Government opposes BSF plea for transfer of murder case trial | india | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Mar 25, 2017-Saturday
New Delhi
  • Humidity
  • Wind

Government opposes BSF plea for transfer of murder case trial

india Updated: Apr 09, 2010 11:40 IST
Ashiq Hussain

The Jammu and Kashmir government on Thursday opposed the BSF plea for shifting the trial in the case of killing of a teenager by BSF personnel to its own court.

The case came up for hearing before Chief Judicial Magistrate Mohammad Ibrahim, a day after BSF authorities sought a stay of the case in civil court and transfer of the case to BSF court. BSF authorities also want police to handover the two BSF personnel including a commandant accused of killing Zahid Farooq along with the case diaries and evidences.

Public Prosecutor AA Teli strongly opposed the BSF application and argued that it was not maintainable at all.
A teenager, Zahid Farooq was killed when a bullet from BSF personnel in the convoy of BSF’s 68 battalion hit him on February 5 at Nishat on the banks of Dal lake in Srinagar. Commandant Birdi was heading the convoy.
Police have charged the Birdi and his subordinate constable Lakhwinder with murder, abetment of Crime and destruction of evidence.

The chief judicial magistrate directed the Public Prosecutor to file objections against the BSF application till April 23.
As the murder cases are to be tried in sessions court, the public prosecutor pleaded before CJM that either the case be committed to the sessions court along with the BSF application or the prosecution be given a copy of the BSF application to file its objections. “The jurisdiction of this court is to allow the case to the court of sessions,” Teli said.

BSF counsel S Gowhar questioned the locus standi of the public prosecutor to file objections. “It is between court and court (BSF court and civil court). Prosecution has limited role in this,” Gowhar argued.

The CJM Mohammad Ibrahim ordered that public prosecutor be allowed to file his objections against the BSF application before April 23. At the same time the court maintained that it was the committal court (sessions court) which has to decide on the BSF plea.

Molvi Aijaz, the counsel for the two accused BSF personnel, sought directions from the court for “lodging of counter FIR against the unlawful assembly of people who blocked the roads and pelted stones on the fateful day of February 5 at Nishat”. He pleaded that police should properly investigate the case particularly of “FIR No73/2009 of police station Safakadal”.

The CJM directed the chief prosecuting officer to file his reply on this plea.