Vikram Buddhi remains in jail, father writes to PM

Mumbai, Jul 6: Captain B K Subbarao, father of Indian scholar Vikram Buddhi, who is now behind the bars, has sought PM Manmohan Singh's urgent and immediate intervention, seeking justice for his son who has been jailed in the US despite completing his 57-month jail term on May 6. Buddhi was jailed for allegedly posting messages on Internet Yahoo space which had called upon the people of Iraq to retaliate the perceived unjust Iraq war and to kill President G W Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and others.

Subbarao, in his letters to the PMO and also the ministry of external affairs, has pointed out instances of deliberate discrimination during the court trial of Vikram. "Indian graduate student and PhD mathematics scholar Vikram Buddhi has already served the full 57-month jail term, but he is still held behind bars by the immigration department which has the power to deport him. I have urged our prime minister to at least now provide him with legal assistance in the US so that he can appeal against this unfair court verdict and clear his name,'' said Captain Subbarao.

Comparing the recent case of handcuffing of 18-year-old Krittika Biswas, Vikram's distraught father wrote in his letter that "it was all the more surprising how top MEA officials worked through the night to intervene in the case of Krittika who was jailed for one day. But, in Vikram's case there was no sincere help or intervention from the Indian government in the last four-and-half years.''

Also, in Krittika's case the actual email offender turned out to be a Chinese male student, but in Vikram's case the real email culprit was never properly confirmed. Firstly, he stated, that the very indictment (charge) against Vikram is faulty as it simply does not mention the term 'internet messages', which were supposedly first noticed by the US Secret Service (USSS) police.
He mentioned that this was deliberately done because an internet message usually constitutes protected speech under the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

"It shows the defence attorney was prevented from defending Vikram fully and properly. All these factors clearly show that Vikram was discriminated against as the proper justice process was not followed during his trial,'' he added.

OneIndia News