Tuesday, November 10, 2026
Advertisement
Jammu

J&K Court Acquits Two Youths In UAPA Case, Cites Unreliable Evidence And Contradictions

J&K Court Acquits Two Youths In UAPA Case, Cites Unreliable Evidence And Contradictions

Srinagar, November 10 : A special court in Jammu and Kashmir has acquitted two youths facing trial under anti-terror laws in Baramulla district, ruling that the prosecution failed to establish the charges due to unreliable evidence and significant inconsistencies in its case. 

Special Judge (UAPA/NIA Cases), Baramulla, Feroz Ahmad Khan, acquitted Huzaif Firdous Bhat and Aijaz Ahmad after finding material contradictions in the prosecution’s evidence.

The two accused were arrested in September 2020 during a joint checkpoint checking operation conducted by police and Army personnel at Kanispora in Baramulla district.

Following their arrest, a case was registered against them under Sections 18, 23 and 39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), along with Section 7/25 of the Arms Act.

Police had alleged that two hand grenades, 100 rounds of ammunition and posters of the terrorist organisation Lashkar-e-Taiba were recovered from their possession.

However, after examining the evidence and hearing the arguments, the court found serious inconsistencies and shortcomings in the prosecution’s case.

In its 71-page judgment, the court observed that the evidence contained material contradictions and infirmities, making it unsafe to base a conviction on the prosecution’s claims.

The court further held that the prosecution had failed to establish through reliable and convincing evidence that the arms and ammunition presented before it had been recovered from the conscious possession of the accused in the manner alleged.

It also pointed out that no independent witness was present during the alleged recovery of the weapons and ammunition.

The court noted significant contradictions in the statements of police witnesses during their examination and cross-examination.

Observing that the alleged recovery itself had become doubtful, the court said the foundation of the charges under Sections 18 and 23 of the UAPA and Section 7/25 of the Arms Act was substantially weakened.

On the basis of these findings, the court acquitted both youths of the charges.

Related Articles