No evidence produced to link Saeed to Mumbai attacks: Pak HC

No evidence produced to link Saeed to Mumbai attacks: Pak HC

"The Attorney General contended that the petitioners are being blamed to be involved in Mumbai attacks, we have observed that not a single document has been brought on record that the petitioners are involved in it," the court ruled.

A three-member full bench of court on Saturday in its detailed verdict maintained that "no documentary or any other evidence" was produced against the detention of Saeed and others.

The court, in its 29-page verdict, observed the detainees were not informed regarding reasons of their detention within the period of three months which was a legal requirement.

Saeed, linked to 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks, was set free on Tuesday by the Lahore High Court, triggering an angry response from India which accused Pakistan of not being serious about fighting terror.

59-year-old Jamaat-ud-Dawah chief Saeed, who has been under house arrest since December 11, was ordered to be released by the High Court which held his detention as illegal.

A close aide of Saeed, Col (retd) Nazir Mohammad, also held in connection with the November 26 attacks in Mumbai, was freed along with the JuD chief by the High Court.

According to the judgment, Pakistan's Attorney General and Advocate General made verbal request for in camera proceedings as they wanted to produce some "secret" material to be in possession of the government against the petitioners.

"The said documents are mostly reports of intelligence agencies. The first report is dated 6-4-2009 and the document shows that in order to cover up lacuna the report has been obtained after four months of the detention of the petitioners and it is found incorrect as nothing happened which was apprehended in the report," the court said.

According to the judgment, "the second report is dated 21.4.2009". "If this report is correct, why any action was not taken against the responsible persons and even otherwise this report was prepared during the period when the petitioners had already been detained, who can not be held responsible for any apprehension about any action on the part of the JuD," it said.

The court further observed that review board has no judicial status and its decision was only an opinion because retired judges can be appointed its members. Record exhibited was made in May 2009 while they were detained in December 2008, the bench held.

The court finally held that the detainees cannot be detained on the grounds of material and record produced in the court.