New Delhi, March 21: A confession by public prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam that he had cooked up the story about Ajmal Kasab demanding and getting chicken biryani in jail has led senior lawyers and former judges to accuse him of "stooping" to unethical conduct that merits dismissal.

But they suggested the falsehood wouldn't have affected the trial of the 26/11 gunman, although one of them said it could have tilted the balance towards a death sentence by portraying the young Pakistani as unrepentant for the November 2008 massacre.

Nikam, 61, who has been Maharashtra special public prosecutor for two decades, had yesterday told reporters he had "concocted" the biryani story to thwart an "emotional wave" the media had created in favour of Kasab after seeing him wipe his eyes in court.

Nikam's submission in the trial court had gone viral in the social media and sparked outrage on television talk shows, and Opposition politicians used the alleged mollycoddling of a terrorist to target the government.

BJP member Varun Gandhi's 2009 general election campaign had resonated with chants of "Biryanifor Kasab and roti-subzi for Varun (arrested for inflammatory speeches)".

"Terrorists are given biryaniand patriots denied even water," yoga televangelist Baba Ramdev had thundered before a crowd during an anti-government protest in August 2012.

Kasab, sentenced to hang in May 2010, was executed in November 2012.

Legal experts said Nikam's confession would make him liable to dismissal by Bombay High Court or the Maharashtra government. They played down the possibility of prosecution for perjury since the falsehood was neither part of a sworn affidavit nor likely to have influenced the verdict.

Justice B.A. Khan, former Jammu and Kashmir chief justice, said Bombay High Court could certainly sack Nikam if someone lodged a complaint against him.

"If he has made a false statement as a public prosecutor, it amounts to an act of prejudice to the convict. It's a serious matter. A public prosecutor who resorts to this type of falsehood doesn't deserve to be a public prosecutor," he told The Telegraph from Jammu and Kashmir.

"Anybody can file a complaint against him," he said, "but nobody will do that as it is the 26/11 terror case."

Justice Khan said that while Nikam's statement may not have affected the trial, it could have influenced the sentencing.

"If he (the prosecutor) makes a false statement, it influences the court into awarding a (death) sentence, saying, 'The fellow does not have any remorse; therefore why should we reduce his punishment from hanging to life imprisonment?'" he said.

"Otherwise courts take mitigating factors like the remorse of the convict and his age (into account) while awarding the sentence."

A former Delhi High Court judge, Justice S.N. Dhingra, however, dismissed any possibility of the trial judge being swayed by the biryanistory.

"Courts ignore these stories. These types of stories are (published) in the newspapers. We judges are normally not affected by newspaper stories or public prosecutor stories," he said.

"These types of stories are not germane to the case - how does it matter whether he had asked for biryanior not?"

Justice Dhingra also downplayed the possibility of the high court firing Nikam, saying he could only face "administrative action" from the state government.

"Nobody will take suo motu (on its own) cognisance of these matters. Kasab is dead, case is over; somewhere if you feel he (Nikam) should be taken to task, then initiate the process administratively."

Nikam, speaking to reporters on the sidelines of an international conference on counter-terrorism in Jaipur, had described how his story had changed the mood at media panel discussions, replacing their sympathy for a tearful Kasab to outrage at the government's pampering of a militant.

Veteran criminal lawyer Ram Jethmalani said Nikam should not have made such a "foolish statement" but agreed that it would not have swayed the judge.

Advocate K.V. Dhananjay described Nikam's statement as a "light-hearted" one but stressed that it should not have been made.

"The prosecution should not indulge in such gimmicks. If the prosecutor is going to stoop to such levels, doubts would be cast how fair he had been with other things in the case?" he said.

"Very often, the court tends to think the prosecutor would not lie. If a prosecutor is lying through his teeth in such a manner, the court would certainly be entitled to doubt how honest the prosecutor has been in other areas."

Senior lawyer Kamini Jaiswal, who had defended the Parliament attack accused including Afzal Guru, slammed Nikam's "shocking" conduct.

"It is shocking that a person conducting such a sensitive trial should make such a statement. It was being internationally watched. He did it just to get some cheap publicity," Jaiswal said.

"This kind of unprofessional statement is condemnable. As a public prosecutor, he has a much higher responsibility to appear fair."

Jaiswal recalled that on the day of sentencing, Nikam had come to a news conference armed with graphics showing Kasab with a noose round his neck.

"He (Nikam) was holding a photograph of Kasab with a noose as if he had known (beforehand) about the (sentence). He has behaved in the most irresponsible manner. He should henceforth not be appointed in any matter," she said.

Good taste and sobriety had indeed been at a premium on that day five years ago.

Moments after the sentencing, someone from the crowd outside the court had asked Nikam his "score".

It had taken the prosecutor, a veteran of high-profile cases from the 1993 Bombay blasts and the Pramod Mahajan and Gulshan Kumar murders to the Shakti Mills gang rape, a split second to figure the question out.

"Thirty-eight death penalties and over 600 life terms," he had replied.

Thunderous claps greeted the announcement as the crowd celebrated with crackers, drumbeats, cheering and whistling, punctuated by chants of: "Death to Kasab! Hang him! Hang him!"

Nikam kept waving and flashing the "V" sign.