Paranoid Decision

Roshan Jamal Khan, after spending 22 months in a Spanish prison, has been sentenced for 8 and half years for praying in a mosque located in the Raval neighborhood of Barcelona, Spain.

Roshan Jamal Khan has no criminal past. After his arrest in Spain, the top, two investigative agencies of the Government of India, viz. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anti-Terrorism Squad (Maharashtra), investigated his credentials right from his college days till his travel to Spain. When these agencies did not find anything incriminatory against him, the Government of India cleared his name. ( Indian Express )

Roshan Jamal Khan was arrested from the Tariq bin Ziyad mosque on January 18, 2008. He was convicted on the charge of associating with terrorist groups on December 11, 2009. A copy of the court order in Spanish & English is provided for all to read while the rebuttal of the decisive factors leading to the conviction of Roshan follows :
  • The word of just one witness (F-1) has been held as gospel truth against that of 11 others to send Roshan Jamal Khan to prison.

  • No incriminating material was found on his person or at his residence in Spain.

  • Roshan wasn’t under any surveillance. His movements were not suspicious nor were they tracked before he was arrested.

  • His phone was not tapped nor are there any records of his conversations, either telephonic or otherwise, with the terrorist group that he has been associated with.

  • The miniscule amount of pyrotechnic, explosive materials allegedly thrown in a trash can by another accused does not contain the fingerprints & genetic traces of the person accused of throwing it nor of Roshan Jamal Khan.

  • The sole witness, F-1, had arrived from France just 2 days before the raid.

  • The explosive materials were made in France.

  • The fingerprints on the explosive materials were not compared with those of F-1.

  • The miniscule amount of pyrotechnic, explosive material allegedly discovered during the raid on the mosque was the only incriminating material that the prosecution could produce even after 22 months of investigations. This gives rise to the doubt of the evidence being planted by F-1 so that it could be discovered during the raid.

  • The telephonic conversation record of F-1 to his French friend informing him of the terror plan is not provided.

  • The process of how F-1’s friend informed the Spanish authorities about the terror plans is not detailed.

  • The video interview available on the internet and relied upon by the learned judges to implicate Roshan Jamal Khan has been conducted by an unknown person.

  • Studios of Hollywood, Bollywood, Tollywood or even Mollywood, i.e. the Malegaon film industry, can produce such videos.

  • Two persons, present during the raid, were not charged because, according to F-1, they were not present when the terror plans were discussed. But, that doesn’t rule out that they were not present when the plans were discussed in his absence.

  • No particular motive has been imputed to Roshan Jamal Khan for associating with terror groups. It seems the fact that he is a devout Muslim and follows the basic tenets of Islam has been held as enough proof to associate him with terror groups.

  • Roshan Jamal Khan was acquitted and absolved of the charge of possession of explosive materials that was attributed to another person.

  • Roshan was also acquitted and absolved of the charge of conspiring to indulge in terror acts along with all other accused.

  • He was convicted only on the charge of associating with terror groups the substantiation of which can be said to be invalid and erroneous.
The case lacks strength and should have collapsed on its own even without any defence. The learned judges should have dismissed it as a case of paranoia due to the 2004 Madrid train bombings.

One of the major rules of jurisprudence is that a charge should be proved beyond reasonable doubt. If that cannot be done, then the benefit of doubt should be given to the accused. In Roshan Jamal Khan’s case, this wasn’t done.

Justice should not only be done but also seen to be done. In Spain, it has been subverted.