Ayodhya terror attack: 4 on life term get bail

A local resident was killed while seven CRPF personnel were injured when five alleged Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) operatives tried to storm the makeshift temple at the then-disputed Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid site on July 5, 2005. The five JeM operatives were killed by the security personnel.

The court passed the order while hearing separate appeals filed by the convicts, Shakeel Ahmed, Mohammad Naseem, Asif Iqbal, alias Faroq, and Dr Irfan, seeking bail and suspension of their sentence.

While Dr Irfan is a resident of Saharanpur district in Uttar Pradesh, others hail from Poonch in Jammu and Kashmir. All four are lodged in the Naini Central Jail in Prayagraj, defence counsel Aarif Ali Khan said.

A division bench of Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi said in its order, “In our view, without further commenting upon the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to enlarge all the accused, Shakeel Ahmed, Mohammad Naseem, Asif Iqbal, alias Faroq and Dr Irfan on bail in the above case on following strict conditions.”

The bench listed the next date of hearing on December 4.

It added, “We are also mindful of the fact that long period of incarceration during the pendency of appeal has been viewed with concern by the Supreme Court in a series of orders/judgments. Liberty of the individuals would have to be respected while balancing the competing interest of (the) State to maintain order in the society.”

The court imposed conditions, saying all the appellants would report to the jurisdictional police station of their residence once a week and none of them would leave the country without permission. Also, passports issued to the appellants, if any, shall be surrendered to the court concerned, the bench ruled.

The court further observed that the petition for consideration of the first bail application of the convicts is liable to be considered since it has been more than one year since the Supreme Court’s order and that the hearing on the appeal may take some more time.

“All four appellants have been implicated in the offence as conspirators. The aspect of conspiracy is asserted by the prosecution relying upon the recovery of a mobile handset from one of the terrorists, who had been silenced on the spot. The prosecution case is that the mobile handset recovered from the spot was used in various SIM card numbers and through a process of call detail records, all the four… persons have been connected to the recovered mobile handset and thereby implicated in the matter.”

“The defence argument is that the recovery of handset itself is not proved and is planted. We are not required to return any definite finding on this aspect as a detailed appraisal of the evidence led during the trial, on such aspect, would be required at the time of hearing of the appeals. However, we do find that prima facie arguable points are raised in the appeal on the aspect relating to the factum of recovery of the mobile handset. Other legal issues have also been raised including the evidentiary value of call detail records particularly as there is no certificate produced in terms of Section 65B of the Evidence Act. It is also admitted to the prosecution that none of the accused-appellants have any criminal history and they are languishing in jail for the last more than 18 years,” the court said.

Defence counsel Aarif Ali Khan said they have applied for a certified copy of the HC order. “After obtaining a copy of the order, we will move the court concerned to complete other formalities needed to get the release order,” Aarif added.

In their chargesheet, the police had said that the five arrested suspects allegedly hatched a conspiracy to carry out the attack and provided logistical and material support to the JeM terrorists. They claimed to have seized a cellphone, AK-47 rifles, cartridges, and other items from the suspects.

The trial of the case was shifted from Ayodhya to Allahabad at the direction of the Allahabad High Court in 2006 following a protest by locals.