ATS chief, deputy contest over Pune blast arrest

Mumbai: The arrest of German Bakery blast mastermind Mirza Himayat Baig has sparked a blame game between the Mumbai Anti-Terror Squad chief and his deputy.

After the arrest of Baig, ATS chief Rakesh Maria had said, "We have made the first arrest. Himayat Baig was arrested from Camp Road in Pune."

But barely eight days later, his deputy DIG Ravindra Kadam said it's improper to call Baig the mastermind as he had not even visited Pune.

Kadam said, "Himayat Baig did not go to Pune. He was involved in the conspiracy of the German Backery blast. Yasin was the one who planted the bomb at the backery. Himayat Baig cannot be called the mastermind. Mohsin Chaudhary can be called the mastermind of the German Backery blast."

In a press conference held earlier this month, Rakesh Maria along with DIG Kadam, had detailed Baig's role in the planning and execution of the blast.

Maria had said, "Himayat Baig was involved in planning, recce, and execution of the blasts."

However after the latest statement of Kadam, the ATS chief clarified the situation to the media persons. Maria said: "There are different teams assigned different tasks, working on various aspects of the investigations in various parts of the state and some parts of the country. One team would not be aware of what the other team is working on. All the co-ordination happens under my office at the ATS headquarters. There is no mis-communication."

The blame game may continue within the walls of the ATS offices. But it appears that the defence is likely to exploit these contradictions to its maximum advantage during the legal battles that lie ahead.

Meanwhile, the Pune Bar Association has appealed to all lawyers not to defend German Bakery blast accused Himayat Baig, saying "no defence for accused terrorists". But lawyer Sushil Mancharkar says everybody has a right to be defended and he's ready to defend Baig.

Mancharkar says, "If the accused is trying to have an advocate then why can't he be defended by an advocate of his own choice, when there is a provision of right of defence? From law point of view, the law says, my profession and my conscience says, 'I should defend any of the person who comes to me'."