11/7 hearing: 'Why must taxpayers pay for lives of merchants of death?'

Calling them lsquomerchants of deathrsquo the prosecution sought the death penalty for eight of the 12 convicts in the 117 train blasts case Special Public Prosecutor Raja Thakare highlighted the roles of those eight including the five who had planted the bombs and said they deserved nothing less than deathMangled remains of the first class compartment of a Virarbound train in which one of the blasts occurred after the local left Mahim station 188 people died after seven RDX bombs exploded in the first class coaches of seven local trains on July 11 2006 File picHe sought life imprisonment till death for the remaining four convicts He also referred to the trial of Yakub Memon who was eventually hanged for his role in the 1993 bombings and argued why education reformation or ill health should not count as mitigating circumstances for lenient sentencingThe court will deliver its decision on the quantum of sentence on September 30 Thakare asked for death for Dr Tanvir Ahmed Ansari Shaikh Alam Shaikh and Mohammad Sajid Ansari as well as the five who had planted the bombs Ehtesham Siddiqui Asif Khan Mohammad Faisal Shaikh Naveed Khan and Kamal Ahamed AnsariThakare told the court ldquoThe timing and target chosen is very crucial It is common knowledge that suburban trains on the ChurchgateVirar line are very crowded and during peak hours they are jampacked If blasts take place in running trains or at stations they are bound to cause maximum casualties because of the rushTherefore choice of the time and target also shows the extreme mentality of culprits who planted bombsrdquo He pointed out that terror acts in themselves were perverse phenomena ldquoThe main objective of terrorists is to disturb the harmony of the society disturb the even tempo peace and tranquility to create a sense of insecurity among peoplerdquoHe referred to the convicts as merchants of death and questioned why citizens should be taxed for their upkeep in case of a life term He said ldquoThe thinkers have posed a question these are merchants of death so why should honest taxpayers be liable for maintaining them for 40 to 60 yearsrdquolsquoNo call for leniencyrsquoThakare also argued ldquoYoung or old age cannot be used as mitigating circumstances Similarly ill health is also not considered as mitigating circumstancesrdquo The defence had earlier presented that several of the convicts had made serious attempts to garner some education while in prison and many of them had signed up for courses and earned degrees as wellThe defence had even called a teacher from the Indira Gandhi National Open University IGNOU to depose on behalf of the accused However Thakare pointed out that the IGNOU professor had said that the convicts studied in prison because they had a lot of time and said this did not qualify as mitigating circumstances eitherldquoThe accused showed no remorse or repentance At this stage they are telling the court that they are reformed and that they have read 27 books of Mahatma Gandhiji but this is not enoughrdquo said Thakare He also pointed out that in the past there had been adverse reports about their misconduct in jail and in court during the trialLife term for fourHowever Thakare said he would not insist on capital punishment for four of the convicts mdash Mohammad Majid Shafi Muzzammil Shaikh Soheil Mehmood Shaikh and Zamir Ahmad Shaikh Instead he sought life imprisonment for them ldquoThe court may consider them on a slightly different footing than other eightIf the court feels they deserve some leniency my respectful submission would be that since they have been found guilty of multiple offences of life imprisonment they may be sentenced till the end of their life and in no event less than 60 yearsrdquoYakubrsquos exampleSpecial Public Prosecutor Raja Thakare referred to the trial of 1993 blasts convict Yakub Memon who was hanged in July for his role in the attackThakare said Yakub was a Chartered Accountant by profession and was considered to be a respectable person before the attack However this was not given weightage by the Supreme Court and so education could not be considered as mitigating circumstances in this case eitherThakare also said that the court had not shown leniency even though Yakub claimed he had been falsely implicated because he was the brother of prime suspect Tiger Memon Neither was it considered mitigating circumstances that he had depression since 1996 and had served for 19 years in prisonDefence speakDefence advocate Yug Chaudhry said ldquoI can understand the rationality in asking for death for the five who planted the bombs but canrsquot understand why for the othersrdquo