The High Court of Karnataka has upheld the trial court’s order of conviction and imposition of life sentence on Imran Jalal, a native of Jammu and Kashmir and a resident of Hospet in Ballari district, on the charge of possessing arms and ammunition to carry out terror attacks in the city as a member of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), a banned terrorist organisation.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Ravi Malimath and Justice H.P. Sandesh passed the order while dismissing the appeal filed by Imran alias Bilal Ahmed alias Saleem questioning the October 4, 2016, judgement of the trial court, which had convicted him on the charges of attempting to wage a war against the country by associating himself with LeT and possessing arms and ammunition to carry out terror attacks in various IT companies and public buildings in the city.
He was caught on January 5, 2007, when he entered the city on a private bus and the police had seized two AK-47 assault riffles, 400 rounds of ammunition and 10 hand grenades from his possession.
The trial court had accepted the contention of the prosecution that Imran was running a handicrafts shop in Hospet and had visited Pakistan in 2004-05 by getting a Pakistani visa through a fake Indian passport, had undergone training for terror activities in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, and was in touch with LeT operatives in Jammu and Kashmir and their commanders in Pakistan through e-mails and a satellite phone provided to him by the LeT commanders. The trial court split the trial against other five accused, three of them are Pakistan nationals and another a resident of Pune as the police could not apprehend them.
“There is nothing on record to show that the Investigating Officer, who seized the articles at the instance of the accused, had ill-will against the accused. Nothing is elicited in the evidence of the witnesses also that they had any ill-will against the accused, in order to implicate him falsely in the case. Though dispute raised with regard to the seizure of live grenades, bullets and banned articles like AK-47 rifles, etc, nothing is elicited in the cross-examination to disbelieve the case of the prosecution,” the High Court held.
On claim made on behalf of the accused that there was no direct proof that he belong to LeT, the High Court said, “the Court cannot expect any direct evidence with regard to membership with LeT and the same has to be gathered with the totality of the evidence.” Based on materials like his email communications with Pakistani nationals, including one person involved in a bomb blast case in Delhi, possession of weapons of mass destruction, the High Court said, the trial court had rightly come to the conclusion that he was engaged in unlawful activities as defined under the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
