LAHORE, Nov 24 With the first anniversary of the Mumbai terror attack falling on Thursday, defence lawyers of the accused in Pakistan want extradition of Ajmal Amir Kasab, the lone surviving 'terrorist' being tried in India, (for investigation and his trial here).

Law-enforcement agencies had arrested a number of suspects in this connection and seven of them are being tried in the Anti-Terrorism Court, Rawalpindi.

The court is yet to indict Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi, who has been accused of masterminding the Mumbai attack, Abdul Wajid, Mazhar Iqbal, Hammad Amin Saddiq, Shaid Jamil Riaz, Jamil Ahmed and Younas Anjum.

At least 179 people, 22 of them foreigners, lost their lives when about 10 terrorists launched an attack on several sites in Mumbai on Nov 26, last year. The attack lasted three days.

The Indian authorities blamed the Pakistan-based Lashkar-i-Taiba outfit and demanded 'swift' action against those responsible for the carnage.

Advocates Khwaja Sultan Ahmed and Sher Afgan Asadi, counsel for Lakhvi, have submitted an application in the court of Malik Mohammad Akram Awan, Judge Special Court No.1 (Anti-Terrorism) Rawalpindi, and objected to the use of 'uncertified and unattested' copies of Ajmal Kasab's statement framing charges against the petitioner and other accused.

The application says “The process of procuring the presence of Kasab for trial before the court is still inconclusive and the only way to procure his attendance is through the Pakistan government demanding his custody from Indian authority for the purpose of investigation and trial.”

It also requested the court that the statement of Kasab should be 'left out of consideration' for the purpose of framing charges against Lakhvi and the co-accused.

The petitioner alleges in the application that the prosecution has supplied to the accused three sets of 'so-called' confessional statement of Kasab. The first is Kasab's statement recorded in Hindi script along with questions put to him and his answers recorded partly in English and partly in Hindi.

The second is the English translation of his statement recorded in Hindi by an Indian magistrate. And the third is the English translation of a purported statement of Kasab recorded in India bearing the signature and seal of Dr D.J. Thuse, a chartered civil engineer, but without any certificate of the legal keeper.

“The said documents are neither certified copies of the original nor can be used or proved under the provisions of Sub-Article 5 of Article 89 of the Qanoon-e-Shahdat. Kasab is not being tried jointly with the petitioner and his co-accused, thereby his statement is not admissible”.

According to the application, the prosecution has shown prejudice against the accused by using these documents for the purpose of framing charges. “The name of Ajmal Kasab has neither been shown in the list of the accused who have been sent up for trial nor in the ones not sent up for trial or are absconding.

“The prosecution has not cited any witness to prove the so-called confessional statement of Kasab not even Mrs R. V. Sawanth Waguly, the lady magistrate who had recorded it and Shree B.L. Waghmare, chief metropolitan magistrate, who had deputed Wguly, not cited as prosecution witness as per requirement of the relevant law.”

The petitioner further argued that the prosecution had made an attempt to get Kasab declared a proclaimed offender by obtaining warrants for his arrest, knowing that he was in the judicial custody of an Indian court where the charge has already been framed against him and he was 'not wilfully avoiding arrest'.

“On the receipt of report of the process-server to this effect the learned predecessor of the court observed in interim order dated 25-07-2009 that arrest warrants against Kasab cannot be executed because he was in judicial custody of an Indian court. For the same reason no proclamation can be issued against Kasab nor can he be declared a proclaimed offender. Even evidence against him under section 512 Cr. P.C. cannot be recorded in his absence.”

It says the prosecution 'deliberately' concealed the fact that Kasab had already retracted any statement said to have been made by him. “He had also not pleaded guilty to the charges framed against him and that judicial findings have yet to be given even by the Indian court.”