Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court Illicit Affair Alone Cannot Make a Man Guilty of Abetting Suicide: Supreme Court Quashes Charge Under Section 306 IPC Landlord Cannot Be Punished for Slowness of Courts: Supreme Court on Bonafide Need in Eviction Suits Expect States To Enact Laws Regulating Unlicensed Money Lenders Charging Exorbitant Interest Contrary To 'Damdupat': Supreme Court Accused Who Skips Lok Adalat After Seeking It, Then Cries 'Prejudice', Cannot Claim Apprehension of Denial of Justice: Madras High Court Refuse To Transfer Case IO Cannot Act Without Prior Sanction: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail, Flags Procedural Lapse in Religious Conversion Case Electricity Board Strictly Liable For Unprotected Transformer, 7-Year-Old Cannot Be Guilty Of Contributory Negligence: Allahabad High Court POCSO Conviction Can't Stand For Offence Not Charged: Delhi High Court Member of Unlawful Assembly Cannot Escape Conviction By Claiming He Only Carried a Lathi and Struck No One: Allahabad High Court Jurisdiction Cannot Be Founded On Casual Or Incidental Facts If Not Have A Direct Nexus With The Lis: : Delhi High Court Clause Stating Disputes "Can" Be Settled By Arbitration Is Not A Binding Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court State Cannot Plead Helplessness Against Sand Mafia; Supreme Court Warns Of Paramilitary Deployment, Complete Mining Ban In MP & Rajasthan Authority Cannot Withdraw Subsidy Citing Non-Compliance When It Ignored Repeated Requests For Inspection: Supreme Court Out-of-State SC/ST/OBC Candidates Cannot Claim Rajasthan's Reservation Benefits in NEET PG Counselling: Rajasthan High Court Supreme Court Upholds Haryana's Regularisation Of Qualified Ad Hoc Staff As 'One-Time Measure', Strikes Down Futuristic Cut-Offs

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