Early Times Report
Jammu, Sept 23: Following the prosecution failure to prove case against them, 1st additional sessions judge, Jammu, M A Chowdhary has acquitted two alleged militants.
They included HUJI commander Muzaffar Ilahi alias Sohail Faisal, son of Ghulam Ahmed, and Ilam Din, son of Mangu Gujjar. While Muzaffar hails from Mular village of Chattru, Kishtwar, Ilam is resident of Jansar, Chattru.
They were apprehended from near Vaishnavi Dham, railway station here, on December 21, 2008 after SOG Inspector Javed Iqbal Naz had alerted police about their presence in the city. While cops were busy frisking pedestrians and checking vehicles at a naka outside Vaishnavi Dham, a person tried to escape from there. He was immediately taken into custody by the cops.
During his questioning, he disclosed his name as Muzaffar Ilahi, a chief commandar of HUJI. His search led cops to the recovery of one Chinese pistol, its one magazine, six rounds and one handgrenade. A case was then registered against him at Bahu Fort police station under sections 121-A,122, 124 and 120-B of RPC, section 3/25 of Arms Act and section 13 of Unlawful Activities Act.
Investigation of the case was entrusted to SDPO, City East. During his questioning, he told police he had received from Pakistan a hawala money of Rs 1,26,000 which was lying with his father at Kishtwar. He also provided police information about Ilam Din, alleging that he too was involved in terrorist activities and possessed a Pika gun and a carbine which he had snatched from Irshad Ahmed, PSO of ex-MLA of Inderwal. Cops were then rushed to Kishtwar and both Ghulam Ahmed and Ilam Din were arrested. The hawala money of Rs 1,26,000 was also recovered from Ghulam Ahmad. On disclosure of Ilam Din, the Pika gun and the carbine gun were recovered from him.
After hearing the two sides, the judge observed that prosecution had not examined any ballistic expert who could be the only witness to say whether the seized weapon and ammunition were in working condition or not and in the absence of such proof, offence under Arms Act could not be said to have been proved against the accused. He held that prosecution had failed to connect the accused with the commission of offence by leading sufficient, cogent and credible evidence and in the considered opinion of this court, the prosecution had failed to bring home the charge against the accused.
The case was, therefore, dismissed and the accused were acquitted of the charge, he directed. (JNF) |
