Srinagar: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh upheld the acquittal of alleged active members of Lashkar-e-Taiba, who according to the prosecution, were hellbent upon sowing unrest in the Valley and had been engaging in terrorist activities and acts of sabotage to overthrow the Central government.
"The story of the prosecution otherwise seems to be unreliable because the seven persons allegedly involved in terrorist activities and as alleged by the police to be members of Laskhar-e-Taiba, a dreaded organisation were sitting like ducks at a public place in Wildlife Sanctuary at Manda waiting for the police to be arrested without any reaction and despite availability of the weapon/explosives they had not used them to retaliate while being arrested by the police," a bench of Justice Muhammad Akram Chowdhary said while expressing serious reservations regarding the evidence that the prosecution had presented before the trial court.
In the present matter, on August 28, 2004, the in charge of Police Station Pacca Danga learnt from a reliable source that the respondents, who were allegedly active Lashkar-e-Taiba members, intended to stir up trouble in the state of Jammu and Kashmir. According to sources, the respondents were present in the adjacent Manda Jammu forest where they were allegedly plotting to carry out their nefarious plans.
This information led to the registration of a case in which the respondents were accused of violating many provisions of the RPC (Ranbir Penal Code), including Sections 121, 121-A, 122, 120-B, 153A, as well as Sections 4/5 of the Explosive Substances Act and 7/25 of the Arms Act. The accused were reportedly found plotting together during a raid that was conducted by a police force that included officers in uniform and plain clothes. They were apprehended and during the search, various weapons were recovered, including grenades and a revolver, as well as a letter from the district commander of Lashkar-e-Taiba and a letter pad that belonged to the group.
"During the search, two Chinese grenades were recovered from respondent Mohd Bashir, one pistol from Mohd Shafi, one live hand grenade from Javed Ahmed, one Chinese grenade from Abdul Rehman, two Chinese grenades from Abdul Rashid besides one letter written in Urdu by the District Commander of Lashkar-e-Taiba and a letter pad of the said organisation were recovered from their possession."
Following an inquiry, a charge sheet was submitted under RPC Section 212, ESA Section 4/5, and Arms Act Section 7/25. A few witnesses for the prosecution testified against the accused throughout the trial. The investigating officer and other witnesses, however, were not presented for questioning despite several opportunities provided by the court.
Also read:J-K: 3 terror associates arrested in Awantipora and Shopian, incriminating materials recovered
The trial court found all of the defendants innocent after evaluating the available evidence and witness testimony, noting the prosecution's inability to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The prosecution's contention that the respondents, who were armed, did not open fire or toss grenades at the police party did not convince the court that their version of events was believable.
After reviewing the testimony of the prosecution witnesses, Justice Chowdhary noted a lack of conclusive and corroborated evidence given that the prosecution witnesses' comments varied from one another in important ways. While one of the prosecution witnesses testified that the accused were found by the side of the road heading to Nagrota, other witnesses said that the accused were found seated on concrete benches or chairs on a route maintained in Wildlife Sanctuary Manda for the area's morning and evening walkers. The court noted that several witnesses claimed the suspects were found right behind the Ashoka Hotel.
The accused were found in a public area behind a well-known hotel in Jammu, but even if there was no one available from the general public, the hotel staff could have been involved at the time the weapons and explosive material were seized from the accused, the court stated, highlighting the fact that no independent witness has been associated to prove the arrest of the accused or recovery of the weapons or explosives from their possession.
The police had first filed a case against the accused for sedition, but before filing the chargesheet, they had subsequently abandoned such allegations, the court further stated. Most prosecution witnesses throughout the trial were unable to identify any of the defendants, and it is unclear how the firearm and explosives were taken from the defendants' hands. The trial court correctly exonerated all of the defendants since no independent witness was involved in the recovery and seizure procedure, the court reasoned in dismissing the plea.
