Jammu, September 5: A Jammu court has discharged seven accused persons in a case arising from protests held in Jammu following the February 2019 Pulwama terror attack, ruling that mere presence in a large gathering does not, by itself, make a person criminally liable under Section 149 of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC).
The order was passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge Anoop Kumar Sharma, who found that the prosecution material failed to establish that the accused had participated in, abetted, or shared the common object of the alleged violent acts committed during the protest.
The case relates to a Jammu bandh and protest on February 15, 2019, a day after the deadly Pulwama attack. According to the prosecution, a crowd of around 600–700 people moved towards Raghunath Bazaar and, after being stopped by police near Vivekanand Chowk, allegedly turned unruly. It was alleged that the mob subsequently set five to six vehicles on fire.
The seven accused discharged by the court were identified as Rohit Sharma, Kailash Kumar, Manat Kumar, Sajan Kumar, Sukhdev Singh alias Rinku, Sahil Sharma and Jagdish Kumar. They had been accused of being members of the unlawful assembly and were facing charges under Sections 188, 147, 148, 149, 435 and 427 RPC.
Court Finds No Specific Role Attributed to Accused
While examining the prosecution evidence, the court noted that several police witnesses had identified some of the accused as being present in the gathering. However, none of the witnesses attributed any specific overt or covert act to any of the seven accused in connection with the alleged violence.
The court further observed that certain witness statements appeared to be “like a carbon copy” of one another and did not adequately explain when, where or under what circumstances the accused persons had allegedly been identified.
The court also considered the prosecution’s reliance on mobile-phone tower location data. It held that the presence of the accused persons’ mobile phones in the vicinity of the incident was not sufficient to establish that they were members of that particular portion of the gathering which later allegedly turned violent.
Mere Presence Cannot Automatically Attract Section 149 RPC
The court emphasised that merely being present at the scene of an incident does not automatically make an individual liable for offences allegedly committed by other members of a gathering.
Referring to Supreme Court precedents, including the ruling in Zainul v. State of Bihar, the court reiterated that liability under Section 149 RPC requires material showing that the accused was a member of the unlawful assembly and shared its common object.
The court observed that the initial purpose of the gathering appeared to have been a protest against Pakistan following the Pulwama attack, with slogans including “Hindustan Zindabad, Pakistan Murdabad.” According to the court, the assembly appeared to have turned violent only after it was stopped by the police.
No Sufficient Material for Section 188 RPC Charge
The court also found the prosecution’s case under Section 188 RPC, relating to disobedience of an order promulgated by a public servant, to be unsupported by the required material.
It noted that the prosecution had not placed on record the alleged order issued under Section 144 CrPC. The court also observed that there was no complaint from the public servant whose order was allegedly disobeyed.
Court Says It Cannot Act as “Post Office” for Prosecution
While considering whether charges should be framed, the court stressed that a judicial officer is required to independently examine the material placed by the prosecution and cannot mechanically accept the prosecution’s allegations.
The court observed that at the stage of framing charges, it “cannot act merely as a Post Office or a mouthpiece of the prosecution.”
After examining the evidence and material collected during the investigation, the court concluded that the case raised, at best, a “very bleak suspicion” against the accused rather than the grave suspicion required to proceed with a criminal trial.
Seven Accused Discharged, Challan Dismissed
Consequently, the court discharged all seven accused from the offences under Sections 188, 147, 148, 149, 435 and 427 RPC.
The court also dismissed the challan and relieved the accused persons of their bail bonds, bringing the proceedings against the seven accused to an end at the trial court level.(KNC)
