Delhi court: NIA didn’t try to find out who made CD linking accused to banned outfit

On October 21, Special Judge Parveen Singh discharged Mohd Salman, Mohd Saleem, Arif Gulam Bashir Dharampuria and Mohd Hussain Molani – who were arrested by the NIA for allegedly receiving money from the Pakistan-based proscribed outfit Falah-i-Insaniat Foundation.

Discharging four accused in a terror funding case while noting that drawing final presumption not based on facts was dangerous, a Delhi court observed that the NIA did not make any efforts to find out who made the CD containing conversations to link them to a banned terrorist organisation.

On October 21, Special Judge Parveen Singh discharged Mohd Salman, Mohd Saleem, Arif Gulam Bashir Dharampuria and Mohd Hussain Molani – who were arrested by the NIA for allegedly receiving money from the Pakistan-based proscribed outfit Falah-i-Insaniat Foundation (FIF) for attracting a group of sympathisers and sleeper cells to “create unrest in India”.

The prosecution contended that Salman was in touch with one Mohammad Kamran, who is said to be based in Dubai, made an accused but not arrested in the case, handled FIF operations and conspired with Jamat-ud-Dawa (JuD) founder Hafiz Mohammad Saeed to launder money for terror-related activities.

The NIA’s strongest piece of evidence was a CD recovered from Dharampuria, who was alleged to be Kamran’s employee. The CD contained purported conversations between FIF’s deputy chief Shahid Mahmood and Kamran, through which the prosecution sought to establish that they were “closely associated and involved in various illegal activities”.

The court said, “There is nothing either on record or in submissions that what and if any efforts were made by the NIA to trace or find out the person who prepared this CD…However, at the same time, even the source of this CD is not clear or when it was prepared or the time frame in which it has been prepared.”

The prosecution raised the contention that “Kamran was working very closely with Mahmood, he should have known that Mahmood was working for FIF and therefore, by his association with Mahmood, a further conclusion can be drawn that money which was being sent by Kamran belonged to FIF”.

To this, the court said that the prosecution’s contention “shows that there are many ‘ifs’ involved” and it is “not based on facts but on presumptions which leads to a final presumption…”

Source: Read Full Article