The Bombay High Court quashed a 2018 special court order directing authorities to share confidential records with 26/11 accused Abu Jundal, calling his request a “fishing and roving inquiry.” The court said the demand was a belated and tactical move unrelated to the main terror case.
Senior Congress leader Kapil Sibal welcomed the extradition of Tahawwur Rana, a key figure in the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks, attributing it to efforts by both UPA and NDA governments. The NIA seeks to uncover the broader conspiracy linked to Rana’s role, emphasizing the need for justice for the victims and the investigation’s significance.
Today, On 11th April, The National Investigation Agency (NIA) informed the court that Tahawwur Rana, accused in the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, may have planned similar attacks in other Indian cities. Rana is currently facing extradition proceedings. The agency emphasized the seriousness of the threat posed by his alleged involvement.
Advocate Narender Mann has been appointed as the Special Public Prosecutor for the trial of Tahawwur Rana, who is accused in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks. With more than 30 years of experience in the legal field, Mann has managed numerous significant criminal cases, including those involving corruption and major scams. The Ministry of Home Affairs has confirmed his appointment for a duration of three years or until the trial concludes, whichever is earlier. In this prominent case, Mann will represent the National Investigation Agency (NIA).
Senior advocate Dayan Krishnan will lead the prosecution of Tahawwur Rana in India for his role in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks. Rana is accused of helping plan the attacks that killed over 160 people in 2008. He is currently in the United States, but India is working to bring him here through extradition. This move is an important step in getting justice for the victims of the attacks.
Tahawwur Rana, wanted for his role in the 2008 Mumbai attacks, is battling extradition to India. His attorney has petitioned the US Supreme Court to reconsider earlier court decisions based on double jeopardy claims, arguing it pertains to the same conduct. The Supreme Court will address this matter on January 17.