1. The terming ‘impugned order’ in the defence petition is objectionable.Tajul Islam responded to these arguments
2. The defece is challenging the word ‘allege’in the Order.
3. The defense must prove the skype docs because they brought it.
4. Though the conversation is established, the content of the application is not proved.
5. These are unsafe docs, no probative value.
6. Section 2 (1)(e) of the information and communication Act 2006 is relevant.
7. Section 16 is also relevant.
8. As per section 19(1) ICTA, the Skype has no probative value.
9. The order passed by Tribunal is signed by two other members. So these are the orders of Tribunal.
10. There is no allegation about the prosecution witnesses and defense witnesses
11. It is revealed by Skype that Mr. Nasim was not under pressure by govt.
12. Disclosure of ‘IT expert’ is not mandatory to be disclosed to the defence.
1. Through Skype it is revealed that the Trial Process is vitisted.
2. What more needs to be found to prove that the Trial is vitiated.
3. Skype conversation is not denied by any one.
4. We have given CD of conversations. This reflects the exact text.
5. Burden of prove is not upon defence.
6. Admitted facts need not to be proved.
7. As it is relevant document, it is admissible.
8. These documents are not unsafe documents. No one challenged.
9. The source of expert opinion should be disclosed to us.