Stung by HC verdict, RK Anand defends himself

DEFENSIVE LAWYER: RK Anand says High Court hasn't examined the credentials of all witnesses.

J & K | Chhattisgarh | Delhi | MP |
Mizoram | Rajasthan

Featured Blog

Rajdeep Sardesai

26/11: Terror comes precariously close

Featured Slideshows

New Delhi: In a rare verdict by the Delhi High Court, two of the country's top criminal lawyers, R K Anand and I U Khan have been held guilty of colluding with a witness in the high-profile BMW hit-and-run case.

Responding to the verdict, Anand spoke with CNN-IBN from Beijing and said he would challenge the verdict in a higher court.

“See, under the Contempt of Court Act, any decision given by the court is an appealable order, and the appeal lies to the higher court and I am definitely going to file an appeal,” he said.

Here are the excerpts from the interview:

CNN-IBN: The legal fraternity is actually split on how severe your punishment should be. No one is really is questioning the fact that you are guilty, Mr Anand.

RK Anand: I think what you are saying is not a fact - that the legal fraternity is divided. The question is that the facts are not placed before each and every member of the bar. The more you know about the facts of a case, the more you understand what exactly the position is. It is such a high profile and controversial matter, you can always point to the guilt of an individual but when I go deep into this matter I find there's nothing in the case.

CNN-IBN: Just to put the facts clear one last time Mr Anand, what were you as a senior defence lawyer doing with a court witness in the first place, discussing the accused and the Public Prosecutor?

RK Anand: See to be very frank, I was not with the witness. I had taken a flight to go to Ahmedabad to argue a very high-profile matter of a very high government official (sic), and there was a lot of rain at that time. If someone barges into your place and starts talking to you, you cannot stop them. You've come all the way to Beijing to talk to me. I have never stopped anyone talking to me.

CNN-IBN: The High Court order is silent on Sunil Kulkarni and his conduct. You have based your entire defence on Kulkarni's credential and believability.

RK Anand: See, the point is when you judge a particular scene, whether enacted or videographed, you must have an angle. When a person is taking an interview of yours, any person is taking a recording of yours, he is doing it with a motive and an intention. If the motive and intention is very clear then naturally, you have to act upon that one. I think the HC is totally in error in not going into the credential of that individual concerned (sic).

CNN-IBN: Mr Anand, we have so far heard in whispers that often the defence and the prosecution do collude on cases. Do you believe you are being made an example of?

RK Anand: I won't say the defence and prosecution collude but I can understand that there are witnesses they are always won over. There are witnesses that are planted, which are not really witnesses that are roped in as witnesses. In those cases, I don't think that this question arises of collusion between the prosecution and the defence. It’s the duty of the defence lawyer to see that truth comes before the court, and when an individual is not present at the place of the occurrence, it becomes the duty of the defence lawyer to see that the truth is brought before the court.