E-Paper
2017 Jammu and Kashmir DSP lynching case: NIA court grants bail to 17 accused
A court designated under the NIA Act has granted bail to 17 persons accused in the 2017 lynching case of the deputy superintendent of Jammu and Kashmir police (DSP), Mohammed Ayub Pandith.
A court designated under the NIA Act has granted bail to 17 persons accused in the 2017 lynching case of the deputy superintendent of J&K police (DSP), Mohammed Ayub Pandith.
The officer was lynched to death by a mob outside the Jamia Masjid in Srinagar on the night of June 22, which was Shab-e-Qadr, an auspicious night for Muslims. The killing had triggered shock and anger across the Valley.
MS Manhas, special judge, designated under the NIA Act, stated that it has “not been proved beyond reasonable doubt” that the 17 accused, applying for bail, were involved in the commission of offences as alleged in the charge sheet.
“There is neither any direct evidence nor any substantial evidence on the record which would have connected the accused/applicants herein with the alleged crime, so in the absence of ocular as well as substantial evidence on the record, the grounds taken by the counsel for the accused/applicants herein carry weight,” the order, pronounced on Wednesday, said.
The police had filed an FIR No. 51/2017 in the crime under IPC sections of 302, 148,149,392,341 and section 13 of UA(P) Act at Nawhatta police station. There are a total of 24 accused in the case including three juveniles who have already been granted bail.
The court while allowing bail to the 17 accused directed them to furnish a bail bond of ₹2,00,000 each with two sureties in the “like amount, failing which the accused person/applicant herein shall remain in the judicial custody”.
The bail was granted on certain conditions, including the one that accused/applicants shall not induce the witnesses of the prosecution directly or indirectly, shall appear before the court on each and every date of hearing and shall not tamper with the evidence of the prosecution in any manner.
It also directed the accused not to leave the territorial jurisdiction of this court without prior permission of the court and also shall not change their residences during the period of bail.
“Before parting with the order, it is made clear that any observation made in this order shall not affect the merits of the main case which shall be decided on its own merits,” the order stated.
