news details |
|
|
| NIA Court rejects bail pleas of 6 in cross-LoC terror case | | |  Early Times Report
Jammu, Aug 4: The Special NIA Court, Jammu, has rejected the bail pleas of six accused facing trial in an alleged Pakistan-backed conspiracy involving the smuggling of arms, ammunition, explosives and narcotics across the Line of Control to revive terrorism in the border districts of Poonch and Rajouri.
Special Judge NIA Cases Prem Sagar, through three separate orders passed on July 31, dismissed the applications filed by Mohd Mustafa Khan, Mohd Nakeem Khan, Mohd Yaseen Khan, Mohd Ibrar Khan, Mohd Farooq and Sher Ali Choudhary.
The accused are facing trial in case RC-02/2021/NIA/JMU under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, Arms Act, Explosive Substances Act and Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
The court held that the trial was already underway and that the material on record indicated the alleged involvement of the accused in furtherance of a conspiracy for unlawful activities. It observed that several relevant witnesses were yet to be examined and releasing the accused at this stage could create a likelihood of key witnesses being influenced, thereby hampering the process of justice.
“Keeping in view the nature and gravity of the offences and the larger interest of the State/UT,” the court rejected the bail applications.
The case originated from the interception of a Scorpio vehicle at Basooni in Mendhar on December 26, 2020. According to the prosecution, Mohd Mustafa Khan was found travelling under suspicious circumstances and his mobile phone allegedly contained photographs of Army installations, recordings and propaganda material connected with terrorist outfits.
The prosecution claimed that further questioning led to the search of Mustafa’s residence at Galhuta, where six hand grenades, balloons bearing Pakistani flags and slogans, and posters linked to the proscribed Tehreek-ul-Mujahideen and Jammu Kashmir Ghaznavi Force were allegedly recovered.
The case was initially registered at Police Station Mendhar before the investigation was transferred to the National Investigation Agency, which re-registered it in March 2021.
According to the NIA, Pakistan and PoK-based handlers, including accused Mohd Rafiq Nai alias Sultan, had allegedly conspired with local associates to smuggle arms, explosives, narcotics and other material across the LoC. The prosecution further alleged that the module received and transported two trained Pakistani terrorists into Indian territory to revive terrorist activities in Poonch, Rajouri and other parts of Jammu and Kashmir.
The agency attributed separate roles to each accused. Mohd Yaseen was alleged to have received and transported arms, grenades, narcotics and newly infiltrated terrorists from near the LoC in the Balakote sector.
Mohd Farooq was accused of receiving and concealing cross-border consignments, including 300 grams of heroin allegedly recovered following his disclosure. Mohd Ibrar was alleged to have facilitated infiltrated terrorists with food, water and safe transportation.
Sher Ali Choudhary was described by the prosecution as the alleged main link who, while staying in Kuwait, arranged arms, explosives and narcotics from across the border and got them transported through associates based in Poonch.
Mohd Mustafa was accused of collecting and concealing a carton containing grenades, posters and other incriminating material and allegedly transmitting photographs of Army installations to the Pakistan-based handler.
Mohd Nakeem Khan was alleged to have emerged as an accused during further investigation and to have facilitated the conspiracy along with the other accused.
Appearing for the accused, Advocate Ajaz Chowdhary argued that they had remained in custody for several years and that only a small number of witnesses out of the 68 cited by the prosecution had been examined.
The defence contended that the slow pace of trial had resulted in prolonged incarceration and that the principal prosecution witness had turned hostile. It was submitted that continued detention would violate the accused’s right to liberty and speedy trial.
Opposing the bail pleas, Special Public Prosecutor K S Pathania, assisted by Public Prosecutors Chandan Kumar Singh and Ashwani Verma, submitted that the accusations were covered by Chapters IV and VI of the UAPA and attracted the restriction under Section 43D(5) of the Act.
The NIA argued that the hostility of one witness could not become a ground for bail, particularly when several other witnesses had supported the prosecution case. It also expressed apprehension that the accused could abscond, tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses still awaiting examination.
Rejecting the plea based on delay, the court said that prolonged trial could not automatically entitle an accused to bail in cases involving grave offences under special enactments while ignoring the prima facie material relied upon by the prosecution.
The court said adopting such a yardstick would mean that persons accused of serious offences under special laws would have to be released after the expiry of a specified period despite the material available against them.
The Special Judge, however, clarified that the observations contained in the orders were confined to deciding the bail applications and would have no bearing on the merits of the main trial. (JNF) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
