9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Arrest and recoveries from the accused. 2. Validity and admissibility of confessions made by the accused. 3. Evidence of conspiracy and participation in the attack. 4. Admissibility and relevance of electronic records. 5. Evaluation of evidence against each accused. 6. Legal principles applicable to the charges and the trial process. Detailed Analysis: 1. Arrest and Recoveries from the Accused: - Arrest of S.A.R. Gilani and Afzan Guru: On 15.12.2001, S.A.R. Gilani was arrested outside his house, and Afzan Guru was arrested from her house. Mobile phones and SIM cards were recovered from them. Testimonies of PW-66 and PW-67 corroborated these arrests and recoveries. - Arrest of Shaukat and Mohd. Afzal: They were arrested in Srinagar on 15.12.2001. A laptop, Rs. 10 lakhs, and a mobile phone were recovered from them. Testimonies of PW-61 and PW-62 confirmed these arrests and recoveries. 2. Validity and Admissibility of Confessions: - Confessions of Mohd. Afzal and Shaukat: Recorded by DCP Ashok Chand (PW-60). The confessions were made voluntarily after being warned of the consequences. The confessions were corroborated by independent evidence and were held to be voluntary and truthful. - Admissibility Against Co-accused: Confessions under POTA are admissible against the maker but not against co-accused. The language of Section 32 of POTA makes the confession admissible at the trial of the maker only. 3. Evidence of Conspiracy and Participation in the Attack: - Mohd. Afzal: Evidence showed he procured hideouts, smuggled arms, purchased chemicals for explosives, and was in touch with the terrorists. His confession corroborated these facts. - Shaukat: Evidence showed he was involved in procuring hideouts, providing logistics, and was in touch with the terrorists. His confession corroborated these facts. - S.A.R. Gilani: Evidence of phone calls with Afzal and Shaukat was insufficient to prove his involvement in the conspiracy. No direct evidence linked him to the terrorists or the attack. - Afzan Guru: Evidence was insufficient to prove her involvement in the conspiracy. She was acquitted of all charges. 4. Admissibility and Relevance of Electronic Records: - Mobile Phone Records: Call details were admissible under Section 65B of the Evidence Act. The records showed communication between the accused and the terrorists, corroborating the confessions. - Laptop Evidence: The laptop recovered from the truck contained files related to fake identity cards and Home Ministry stickers. The evidence was held to be credible and not tampered with. 5. Evaluation of Evidence Against Each Accused: - Mohd. Afzal: Evidence of procuring hideouts, smuggling arms, purchasing chemicals, and being in touch with terrorists. Confession corroborated these facts. Convicted under Sections 121, 121-A, 122, 302, 307 IPC, Sections 3 and 4 of POTA, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substances Act. - Shaukat: Evidence of procuring hideouts, providing logistics, and being in touch with terrorists. Confession corroborated these facts. Convicted under the same charges as Mohd. Afzal. - S.A.R. Gilani: Insufficient evidence to prove involvement in the conspiracy. Acquitted of all charges. - Afzan Guru: Insufficient evidence to prove involvement in the conspiracy. Acquitted of all charges. 6. Legal Principles Applicable to the Charges and the Trial Process: - Conspiracy: Requires proof of agreement and participation. Evidence must show informed and interested cooperation. - Confessions: Admissible under POTA if recorded by a police officer not below the rank of Superintendent of Police. Must be voluntary and corroborated by independent evidence. - Electronic Records: Admissible under Section 65B of the Evidence Act. Must be proved by satisfying the conditions of the section. - Test Identification Parade: Not mandatory but adds credibility. Absence of TIP does not invalidate identification if the witness's testimony is credible. Conclusion: - Mohd. Afzal and Shaukat: Convicted and sentenced to death for waging war against the Government of India and other related charges. - S.A.R. Gilani and Afzan Guru: Acquitted of all charges due to insufficient evidence.
|
