Early Times Report
Jammu, June 25: Principal Sessions Judge Bandipora Khalil Ahmed Choudhary acquitted three alleged terrorists namely Ayaz Ahmad Pir Alias Mitha, Shawkat Pir both sons of Ab.Ahad Pir and Mst. Mymoona W/O: Ab. Ahad Pir who was facing trial in a terrorist attack in which one ASI got killed.
Brief facts of the present case which have culminated into the instant charge sheet are to the effect that that on 20.11.2002, a docket was received to the Police Station Bandipora from PW No.1 to the effect that on 20.11.2002, while performing his law-and-order duty at village Garoora, two terrorists namely, Showkat Ahmad Peer, and Ayaz Ahmad Peer sons of Ahad Peer and Ahad Peer son of Gh. Mohd. Peer, Shamus din Peer son of Aziz Peer residents of Garoora Bandipora have attacked the Police Party with their illegally possessed arms and Haji Gh. Nabi Ganaie son of Kabeer Ganaie with the intention to kill them, fired indiscriminately which resulted in on spot death of Ghulam Nabi Ganai, while as, Gh Rasool ASI and Constable Manzoor Ahmad No.634/B and two civilians namely, Javid Ahmad Lone, Zaffar Mehraj Lone residents of Garoora got seriously injured. 2. On receipt of this report, FIR was registered in Police Station Bandipora under sections 302,307, 34 RPC and 7/27 Arms Act against the accused persons. Initially, the investigation of the case was conducted by Shri Abdul Rahim ASI who prepared the injury memos of the injured persons at the Bandipora Hospital. During medical treatment ASI Gh. Rasool succumbed to his injures in the Hospital. He prepared the Seizure memo with regard to the dead body (Fardimaqboozgi) after taking the dead body into is custody. He also prepared the site plan. The post-mortem of the dead body was conducted by the doctor on duty namely, Mushtaq Ahmad and then handed over the same to the relatives for last rites. During investigation memos were collected from the Hospital concerned and the site map of this place of occurrence was also appeared, and eight empty cartridges and two live bullets were also seized and one identity card of the accused Iyaz Ahmad Peer was also seized. On spot, the seized articles were sealed and the statement of accused persons under section 161 Cr.P.C came to be recorded. On the basis of the statements and the circumstances of the case, accused persons were found to be involved in the commission of offences punishable under sections 302, 307, 109, 34 RPC and 7/27 Arms Act. Accused persons came to be arrested on 09/12/2002. Mst. Meema D/O Abdul Ahad Peer was given the benefit of 169 Cr. PC as police could not find any concrete evidence against her. The investigation was made as to the weapon of offence, during this accused No.1 made a disclosure statement and on that basis, AK rifle, and one Magazine and seven live bullets were recovered on his disclosure which were properly sealed on spot and seizer memos were prepared. Site map of the place of recovery was also prepared. The seized articles were sent to Naib Tehsildar concerned who re-sealed them and thereafter forwarded the same for FSL Srinagar and a report was received from FSL Srinagar. After receiving the report of the injured persons and the post-mortem report, offence under section 326 RPC came to be added and ultimately during the course of investigation, the accused persons were found to be involved in the commission of offence punishable under sections 302, 307, 326 34/109 RPC & 7/27 of Arms Act.
Principal Sessions Judge Bandipora Khalil Ahmed Choudhary after hearing both the sides observed that Having ringside appraisal of the facts and circumstances of the case and the quality and not the quantity of the evidence on record, I am of the considered view that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the circumstances by leading evidence beyond any reasonable doubt. I do not find it a case where prosecution has proved and established the circumstances firmly and conclusively by leading evidence beyond any reasonable doubt, leading to a hypothesis which is inconsistent with the innocence of the accused persons. In this case, I find the important incriminating circumstances like disclosure statement, motive, test identification parade, recovery/seizure, having not been established firmly and conclusively. The evidence led to prove the circumstances is too weak and feeble to come to a definite conclusion about the guilt of the accused persons. In such circumstance, though the deceased persons had met with a homicidal death, it cannot be said that rest of the circumstantial evidence culled out by this court unerringly point to the culpability of the accused persons in the homicidal death of deceased persons. Even recovery of weapon of offence, at the instance of A-1, cannot, by itself, be conclusive, as admittedly, the punch witnesses for this recovery also did not support the prosecution case. Moreover, one of the most important points that the none out of 03 investigating officers, have appeared, and deposed before this court, and even they have not cited the injured as witness in this case, which has also caused serious dent in the prosecution, have not enlisted as witnesses in the instant case, though having the importance of independent and recovery witnesses. I am of the unhesitant opinion that the evidence projected by prosecution is wholly unacceptable being fraught with improbabilities, doubts, and oddities inconceivable with normal human conduct or behaviour and, thus cannot be acted upon as the basis of conviction. The testimonies of witnesses even if taken on their face value, fall short of the requirement of proof of the charge beyond all reasonable doubt. In my view, the remaining circumstances relied by the prosecution would not unerringly point towards the guilt of the accused persons. Thus, in my view, it is unsafe on the aforesaid circumstances to maintain the conviction of the accused persons; thus, extend to them the ‘benefit of doubt’. Accordingly, accused namely, Ayaz Ahmad Pir Alias Mitha, Shawkat Pir both sons of Ab. Ahad Pir and Mst. Mymoona W/O: Ab Ahad Pir residents of Garoora Bandipora, are held entitled to be acquitted and are acquitted accordingly from the charges leveled against them, resulting in discharge from their bail and personal bonds. (JNF) |
