The Supreme Court today granted bail to Syed Mohammad Kazmi. The urdu journalist is an accused in the bomb attack on Israeli diplomat in the national capital in February. Kazmi was arrested on March 6 by the Special Cell of the Delhi Police.
A bench headed by Chief Justice Altamas Kabir pronounced the order on a plea by Kazmi challenging the High Court decision which has earlier refused him bail.
There have been several glaring infirmities in the case from the very beginning. Several claims by the Delhi Police particularly the pertaining to transfer of funds to Kazmi from a gulf country was found to be false.
Moreover, there was a concerted attempt by the police to influence public opinion. Each time the matter was to be heard in the Court, there would be a spate of malicious stories that would appear in newspapers. Many of them were attributed to sources in the Delhi police. Also, there were serious questions on the way Police dealt with the investigations in the case.
Since, it allegedly involved Iranian nationals who are said to have hatched the plan, the Police was lax in taking up the investigation. A team of the Delhi police only visited Tehran after filing the Chargesheet against Kazmi even though it was said that he was acting at the behest of the Iranian conspirators. Even the chargesheet is full of glaring loopholes.
An analysis is available here: http://www.ipsnews.net/2012/08/evidence-in-delhi-embassy-bombing-suggests-journalist-was-framed-part-1/
A recent report by Jamia Teachers Solidarity Association meticulously documented the track record of the Delhi Police Special Cell and how it framed innocent people in terror cases.
Meanwhile, the civil rights groups have welcomed the order. Here is the text of a statement issued by Kazmi Solidarity Committee.
The Kazmi Solidarity Committee welcomes the Supreme Court order granting bail to Syed Mohammad Ahmad Kazmi after seven months in custody on charges of involvement in the bomb attack on an Israeli diplomatic vehicle.
The committee deplores the obstructive attitude of the prosecution and the Special Cell of the Delhi Police, which have been perversely attempting to keep Mr. Kazmi in prison despite their inability to file a chargesheet within the extended time granted under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act.
Not only did the prosecution seek an extension of 90 days after the mandated period of judicial custody was over, it also used its inefficiency as an alibi, pleading that it needed more time to send out letters rogatory seeking international judicial assistance. While Mr. Kazmi was in custody, the Special Cell left no stone unturned in orchestrating a media trial to establish his guilt, planting malicious stories of his "confession" (while disavowing responsibility for these in court hearings).
The committee would like to underline once again, that despite this campaign by the Special Cell of the Delhi Police, independent media reports have suggested that the evidence against Mr Kazmi is feeble and the case against him, unlikely to stand any form of scrutiny.