Mobile tower data fails to link seven accused to 2019 arson, Jammu court discharges them
Jammu, Sep 9, KNT: A Jammu court has discharged seven persons accused in a 2019 arson case, holding that their alleged presence in the vicinity of the incident, including through mobile tower location data, did not establish that they were part of the section of the mob that turned violent and set vehicles on fire.
Second Additional Sessions Judge Jammu Anoop Kumar Sharma passed the order in a case arising from the Jammu bandh and protests held on February 15, 2019, following the Pulwama militant attack. The accused, Rohit Sharma, Kailash Kumar, Manat Kumar, Sajan Kumar, Sukhdev Singh alias Rinku, Sahil Sharma and Jagdish Kumar were facing charges under Sections 188, 147, 148, 149, 435 and 427 of the Ranbir Penal Code.
The prosecution case related to a gathering of around 600–700 people which proceeded from J P Chowk towards Raghunath Bazaar and allegedly turned violent near Vivekanand Chowk after being stopped by police. Five to six vehicles were allegedly damaged or set on fire.
The court found that the material relied upon by the prosecution did not establish which members of the large gathering actually participated in or abetted the arson. Mobile tower locations could place the accused in the vicinity, the court observed, but could not establish that they belonged to the particular section of the crowd that committed the alleged acts.
The court also found deficiencies in the identification evidence. Police witnesses who named some of the accused did not specify when, where or under what circumstances they had identified them, while in relation to others the record stated that their names were subsequently learnt without explaining the source of that information.
The court further noted that the initial object of the assembly was a protest against the Pulwama attack and that there was no material showing that the gathering had been carrying deadly weapons or combustible material from the outset. Once the gathering allegedly became violent, the investigating agency was required to establish the individuals who participated in or abetted the acts and shared the unlawful common object.
The proceedings also suffered from a separate evidentiary gap concerning the allegation of disobedience of prohibitory orders. The court noted that the relevant order imposed under Section 144 of the CrPC had not been placed on record and that the requisite complaint by the public servant concerned was also absent.
The court held that the material against the accused amounted only to a “bleak suspicion” and did not meet the threshold required for framing charges. It rejected the approach of mechanically proceeding on the prosecution material, observing that a court is not a mere “Post Office” for the prosecution.
The challan was dismissed and all seven accused were discharged from the case and relieved of their bail bonds. [KNT]
© Kashmir News Trust (KNT). Unauthorized use without attribution is prohibited.
