Ajmal Amir Kasab trial: US witnesses likely to depose throug

 The deposition of three independent witnesses from the US through video conferencing is likely to take place today before the designated court conducting the trial in 26/11 terror attack case.



Making arguments before Justice M L Tahilyani, special public prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam said prosecution may examine the witnesses through video conferencing, subject to their availability.



He said MTNL has been instructed to install the necessary instruments for the purpose in the court room.



Mr Nikam, however, said if these witnesses do not depose, the prosecution may examine the two agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), who had assisted the investigation agencies in gathering evidence against the accused persons.



On August 3, Nikam had made an application stating that five witnesses, from the US including two FBI officials, were prosecution witnesses in the case. While the FBI officials will be present in the court for recording their testimonies the three civilians will do the same through video conference.



He had also prayed the court to refrain media persons from disclosing the identity and addresses of the five US citizens for security reasons.



However, prime accused Ajmal Amir Kasab’s lawyer Abbas Kazmi had opposed Mr Nikam’s plea of American witnesses being examined through video conference as he was unaware of the treaty signed between India and US for dealing with terrorism. 



Mr Kazmi also argued that if the witness gave any false evidence through video conference or tried to cause contempt of court, it would be difficult to take action against that witness.



However, Mr Nikam said necessary precaution would be taken on behalf of the prosecution if any false statement was given by the witness during the examination through video conference. 



He contended that the life of three US citizens, witness in 26/11 attack incident, would be in danger if they came down to the city and hence would be examined through video conferencing. He also said the process in that case would have been lengthy and expensive.



After hearing the arguments of both prosecution and defence on August 6, the court had allowed the deposition of these witnesses.