused, the court will have to proceed as per procedure looking to the status of applicant-accused and other co-accused, as undertrial prisoners and legal aid through LADC (legal aid defence counsel) will be provided to applicant-accused.”