26/11 case: National security concerns justify refusal of police clearance to Ansari, rules Bombay HC

The Bombay High Court has said the police kept in mind the larger interest of public safety and national security while rightly refusing a clearance certificate to Fahim Ansari acquitted in the 2611 terror attack case to ply an autorickshaw for livelihoodThe court has considered the confidential intelligence report submitted by the police which prima facie indicates that the possibility of Ansari indulging in similar activities cannot be ruled out a bench of Justices A S Gadkari and R R Bhonsale said in the judgment on WednesdayWe find no reason to differ with the opinion of the government authorities nor can any fault be found with it said the HC order a copy of which was made available on ThursdayThe certificate to Ansari was refused in the backdrop of his criminal antecedents in a reasonable manner and in the larger interest of public safety and national security it addedAnsari filed the plea in January last year seeking the police clearance certificate for the purpose of securing a public service vehicle badge which is required to drive an autorickshaw for commercial purposesHe said his arrest and trial in the 2611 terror attacks case should not be used as a ground to bar him from availing public amenities and opportunitiesThe government had opposed the plea claiming that the policy guidelines governing the police character verification clearly mandate that a person with a serious criminal background and with a prior conviction must be issued an adverse remarkIt also submitted a confidential note containing certain sensitive information official intelligence communication against Ansari based on which the certificate was refused to himThe court noted that Ansaris employment opportunities stand curtailed only to certain jobs and several other avenues of employment are still open to himThe bench observed that the authorities have rightly refused the clearance certificate and said it was done in the larger interest of the general public and safetyConsidering the nature of offences and crimes in which Ansari was involved and the role assigned to him of having provided ancillary logistical support for terror activities the police were apprehensive and hence as a precautionary measure refused the clearance certificate the court notedThe offences involved were extremely serious in nature and a threat to the security of the country The police authorities based on intelligence reports have considered the petitioner Ansari as a high potential risk it saidThe court further said Ansari has been considered a high risk for certain jobs including that of plying a commercial autorickshaw considering the crimes he was accused and arrested forThe bench agreed that the verification process conducted by the police was in accordance with the guidelinesThe police clearance certificate to Ansari was refused considering his antecedents and the fact that he was convicted in a case of alleged attack on CRPF officials his alleged connections with the banned terror outfit LashkareTaiba and his role in the November 26 2008 terror attacks case the court addedIn his petition Ansari had contested the decision as arbitrary illegal and discriminatory arguing that his fundamental right to livelihood was being violatedTen Pakistani terrorists launched a series of coordinated attacks at vital places in the city including the Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Terminus the Taj and Oberoi hotels in south Mumbai on November 26 2008As many as 166 persons lost their lives and several others were injured in the attacks that lasted around 60 hoursNine of the terrorists were killedIn May 2010 a special court convicted Ajmal Kasab the lone Pakistani terrorist captured alive but acquitted the two Indian men accused in the case Faheem Ansari and Sabauddin Ahmed noting lack of evidenceThe duo was accused of being coconspirators and aiding and abetting terror outfit LeT in conducting the dastardly attackThe Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court had upheld their acquittalAnsari was however convicted and sentenced to ten years jail in another case of Uttar Pradesh He was released from jail after he served the sentenceThis story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed agencies Midday accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability trustworthiness reliability and data of the text Midday managementmiddaycom reserves the sole right to alter delete or remove without notice the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever