26/11 Case: Trial Begins Against Hafiz Saeed in Absentia

New Delhi. Nearly two decades after the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks, the Indian legal process against six Pakistani accused has moved forward with proceedings being initiated in their absence. The accused include Lashkar-e-Taiba founder Hafiz Saeed and Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi, along with Sajid Mir, Abu Alqama, Asim alias Abu Kahafa and Major Abdur Rehman Pasha.

The case is significant because the proceedings are being pursued under Section 356 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, or BNSS. The provision allows a court, subject to prescribed legal conditions, to conduct proceedings against a proclaimed offender who is deliberately evading the judicial process and is not available before the court.

A special court is handling the proceedings in the 26/11 case. The court has initiated the process of issuing proclamations against the accused. The prosecution is expected to place relevant documents, evidence and investigation records before the court as the proceedings move ahead.

Hafiz Saeed is accused of playing a key role in the conspiracy behind the Mumbai attacks. Indian investigators have alleged that Pakistan-based extremist networks were involved in planning and facilitating the operation. Investigators have also alleged that handlers based in Pakistan communicated with the attackers during the assault and provided them with instructions.

The 26/11 attacks began in Mumbai on November 26, 2008, when a group of armed terrorists targeted several prominent locations across the city. The attacks resulted in the deaths of numerous people and left many others injured. The incident became one of the most serious terror attacks in India's modern history and had major consequences for India-Pakistan relations and international counter-terrorism efforts.

Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi has also been accused of being involved in the planning and preparation of the attacks. Investigators have alleged that members associated with Lashkar-e-Taiba played a role in training the attackers and preparing them for the operation.

Sajid Mir has been accused of involvement in planning and communications related to the attack. The other accused — Abu Alqama, Asim alias Abu Kahafa and Major Abdur Rehman Pasha — are also accused of roles connected with the conspiracy, training and preparation of the attackers.

Investigators have alleged that a control room was established in Karachi from where the attackers operating in Mumbai were monitored and directed. The name of Syed Zabiuddin Ansari alias Abu Jundal also emerged during the investigation. He was accused of helping the attackers with Hindi and local language-related information so that they could understand conversations and instructions after reaching Mumbai.

Why is the trial being conducted in absentia?

A major challenge in the case has been the fact that several key accused are located outside India and have not appeared before Indian courts. Section 356 of the BNSS provides a legal mechanism under specified conditions to proceed against proclaimed offenders in their absence.

Before such proceedings can advance, the court must follow the prescribed legal process, including steps intended to establish that the accused has been informed about the proceedings and has been given an opportunity to appear before the court.

The use of this provision in the 26/11 case could become an important development in cases where accused persons remain outside India for prolonged periods and their physical presence before an Indian court cannot be secured.

What happens next?

The prosecution will present relevant evidence and documents before the special court. Witness statements, investigation records and other material may form part of the judicial proceedings. The court will examine the evidence in accordance with the law before reaching any conclusion.

Even though the accused are not physically present, the proceedings must comply with legal safeguards and principles of a fair trial. The allegations will have to be examined on the basis of evidence, and any final determination will be made by the court according to law.

The development is significant because several key accused in the 26/11 case have remained outside the reach of India's judicial process for years. The proceedings under the BNSS could provide a legal route for the case to move forward despite their continued absence.