Srinagar, Aug 9:  A local court here Thursday heard partial final arguments in a case against Chairman of Muslim League Dr Muhammad Qasim Faktoo. 
 The Court of Third Additional Sessions Judge Srinagar Y P Kotwal heard the inconclusive arguments regarding the case against Faktoo in an FIR lodged against him in Soura Police Station in 2000.
 Counsels Muhammad Abdullah Pandit and Mir Urfi representing Dr Faktoo argued before the court that the accused has been already acquitted by a Delhi Court of the offences for which an FIR was registered against him in a Delhi police station.
 “Another FIR in Srinagar cannot be registered against the accused on the basis of the charges for which FIR was lodged against him in Delhi police station. It is in conflict with the provisions of law,” they argued.
 Dr Fuktoo had allegedly made a statement before Delhi Police that he had RDX at his home at Soura in Srinagar and a Delhi Court had acquitted him later. The Soura police had later lodged an FIR against him after claiming having recovered RDX from his house.
 Jammu and Kashmir High Court had on July 31 took on record an official communication indicating the completion of life imprisonment of Dr Faktoo.  
 His counsel, Mian Abdul Qayoom had argued that on May 31, 2012, Dr Faktoo has completed 20 years in prison which as per Jail Manual and Prison’s Act amounts to life imprisonment and he deserved a release.
 Faktoo was arrested on February 5, 1993 and the TADA Court had acquitted him on July 14, 2001.
 The government had challenged the decision of the TADA Court in Supreme Court and the apex court sentenced him to life imprisonment on the basis of “confessional statements”.
 In 2008, Faktoo completed 14 years in prison and a Review Board had recommended his case for the release.
 In June 200, a bench of Jammu and Kashmir High Court had directed to release him in 90 days. The government challenged the decision in division bench and in September 2011, the division bench observed that TADA convict can’t be released prematurely that is after 14 years. The division bench said the case be considered only after the imprisonment of 20 years.

Lastupdate on : Thu, 9 Aug 2012 21:30:00 Makkah time
Lastupdate on : Thu, 9 Aug 2012 18:30:00 GMT
Lastupdate on : Fri, 10 Aug 2012 00:00:00 IST