India Brings up 26/11, Pathankot After Pakistan Protests Samjhauta Accused Acquittal

New Delhi: A special court’s decision to acquit the accused in the Samjhauta train blast case has triggered a diplomatic row between the South Asian two neighbours on Wednesday, with Pakistan summoning the Indian envoy and India retorting by bringing up Islamabad’s tardiness over prosecuting those culpable of the Mumbai and other terror attacks.

On Wednesday, the four accused were acquitted by a special court on charges of masterminding the 2007 Samjhauta train blast case which left 68 people, mostly Pakistanis, dead.

Pakistan’s foreign ministry summoned Indian high commissioner Ajay Bisaria to lodge a “strong protest” against the acquittal. The press release specifically named Swami Aseemanand, the main suspect, describing him as an “activist of the Hindu terrorist organisation RSS”.

“The acquittal of the accused today, 11 years after the heinous Samjhauta Terror Attacks makes a travesty of justice and exposes the sham credibility of the Indian Courts. It also belies the rampant Indian duplicity and hypocrisy where India reflexively levels allegations of terrorism against Pakistan, while protecting with impunity, terrorists who had publicly confessed to their odious crimes,” said the press release from Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Also Read: Samjhauta Blast Case: Aseemanand, Three Others Acquitted by NIA Court

It added that Pakistan’s acting foreign secretary described the acquittal as reflective of “the Indian state policy of promoting and protecting Hindu terrorists”. He also called upon India to “explore judicial remedies to ensure that the perpetrators are brought to justice”.

There was no official response from New Delhi, but official sources indicated that the Indian high commissioner rejected the Pakistani allegations.

“Indian HC rejected Pak assertions. He highlighted that the due process of law was followed by the Indian courts and the judicial system in a transparent manner,” said sources.

Aseemanand. Credit: PTI

The Indian envoy apparently also countered the allegations by saying that the Pakistani government had not been helpful in serving court summons to Pakistani witnesses in the case. “These summons were returned by the Pakistan foreign office and not served,” claimed sources.

Further, Bisaria expressed disappointment over the progress in the trial for the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks mastermind and claimed it “is held up and the perpetrators and prime accused continue to roam freely in Pakistan”.

He also raised Indian “concerns” about the lack of progress in investigating the Pathankot airbase attack, even after a joint investigation team, with Pakistani members, visited the site.

Bisaria also noted that Pakistan has yet to take “credible and irreversible” steps against the Jaish-e-Mohammed and other terror entities and individuals. India had handed over a dossier to Pakistan on February 27, but Islamabad has yet to officially reply to the Indian missive.

Both countries have emerged recently from a major military stand-off after India conducted airstrikes against JeM training camps followed by a retaliatory intrusion by Pakistan’s Air Force.

Also Read: India Open to Third-Party Verification of Pakistani Action Against Terror Camps

While the stand-off may have de-escalated, tensions in the relations remain.

On Monday (March 18), India send a second note verbale within a week to protest the “continued harassment and aggressive tailing” of Indian diplomats in Islamabad. The earlier note verbal was dated on March 13.

The latest incidents of ‘harassment’ listed by India in the note verbal took place on March 14 and 15.

The Indian naval advisor had two Pakistani security personnel on watch outside his residence when he was hosting a dinner on March 14, as per the note. A day later, he was “aggressively tailed” by Pakistani security agency personnel while travelling from his residence to the high commission.

India has also claimed that on March 14, another staff member of the high commission was approached by a person who proceeded to ask questions in an “intimidatory manner”

There were also frequent “hoax calls” received by two other High Commission staff members.