Delhi, India: On March 31, a Delhi Court framed charges against 11 members of the banned terrorist organisation ‘Indian Mujahideen’ for allegedly conspiring to wage war against India. However, the Court also discharged three accused for lack of proof in the same case.
The Court framed charges against Yasin Bhatkal, Mohd Danish Ansari, Mohd Aftab Alam, Imran Khan, Syed Maqbool, Obaid Ur Rehman, Asaudullah Akhtar, Ujjair Ahmad, Mohd Tehsin Akhtar, Haider Ali and Zia Ur Rehman under various provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Furthermore, the Court discharged Manzar Imam, Ariz Khan and Abdul Wahid for lack of proof in the present case. Manzar Imam was convicted in 2018 due to his association with another banned terrorist organisation Students’ Islamic Movements of India (SIMI), Live Law reported. He was arrested in this case on October 1, 2013.
Furthermore, it is pertinent to note that Ariz Khan has been convicted and sentenced to capital punishment in the Batla House murder case and faces trial in multiple bomb blast cases in other states. The Court noted, “It is matter of record that accused Ariz Khan @ Junaid has already been convicted u/s 302, 307, 174A, 186, 333 IPC u/s 27 Arms Act and sentenced inter alia for capital punishment in Batla House murder case and he is facing trial in bomb blast cases of other States like Rajasthan etc.”
The National Investigation Agency (NIA) alleged that the accused were functionaries of Indian Mujahideen undertaking “large scale recruitment/induction of new members for commission of terrorist activities in various parts of India, with active aid and support from Pakistan based associates as well as sleeper cells within the country to commit terrorist acts by bomb blasts at prominent places in India, especially in Delhi.” It is pertinent to note that Indian Mujahideen was as a banned terrorist organisation on June 22, 2009, and included in the First Schedule of the UAPA.
The Court noted, “Indian Mujahideen not only claimed responsibility of UP court blasts but also took responsibility of earlier terror incidents at Varanasi on 07.03.2006, Mumbai serial blasts on 11.07.2006, Hyderabad twin blasts on 25.08.2007… Indian Mujahideen further owned responsibility of terrorist incidents at Jaipur on 13.05.2008, serial blasts in Ahmedabad on 26.07.2008 as well as Delhi serial blasts on 13.09.2008.”
The Court noted, “Indian Mujahideen is a group of highly radicalized Muslim youths, waging war against Government of India and nurse communal hate against Hindu community. In the mail sent before Ahmedabad serial blasts, IM proclaimed executing Jihad against Hindus.”
The NIA submitted, “different operatives of IM have been involved in a larger conspiracy to commit more such terrorist incidents in other parts of India.” The NIA added, “evidence has been overlapping against different accused persons and showing that these accused charge sheeted in the present case were part of larger conspiracy despite being part of conspiracy to commit individual incidents of bomb blasts.”
The NIA submitted that Yasin Bhatkal, one of the founders of Indian Mujahideen was “instrumental in motivating young Muslim boys into path of violent Jihad and to further indoctrinated them and to induct them into Indian Mujahideen.” Furthermore, the NIA submitted that Yasin Bhatkal played an active role in “causing bomb blasts resulting into loss of several lives, destruction of properties.”
The NIA alleged that Yasin Bhatkal is the principal conspirator and operative of the Indian Mujahideen. The NIA submitted that Yasin Bhatkal has been convicted and sentenced to capital punishment in the Hyderabad twin blast case.
The Court observed, “Above referred statements of witnesses, clearly give specific accusation attributable to A-6 (Yasin Bhatkal) being involved continuously since beginning in larger conspiracy of committing different terrorist activities to create terror and destabilize the society as a whole.”
Furthermore, the Court noted that the extraction report for data from devices seized from Yasin Bhatkal contained “many folders containing video clips of jihadi literature including writings for justifying killing of non-Muslims, in the name of jihad.”
“Videos of Talib and Al Qaida on necessity of violent jihad as well as documents, images, videos containing literature regarding making of explosives, IED clearly show that A-6 (Yasin Bhatkal) was involved not only in larger conspiracy for committing terrorist activities but also instrumental in preparing of IEDs and explosives,” the Court noted.
The Court noted, “a chat between A-6 (Yasin Bhatkal) and A-10 (Riyaz Ahmad Shah) reflect IM planning for planting nuclear bomb in Surat town and evacuating Muslims from Surat town before executing such terrorist act.”
