“Evidence Too Weak To Arrive At Different Conclusion”: J&K HC Upholds Acquittal Of Accused In Ex-Education Minister's Assassination Case

The bench, comprising Justices Sanjeev Kumar and Puneet Gupta, dismissed the State's appeal against the acquittal of the accused, emphasizing that the prosecution failed to provide cogent and credible evidence to prove their involvement in the conspiracy behind the terrorist attack.

In dismissing the appeal the bench remarked,

“For the reasons which the Trial Court has given elaborately in the impugned judgment and on re-evaluation of evidence by us, we see no good reason to take a view different from the one taken by the Trial Court. The evidence on record is too weak and shaky to arrive at a conclusion different from one arrived at by the Trial Court”

The case dates back to October 18, 2005, when a terrorist attack was carried out at the Government Quarters in Tulsi Bagh, Srinagar. The attack resulted in the death of then Education Minister Gulam Nabi Lone and injuries to several others. The prosecution alleged that the attack was orchestrated by members of the banned terrorist outfit Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), with the involvement of seven accused, including two Pakistani nationals who were the suicide attackers. While one of the attackers was killed on the spot, the other managed to flee.

The State accused Respondents of being part of a criminal conspiracy to carry out the attack. The prosecution claimed that these individuals provided logistical support to the suicide attackers and were in constant touch with the operational chief of LeT, based in Pakistan.

However, the Trial Court, in its judgment dated October 10, 2012, acquitted all three accused, citing a lack of credible evidence to prove their involvement in the conspiracy. The State, dissatisfied with the acquittal, filed an appeal before the High Court.

Observations Of The Court:

The High Court, after a thorough examination of the evidence and the Trial Court's judgment, concluded that the prosecution had failed to establish a concrete case against the accused. The bench noted that the evidence presented was riddled with contradictions and lacked the necessary credibility to prove the conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Court observed that the prosecution's case primarily relied on circumstantial evidence, including alleged disclosure statements made by the accused, call records, and recovered materials such as video tapes and sketches. However, the bench found that these pieces of evidence were not sufficient to form an unbroken chain of circumstances that could conclusively link the accused to the crime.

The Court noted that the prosecution had alleged that the conspiracy was hatched at Kul Gujjar Pati Sumbler in Bandipora, but the investigating officer's statement suggested that the conspiracy was planned in Pakistan. Additionally, there were discrepancies in the prosecution's claim regarding the arrest and disclosure statements of the accused. The Court found that the prosecution had failed to provide a clear and consistent narrative of how the conspiracy was planned and executed.

The prosecution had claimed that the accused were in constant touch with the operational chief of LeT, based in Pakistan, and had provided logistical support to the suicide attackers. However, the Court found that the call details and other materials recovered from the accused were not adequately proved during the trial. The disclosure statements, which led to the recovery of video tapes and sketches, were also not substantiated to the satisfaction of the Court.

“The call details of the respondents, which could have at least proved that the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 were in touch with Respondent No. 7, the operational chief of LeT based in Pakistan, and had provided logistics and other information to the suicide attackers, i.e. Respondent Nos. 4 and 6, were also not proved during the trial”, the court opined.

Emphasising that the accused before it were not directly involved in carrying out the attack as their alleged involvement was based on the charge of conspiracy under Section 120-B of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC) the Court found that the prosecution had failed to prove their participation in the conspiracy. The bench noted that the Trial Court had rightly concluded that the evidence was full of contradictions and unworthy of credence.

Reiterating that the jurisdiction of an appellate court in an acquittal appeal is limited, the court explained that unless the Trial Court's appreciation of evidence is found to be perverse or impermissible, the appellate court should not interfere with the judgment of acquittal.

In light of the above observations, the High Court dismissed the State's appeal, finding it to be without merit.

Case Title: State Of J&K Vs Sayed Shabir Bukhari

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 109

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment