HC grants bail to 2006 arms haul convict after 20 years in prison

Though the prosecution claimed that Aakif had travelled to Nepal to meet Junaid, a Pakistani national, and inferred on that basis that he wanted to “join Jihad”, there was no material to support the claim, the court said

MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court has granted bail to Sayyed Aakif Sayyad Zafaruddin, a life convict in the 2006 Aurangabad arms haul case, primarily on grounds of lack of adequate material to implicate him in the crime and his imprisonment spanning 20 years, or half of the period he is supposed to serve.

HC grants bail to 2006 arms haul convict after 20 years in prison

“There is no material to show that the applicant was directly or indirectly involved in the procurement and transportation of the subject arms, ammunition and the explosive,” a division bench of justices Suman Shyam and Shyam C Chandak said on Thursday while granting bail to the 44-year-old convict during pendency of his appeal.

The Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) had, on May 9, 2006, intercepted a jeep and a car along Yeola-Chhatrapati Sambajinagar Road and seized 16 AK-47 rifles, 62 magazines, 3,200 live cartridges and 43 kg of RDX (research and development explosive). During investigation, the ATS found that the arms were collected to strike terror as a revenge for the 2002 Gujarat riots, the agency claimed.

Aakif, who was arrested and acquitted in connection with the Ahmedabad bomb blast case, was arrested in the arms haul case on May 19, 2006, after the ATS found his involvement in the “larger conspiracy” to commit terrorist attacks by using the seized arms and ammunition. On July 28, 2016, he was convicted by a special Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) court in the city under various sections of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and sentenced to life imprisonment.

In the high court, Aakif’s counsel Mubin Solkar submitted that his client had no knowledge about transportation of the arms, ammunition and explosives; nor was he involved in the larger conspiracy allegedly hatched by the other accused. No overt act had been attributed to Aakif in the arms haul case and there was no evidence about the accused planning to assassinate the then Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi, Solkar said.

The lawyer said that since Aakif and another accused in the case had been acquitted of charges under the MCOCA, their confessions were insignificant, and his conviction based on the confession was not sustainable in law. While two other convicts in the case had been released on bail pending appeals, Aakif had already suffered incarceration for 20 years, Solkar said, seeking bail for the accused.

Additional prosecutor Megha S Bajoria opposed the plea, contending that the case involved a massive haul of arms, ammunition and explosives collected to strike terror. She claimed that Aakif was associated with the proscribed Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) and also the Pakistan-based terror outfit, Lashkar-e-Taiba, and he would have to undergo 40 years of imprisonment as a life convict under the UAPA.

The court, however, accepted the argument advanced by advocate Solkar, noticing that prima facie, there was not enough material to implicate the accused in the case. Though the prosecution claimed that Aakif had travelled to Nepal to meet Junaid, a Pakistani national, and inferred on that basis that he wanted to “join Jihad”, there was no material to support the claim, the court said.

The division bench noted that apart from the meeting with Junaid, an email allegedly sent by Aakif after the Ahmedabad blast was also used to implicate him, but no certificate was issued under section 65B of the Evidence Act to enable the trial court to accept the email as evidence; hence, acceptance of the email needed detailed scrutiny during the hearing of the appeal.

Considering that Aakif had already spent half of the 40-year jail term, the bench ordered his release on bail on a personal bond of ₹2 lakh and two sureties in the same amount.