"Suspicion Cannot Substitute Evidence": Delhi Court Discharges Four Men Booked Under UAPA In Terror Funding Case

A Delhi Court has discharged four men booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act in connection with an alleged terror funding case after observing that the prosecution failed to bring any evidence which would raise a grave suspicion that the funds were originated from a terrorist organisation or if they were intended to be used for terror activities

Special NIA Judge Parveen Singh said:

"Though there may be some suspicion raised as to what this special purpose was or what those different plans were, however, mere suspicion cannot substitute evidence and it is only the evidence that can be used to assign the meaning which the prosecution seeks to assign to these words."

Background

The facts of the case are that the Central Government had received an information that a Delhi based individual Mohammad Salman was in regular touch with a Dubai based Pakistani national Mohammad Kamran who in turn was connected with Shahid Mahmood, another Pakistani national and Dy. Chief of Falah-I-Insaniat Foundation (FIF).

FIF was designated as terrorist organisation under UAPA by the Government of India in 2016.

The information allegedly revealed that Mohammad Salman was receiving funds from FIF operative Mohammad Kamran and his associates, through Hawala operators. It also alleged that the foundation had been trying to attract group of sympathizers and sleeper cells to create unrest in India by sending funds for anti-Indian and terrorist activities.

The prosecution also contended that that there were two incriminating messages found in the phone of Mohd. Salman, using the words 'ghee', which may have been used as a code word for explosives or other substances and 'khidmat' which is an activity which is done by the people to the terrorists who have undergone terror training.

Findings

The Court was of the opinion that on the face of it, an illegality was being committed by the accused where money was being received from Hawala channels.

"Thus far, even the accused have not disputed that an illegal act was being committed and have contended that the accused may be prosecuted for those acts..." the Court noted.

However, the accused had also contended that they should not be prosecuted under UAPA for terrorism as there is no evidence for those offences.

In this backdrop, the Court observed,

"the prosecution has failed to bring forth any evidence which would raise a grave suspicion that either the funds that were being sent from Dubai and were being received by accused Mohd. Salman through other accused were terror funds / funds originated from terrorist organization or that these funds were intended to be used for terror activities i.e. creation of sleeper cells/ sympathizers / hideouts/ logistic support for the terrorists of LeT/ JuD and FIF."

It added,

"On what basis the prosecution states that the word 'ghee' is a code for explosives has not been specified. The cipher on the basis of which this code has been deciphered has also not been disclosed before the court...Similarly, the word 'khidmat'...literal meaning...is service and it could be any service. Unless there are surrounding circumstance or any conversation prior to this sentence or after this sentence which would reflect that use of word khidmat in this sentence meant service of persons who had undergone terrorist training, this meaning can not be assigned to this word."

The Court also added that there was no evidence on record that any sleeper cell or hide outs or base for FIF or LeT had come into existence by use of the funds.

"The prosecution has tried to impress that meaning of these words which is to be deciphered is that the special purpose, different plans and any kind of work could only mean terror activities or creation of sleeper cells/ hideouts for terrorists. However, there is no evidence on record on the basis of which such meaning can be given to these words. There is nothing on record to show that there was any code that was being used and has been deciphered wherefrom the meaning which the prosecution seeks to attach to these words can be accepted," the judge added.

Thus, discharging the four, Court said:

"I accordingly find that the material placed before the court is not sufficient to raise grave suspicion of commission of offences punishable u/s 17, 20 and 21 of UA(P)Act and u/s 120B IPC by accused Mohd. Salman(A-1), Mohd. Saleem (A-2), Arif Gulam Bashir Dharampuria(A-4) and Mohd. Hussain Molani(A-7). The accused are accordingly discharged for these offences."

A Delhi court on Thursday discharged four persons in a terror funding case as the NIA failed to establish that they were involved in creating a sleeper cell for a Pakistan-based outfit as alleged by the agency earlier.

The Accused Mohd. Hussain Molani(A-7)& Mohd. Salim(A-2) were represented by Advocates Tanveer Ahmed Mir, Prabhav Ralli and Tushan Rawal  

Case Title: NIA v. Mohd. Salman & Ors.

Click Here To Read Order