Supreme CourtDivision Bench(2012) 10 SC CK 0014

Mohammed Ajmal Mohammad Amir Kasab @ Abu Mujahid vs State of Maharashtra

Supreme Court Of India · Decided on 3 October 2012 · Citation: (2013) 1 ALT(Cri) 232 : (2012) 9 SCALE 756 : 2012 (9) SCC 234

HON’BLE JUDGES
Chandramauli Kumar Prasad, J · Aftab Alam, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No''s. 19941-19942 of 2012 in Criminal A. No''s. 1899-1900 of 2011

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 250 words
1.

In paragraph 604 of the judgment, this Court directed the Maharashtra Government to pay a sum of Rs. 11,00,000 (rupees eleven lakhs only) to Mr. Raju Ramachandran and Rs. 3,50,000 (rupees three lakhs fifty thousand only) to Mr. Gaurav Agrawal as token remuneration for their valuable assistance to the Court. M/s. Ramachandran and Agrawal have filed a joint application expressing their unwillingness to accept the money for rendering assistance to the Court in this matter.

2.

We appreciate the high standard of professional ethics set by M/s. Ramachandran and Agrawal for themselves.

3.

Since the two counsel are not willing to accept the money, the Maharashtra Government is directed to pay the aforesaid amount of Rs. 14,50,000/- (rupees fourteen lakhs fifty thousand only) from the side of the two counsel to the kin of the eighteen (18) policemen, including the other security personnel, killed in the terrorists' carnage in equal proportions. The direction to the Maharashtra Government given in the main judgment is modified to the above extent. The payment to the kin of the police personnel should be made within six weeks from today.

4.

This disposes of Criminal Miscellaneous Petition Nos. 19941-19942 of 2012. We notice a typographical error in paragraph 603 of the judgment. In that paragraph, reference to the National Judicial Authority and the Judicial Authorities of the different States is a mistake. It should be read as National Judicial Academy and the Judicial Academies of the different States. Let necessary corrections be carried out.