Section 164 CrPC Statement Recorded Without Procedural Safeguards Or 'Cooling-Off' Period Not A Valid Confession: Jharkhand High Court Anticipatory Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Investigation Is At A Nascent Stage If Custodial Interrogation Is Not Indispensable: Telangana High Court Actual Pay Drawn During Last 10 Months Must Be Basis For Pension Calculation, Regardless Of Notional Pay In Parent Bank: Punjab & Haryana High Court Limitation For Redemption Of Usufructuary Mortgage Starts Only When Mortgage Money Is Paid Or Tendered: Allahabad High Court Exclusion Of Natural Heir From Will Not A Suspicious Circumstance If Execution Is Duly Proved: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Travel Abroad Is A Basic Human Right; Permission Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Visit Is For 'Social Or Celebratory' Purpose: Andhra Pradesh High Court Citizen Cannot Be Externed Merely For Raising Grievances Against Government Decisions: Bombay High Court Lack Of Opportunity To Cross-Examine Partition Commissioner Does Not Vitiate Final Decree; Report Is Part Of Record: Calcutta High Court Section 27 Evidence Act Recoveries Inadmissible If Police Had Prior Knowledge Of Location Before Recording Disclosure: Delhi High Court Foreigners Act | Burden Of Proof To Establish Citizenship Solely On Proceedee, Never Shifts; Prescription For Parkinson's No Proof Of Mental Illness To Explain Testimony Contradictions: Gauhati High Court Trial Court Erred In Abating Suit While Application To Bring Legal Heirs On Record Was Pending: Gujarat High Court Places Of Worship Act 1991 Not A Shield Against Land Acquisition By State For Public Purpose: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Partition Deed Creating New Rights In Immovable Property Inadmissible In Evidence: Himachal Pradesh High Court Illiteracy No Excuse For Filing False Income Tax Returns, Court Must Presume Culpable Mental State Under Section 278E: Jharkhand High Court Trial Court Must Consider Convenience Of Family & Accused's Right To Assist Counsel While Deciding Jail Shifting Applications: J&K High Court Investigation Substantially Complete, Offence Carries Max 7 Years Jail: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail To Police Officers In Corruption Case Buyer's Knowledge Of Title Defect Doesn't Extinguish Statutory Warranty Of Title Unless Sale Deed Specifically Excludes It: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Sets Aside Appointment Of PAs To Judges, Says Relaxation Of Qualifications Via Circular Violates Article 14 BNSS | Mere Allegation Of Calling Deceased To Spot Not Sufficient To Deny Bail To Woman If Charge Sheet Filed: Orissa High Court Amendment To Rectify Property Description In Agreement To Sell Can Be Allowed At Any Stage Of Specific Performance Suit: Delhi High Court NDPS | Confession Before Police Cannot Be Sole Basis For Prosecution: Telangana High Court Grants Bail No Judicial Sanctity For Adulterous Relationships: J&K High Court Refuses To Quash Abduction FIR Involving Married Woman Habitual Offender Accused Of Brutal Murder Of SC Community Member Denied Bail: Kerala High Court Prosecution Fails To Prove Murder Charge As Recovery Witnesses Turn Hostile: Uttarakhand High Court Acquits Man Acquittal In Criminal Case Based On Benefit Of Doubt Does Not Automatically Absolve Employee From Disciplinary Liability: Madhya Pradesh High Court Punjab & Haryana HC Quashes FIR Against Woman For Dressing Pet Dog As Lord Krishna Personal Laws Cannot Be Used As Shield To Commit Gang Rape Under Garb Of Nikah Halala: Allahabad High Court

Acquittal in Terrorism Case: “Prosecution Failed to Prove Charges Beyond Reasonable Doubt,” J&K HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Jammu, June 7, 2023: In a significant ruling, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has upheld the acquittal of the accused in a terrorism-related case. The court stated that the prosecution failed to establish the charges beyond a reasonable doubt, leading to the acquittal of the respondents. The judgment, delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice MA Chowdhary, emphasized the discrepancies in the evidence presented by the prosecution, including the lack of independent witnesses and the failure to produce conclusive forensic and ballistic evidence.

The case, titled 'State v. Bashir Ahmed & Ors.', Involved charges under sections 120-B, 121, 121-A, 122, 153A of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC), as well as sections 4/5 of the Explosive Substances Act and sections 7/25 of the Arms Act. The accused were alleged members of the militant organization Lashkar-e-Taiba, accused of planning acts of sabotage and terrorist activities.

Quoting from the judgment, Justice MA Chowdhary remarked, “The prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt to bring home the charge against the accused for the commission of any of the offenses of which the accused had been charged.” The court highlighted the inconsistencies among the prosecution witnesses, the lack of independent witnesses to support the search and seizure, and the non-production of conclusive ballistic and forensic evidence.

The judgment also pointed out that”the initial charges against the accused, including sedition charges, were dropped before the trial. The court stressed the importance of independent witnesses in search and seizure cases, stating that their absence affects the weight of the evidence. Furthermore, the court found the prosecution’s story to be unreliable, noting that the accused, allegedly involved in terrorist activities, were apprehended without any resistance.

The defense counsel, representing Bashir Ahmed & Ors., argued that the prosecution had miserably failed to connect the accused with the commission of the alleged offenses. They emphasized the lack of identification by prosecution witnesses and the absence of concrete evidence to support the recovery of weapons and explosives.

With the High Court’s decision to uphold the acquittal, the appeal filed by the State (now Union Territory) of Jammu & Kashmir has been dismissed. This ruling highlights the importance of presenting strong and conclusive evidence in criminal cases to secure convictions.

Date of Decision: 07.06.2023

State (now UT) of J&K   VS Bashir Ahmed & Ors.          

Latest Legal News