Srinagar, July 22: A local court on Friday directed the government to release two youth who were allegedly booked for hatching a conspiracy to get two policemen killed in frontier district of Kupwara three years ago.      
 “It is a settled law that opinion of handwriting expert is corroborative piece of evidence not a substantive, therefore the material evidence in the final report does not disclose any prima facie involvement of the accused in the alleged crime,” the Court of Second Additional Sessions Judge Srinagar observed. 
Case history
 Mahraj Gunj Police station Srinagar, on April 11, 2008 had apprehended two persons, Muzaffar Ahmad Hajam and Muhammad Younis Bhat on the alleged charges that it had recovered a Hukumnama besides arms and ammunition from their possession.
 According to police, the Hukumnama recovered from the possession of the accused was issued by police station Sogam against one Shakoor Ahmad Sheikh of Sogam Kupwara, which had the signature of one of the two policemen whose bodies were recovered in Kupwara after they were  abducted and killed.
 An FIR was registered against the duo for committing offence under arms act both in Police Station Mahraj Gunj and Police Station Sogam.
 After a couple of days three militants were killed in the area. After the gunfight police said the slain militants were responsible for killing two policemen.
 While, the Hukumnama which police claimed to have recovered from the possession of the two persons apprehended by the Mahraj Ganj police station, the  Hukumnama and some documents from Sogam police station were sent to FSL Srinagar for expert opinion.
 The FSL report had revealed that the handwriting on Hukumnama and that of constable Tariq Ahmad, one of the constables killed were similar.
 Counsel for the accused, M A Ronga pleaded before the court that there was no sufficient evidence against the accused and even if it were presumed that the Hukumnama was recovered from them, it is not a substantive ground for their conviction. The Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) told the court that the material evidence against the accused was sufficient to convict them.
Verdict 
 Before pronouncing the verdict, the trial court referred to various Judgments of the Supreme Court wherein in the apex court has underlined the need for a sufficient ground to convict an accused.
 Referring to the Apex Court Judgment in case of P Vijayan Vs State of Kerala, “The words not sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused” clearly show that Judge is not a mere post office to frame the charges at the behest of the prosecution, but has to exercise his judicial mind to fact of case in order to determine whether a case for trial has been made out by prosecution,” the trial Court said, it is the sufficient evidence that is needed to convict an accused.

Lastupdate on : Fri, 22 Jul 2011 21:30:00 Makkah time
Lastupdate on : Fri, 22 Jul 2011 18:30:00 GMT
Lastupdate on : Sat, 23 Jul 2011 00:00:00 IST