MOHAMMED AJMAL MOHAMMAD AMIR KASAB @ ABU MUJAHID versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

MOHAMMED AJMAL MOHAMMAD AMIR KASAB @ ABU MUJAHID versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

On the basis of voluminous independent ocular, forensic, documentary and electronic evidence (including recoveries from the vessel Kuber, GPS and satellite phone data, DNA matches, CCTV footage and intercepted calls) the appellant was a member of the cross-border conspiracy to wage war against the Government of India, personally responsible for multiple murders and terrorist offences; his confessional statement recorded under s.164 CrPC was voluntary and admissible; the right to counsel arises when first produced before a magistrate and was complied with in the case; given the enormity, premeditation, cruelty and consequences of the offences the death penalty was appropriate and affirmed;...

Parties
Appellant/accused: Mohammed Ajmal Mohammad Amir Kasab @ Abu Mujahid; Respondent: State of Maharashtra; Respondent/accused: Fahim Ansari; Respondent/accused: Sabauddin Ahmed
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
29 August 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; convictions and sentences of appellant affirmed; acquittals of A-2 and A-3 upheld
Legal Topics
Waging War, Conspiracy, Confession (s.164 Cr Pc), Right Against Self Incrimination, Right to Counsel/legal Aid, Death Penalty, Interception of Communications, Admissibility of Electronic Evidence, Judicial Notice
Criminal Law Terrorism Evidence Constitutional Law Sentencing Media Law International Law Waging War +8 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohammed Ajmal Mohammad Amir Kasab @ Abu Mujahid

Appellant/accused

State of Maharashtra

Respondent

Fahim Ansari

Respondent/accused

Sabauddin Ahmed

Respondent/accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellant guilty of multiple murders and of waging war against the Government of India
  2. 2 Whether appellant's confession recorded under s.164 CrPC was voluntary and admissible
  3. 3 Whether appellant was entitled to a lawyer at the pre-trial stage and effect of any omission

Ratio Decidendi

On the basis of voluminous independent ocular, forensic, documentary and electronic evidence (including recoveries from the vessel Kuber, GPS and satellite phone data, DNA matches, CCTV footage and intercepted calls) the appellant was a member of the cross-border conspiracy to wage war against the Government of India, personally responsible for multiple murders and terrorist offences; his confessional statement recorded under s.164 CrPC was voluntary and admissible; the right to counsel arises when first produced before a magistrate and was complied with in the case; given the enormity, premeditation, cruelty and consequences of the offences the death penalty was appropriate and affirmed;...

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; convictions and sentences of appellant affirmed; acquittals of A-2 and A-3 upheld

Orders

  • Convictions and five death sentences of appellant affirmed
  • Acquittal of Fahim Ansari and Sabauddin Ahmed upheld