news details |
|
|
| Court rejects bail to accused linked to JeM's Nagrota strike | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Aug 3: A Special NIA Court in Jammu has rejected the bail application of Syed Munir-ul-Hassan Qadri, an accused in the 2016 Nagrota Army Camp terror attack case, observing that the seriousness of the allegations, prima facie material and the possibility of influencing key witnesses did not justify his release at this stage.
Special Judge NIA Cases, Jammu, Prem Sagar dismissed the bail plea after considering the arguments advanced by the defence and the National Investigation Agency.
The case relates to the November 29, 2016 armed attack on an Army camp near Baleeni Bridge in Nagrota, Jammu, in which seven Army personnel were killed and government property was damaged. According to the prosecution, the attack was carried out by three heavily armed Pakistani terrorists belonging to the proscribed Jaish-e-Mohammad outfit.
The case was initially registered at Police Station Nagrota under provisions of the Ranbir Penal Code, Arms Act and Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. It was later taken over and re-registered by the NIA.
The investigating agency filed its chargesheet in November 2018 against Qadri and other accused persons. The court subsequently framed charges against him under Sections 120-B, 121 and 307 of the RPC, provisions of the UAPA, Arms Act, Explosive Substances Act and Foreigners Act.
The NIA alleged that Qadri acted as a key conspirator and facilitator who remained in contact with cross-border handlers and other accused persons. He was accused of arranging logistics, safe shelters, transportation and communication devices besides facilitating the movement of arms and ammunition.
The prosecution further alleged that he provided strategic and reconnaissance support and participated in the collection and channelisation of funds for terrorist activities. These allegations, however, remain subject to proof during the trial.
One of the co-accused, Tariq Ahmad Dar, has turned approver and, according to the NIA, made a statement implicating Qadri. The prosecution also claimed that six witnesses had deposed against him.
Seeking bail, Qadri's counsel argued that he had been in custody since April 23, 2018, and the trial had remained pending for nearly eight years. The defence submitted that the major witnesses had not supported the prosecution's allegations and no hotel employee had identified the accused or produced documentary proof of his alleged stay.
It was also argued that Qadri's wife and three children were financially dependent upon him and that his continued incarceration had effectively become punishment without conclusion of the trial.
Opposing the application, the NIA invoked Section 43D(5) of the UAPA and maintained that the accusations were prima facie true. It apprehended that the accused, if released, could influence witnesses, tamper with evidence or flee from justice. The court noted that 42 out of 104 prosecution witnesses had already been examined and that material witnesses were still awaiting examination.
It observed that prolonged detention cannot automatically become a ground for bail in cases involving offences under special anti-terror laws. Delay, the court said, must be examined along with the gravity of the offence, the role attributed to the accused, the strength of the prima facie case and the possible risk to the trial.
Holding that the record indicated the alleged involvement of the applicant in furtherance of the conspiracy and that his release could hamper the examination of key witnesses, the court rejected the bail application in view of the "nature and gravity of the offences" and the "larger interest of the State/UT."
Advocates Anil Sethi and Vipul Gupta appeared for the accused, while Senior Public Prosecutor R S Slathia and Public Prosecutors Chandan Kumar Singh and Ashwani Verma represented the NIA.
(JNF) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
