On January 23, 2018, 14 rounds of fire were exchanged between the police and Qureshi during the encounter at a poorly-lit market in East Delhi’s Ghazipur area before the wanted terrorist was nabbed. (File Photo)
A Delhi court has acquitted Abdul Subhan Qureshi, a suspected Indian Mujahideen (IM) operative, and his associate, Ariz Khan, who fled the country after the 2008 Batla House encounter, observing that there is no admissible material in the chargesheet to suggest a conspiracy by the two to revive the banned IM or Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI).
Noting the absence of substantive evidence linking the two accused to any anti-national activity or membership of the outlawed groups, the court said on December 20 that there was insufficient ground to frame charges related to conspiracy against the sovereignty and security of India.
“As soon as he arrived, we asked him to get out of the vehicle. He resisted and opened fire at the team. Fourteen rounds of fire were exchanged, and he was taken into custody,” then deputy commissioner of police (special cell) Pramod Singh Kushwaha had said. Two years later, on Republic Day, Kushwaha and inspector Amul Tyagi were awarded a police medal for arresting Qureshi.
The case under Section 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, in which they were acquitted, was registered in 2014.
“Brief facts as mentioned in the charge sheet for that purpose are that after an accidental blast in Bijnor on September 12, 2014, efforts were renewed in Delhi and bordering districts of UP to extract information regarding the absconding SIMI terrorist and their contacts/sympathizers. On October 20, 2014, source information was received that the accused involved in Bijnor accidental blast were also moving along with SIMI suspects and were planning to carry out terrorist activities in Delhi and adjoining areas,” the order by Additional Sessions Judge (Patiala House Court) Amit Bansal said.
The order directed that both the accused be released from judicial custody, if not required to be detained in any other case. “It seems from the chargesheet that the main material on record against the accused persons is their disclosure/confessional statements and further list of cases and copy of charge sheets of other cases wherein accused are involved. It is a settled law that disclosure/confessional statements as made to police officers or made by a person while he is in custody of a police officer are inadmissible in the absence of any discovery of any fact in consequence of the said information,” the order added.
“…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. Further, the list of the cases wherein accused 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 order further said.
“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,” the order added.
The court noted that the statement of the investigation officer, retired ACP Govind Sharma, was recorded last year, where he specifically stated that the accused are facing trial in the respective FIRs in different states. “…no separate incident apart from the FIRs wherein the accused persons are facing trial has been investigated in the present case and since the accused persons were making efforts to revive SIMI and IM, so the present case was registered to investigate the role of the accused persons but no separate incident took place in the present case,” the court said.
“…In the said circumstances, there is absolutely no admissible material on record in the charge-sheet of the present case to show or raise a grave suspicion against both the accused persons that they entered into a conspiracy to revive activity of banned terrorist organisation SIMI and IM in India or that they were members of the said banned terrorist organisations SIMI and IM or that they entered into any conspiracy against the sovereignty and security of India in order to set up the base of the said terrorist outfits in India,” the judge said in his order.