J&K court releases two youth after 6 years, says ‘suspicion, however grave, cannot substitute proof’

Image used for representation purpose only.

A Jammu and Kashmir Court has released two youth from north Kashmir after six years, booked under provisions of Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) and Arms Act, and held that “suspicion, however grave, cannot substitute proof”.

“The prosecution must travel the entire distance from suspicion to legal proof. In the present case, that distance has not been traversed. The Court holds that the prosecution has not proved beyond reasonable doubt the essential ingredients of the offences charged against the accused persons.

The benefit of such doubt must necessarily go to the accused,” held Feroz Ahmad Khan, Special Judge Designated under UAPA at Sopore, Baramulla.

The Court directed “immediate release” of the accused, Huzaif Firdous Bhat, a resident of Choora Sopore and Ajaz Ahmad Khan, a resident of Najibhat Kreeri. Both the accused were booked under Sections 7/25 of the Indian Arms Act and under Section 39 and under Section 23 of the UAPA from 2020.

“The seized property shall be dealt as per law after expiry of the appeal period,” said the court.

The police had claimed that the duo were in a vehicle that was carrying two grenades and 100 live rounds of AK-47 packed in a polythene beneath the driver’s seat. It said two xerox copies of letter pad with writing LeT on them were also recovered. “The recovered ammunition from the possession of the above said persons was illegally acquired and was being transported from Singhpora towards Baramulla town to carry out terrorist activities,” the police has claimed.

However, the Court observed that prosecution “must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, the evidence on record, in the instant case falls short of this standard”.

The Court observed that the foundation for the offences under Sections 18 and 23 UAPA and Section 7/25 of the Arms Act “is substantially weakened”.

“Likewise, the allegation under Section 39 UAPA requires reliable evidence demonstrating intentional support or assistance to the terrorist organisation. Mere allegation of association, unsupported by dependable independent evidence of intentional assistance, cannot by itself satisfy the standard of proof required for conviction,” the court added.

“The benefit of doubt therefore has to go (to) the accused. Prosecution has not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against both the accused,” the court held.

Kashmir chief cleric Mirwaiz Umar Farooq said the case highlights the serious human cost of prolonged detention when evidence is ultimately found insufficient to sustain a conviction.

“Deeply saddening that two young men from Baramulla had to spend six precious years in jail under stringent anti-terror laws, before being acquitted as the evidence against them was found unreliable. This case once again highlights the indiscriminate arrest and prolonged detention of Kashmiri youth. Will accountability be fixed for their wasted years? Authorities should review this approach and relook and do justice to the thousands of youth under prolonged detention,” he said in a post on X.