Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

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