Statesman News Service
New Delhi, 27 April 2017. India on Thursday stuck to its position that Kulbhushan Jadhav had been awarded death sentence by a Pakistan military court on ‘baseless’ charges while Islamabad claimed that the former Indian Navy officer had been tried for espionage in a ‘transparent manner’ in accordance with the law of the land.
Amid anxiety in India about the well-being and whereabouts of Jadhav, MEA spokesperson Gopal Baglay hoped at a media briefing that Pakistan would grant visas to Jadhav’s parents so that they could go to the neighbouring country and follow with the authorities the petition by his mother seeking the Pakistan Government’s intervention for his release and the appeal to be filed to the appellate court to initiate the process to get his conviction overturned.
The spokesperson said the visa applications of Jadhav’s parents needed to be expedited so that they could take further steps to secure justice for him. In response to a question, he said India awaited Pakistan’s response on his parents’ request.
The petition and the appeal on behalf of Jadhav’s mother were handed over by Indian High Commissioner Gautam Bambawale to Pakistan Foreign Secretary Tehmina Janjua in Islamabad on Wednesday since he has 40 days’ time to go in appeal as per the law of Pakistan.
On Pakistan’s contention that Jadhav’s trial was fair and transparent, the spokesperson said India had not been officially informed anything about it. India was not aware who defended him before the military court or if he was provided a lawyer at all.
Jadhav’s health was causing great concern to the entire country since he had been in the ‘illegal’ custody of the Pakistani authorities for over a year now. India had also sought his medical certificate from the Pakistani authorities.
The spokesperson said the government and Jadhav’s family would explore every option available to secure justice for him.
Meanwhile, in Islamabad, Pakistan Foreign Office spokesperson Nafees Zakaria said the military court’s ruling in Jadhav’s case was based on specific evidence and the trial was conducted in a transparent manner.