Sharjeel Imam, Umar Khalid and others move court alleging denial of access to chargesheet
By Muslim Mirror Staff
New Delhi: Several Muslim activists on Tuesday told a court that they had not been given access to 18,000-page charge sheet despite its orders.
”Police officials have uploaded the charge sheet in the computer but the jail authorities have not given me access to it,” Saifi, who is lodged in Mandoli prison, was quoted by PTI as saying.
Some of the other accused, who have got access to it, sought the court’s directions to the jail authorities for a uniform time slot, preferably more than an hour a day, for reading the bulky 18,000 pages on the computer system in prison.
Rehman, lodged in Tihar jail, said the prison authorities did not inform him till date that the charge sheet has been uploaded and he can read it.
Suspended AAP Councillor and co-accused Tahir Hussain said he has not been able to read the charge sheet as the computer system was always occupied.
Hussain also sought to be given access to a pen drive containing the charge sheet so that he can go to the library and read it.
Former JNU student leader Umar Khalid submitted he had been given three hours someday while one hour the other day for reading the charge sheet.
”Besides the availability of computer system and the fact that it varies from jail to jail, it also depends on the official on duty as for how much time we will be given access to the computer. It is my request that some standard time be provided, which is more than an hour a day as the charge sheet is about 18,000 pages,” Khalid said.
While JNU student Sharjeel Imam said he has been given two hours to read the charge sheet, former Congress Councillor Ishrat Jahan said she was given one hour and Jamia Millia Islamia student Asif Iqbal Tanha said he has been given access to the computer for half an hour only.
The court expressed displeasure when it came to know that the accused were not being given a uniform time slot for reading the charge sheet.
When the judge asked the Tihar jail authorities, who was present during the video conferencing, about the concerns raised by the accused, he failed to give any answer.
”What’s the point of uploading it on the computer if the accused cannot access it? …Why are they given different time slots?” the judge remarked.
