New Delhi: Observing that there was no evidence except confessional statements, and witnesses beyond police officers to show or even raise suspicion that they were members of terror outfits, a Delhi court Saturday ordered the release of two men arrested by Delhi Police in 2018.
Additionally, the court observed that neither of the two men, Abdul Subhan Qureshi and Ariz Khan, were found to be member of the banned outfits, the Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI), or its offshoot, the Indian Mujahideen; nor were they hatching a conspiracy to revive these outfits.
The court ordered their release from judicial custody if they were not wanted in any other cases. Their lawyer advocate M.S. Khan, however, said the duo remain in prison as trial proceedings are underway in other cases they are charged in.
In January 2018, the Delhi Police Special Cell arrested Qureshi after a brief exchange of fire in a different case registered under IPC sections and the Arms Act, before he was booked in a case related to SIMI and arrested on 3 February the same year. On the other hand, Aziz was arrested along the Indo-Nepal border on 13 February.
In its chargesheet filed in 2018, the Delhi Police Special Cell called Qureshi a “top-most senior cadre of SIMI module” wanted in connection with multiple criminal cases, including those related to terrorism.
The police also alleged that both accused attended a meeting of the SIMI and IM in Saudi Arabia, chaired by Indian Mujahideen founders and ideologues, including Riyaz Bhatkal and Iqbal Bhatkal, and Mohsin Chaudhary and Ariz Khan, at which they discussed the prospects of the SIMI and IM. As part of the plan, Qureshi was codenamed Abdul Rehman and Ariz took the name Salim, the police had claimed in the chargesheet.
“It is mentioned in the chargesheet that in the said meeting, it was decided that A-1 and A-2 would go to India and revive the SIMI & IM module again in India and as they were almost cut off with every one, hence they would have been out of radar of Intelligence Agencies of India,” Additional Sessions Judge Amit Bansal quoted an excerpt from the police chargesheet.
The judge, however, pointed out that the primary material presented in the chargesheet consisted solely of Qureshi and Ariz’s own confessional statements, which are not admissible in a court of law, and that there were no subsequent recoveries. The court observed that the police had not submitted any incriminating material against the accused in the chargesheet or during arguments before the charges were framed.
“In the present case, it is an admitted position that no fact was deposed to as discovered in consequence of the said disclosure/confessional statements of both the accused persons and hence, the said disclosure/confessional statements are inadmissible in this case,” Judge Bansal observed in the order.
He also rejected the police’s contention that, because the accused persons had a list of 35 cases against them, it should be material to the trial proceedings.
“Further, the list of the cases wherein accused A-1 and A-2 are involved in different cases along with copy of their charge-sheets would also not help the prosecution as no grave suspicion of commission of any offence in the present case would arise from them,” the judge observed.
Adding, “It is also an admitted position that the list of witnesses of the present charge-sheet mainly includes Duty Officers/Record Clerks to prove the FIRs of other cases against the accused persons herein which does not raise any suspicion what to say of grave suspicion against the accused persons of commission of offences in the present case.”
(Edited by Amrtansh Arora)
Also Read: Pakistani accomplices, shootouts, sealed chargesheet—how the 7/11 blasts case fell apart