Don’t miss the latest developments in business and finance.

HC directs framing of stringent charges against blast accused

Image
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Jan 24 2013 | 2:10 AM IST

A bench of justices Sanjiv Khanna and S P Garg allowed National Investigation Agency's plea against the trial court order, which had dropped stringent penal charge of 'waging war against the government' against Malik, who is facing trial in the September 7, 2011 attack case, in which 15 people were killed and 79 others were injured.

"The facts as alleged and material evidence relied upon and mentioned justify framing of charges under the appropriate section of the IPC," the bench said.

"Charges under section 121 (waging war against India), 121A (conspiracy to commit offences punishable by section 121), 122 (collecting arms etc, with intention of waging war against India) and 123 (concealing existence of design to wage war) read with section 120B (criminal conspiracy) will be framed by the trial court," the bench added.

Accepting the NIA's argument that the intention of the accused was not to cause injury to a particular person but the public in general, it said, "We allow the present appeal and set aside para 24 of the trial court order discharging the respondent (Malik) and holding that there is no ground or material to frame charges under section 121 of IPC."

"We record and note the contention that the bomb blast was not targeted to cause injury to a particular person but (the bomb) was kept at the reception counter of the Delhi High Court which issued passes that enables litigants and others to enter the main gate of high court building.

"The object, purpose and animus as propounded and alleged has to be given weightage and cannot be discounted or rejected at this stage," the court said.

More From This Section

The bench rejected Malik's argument that unless security forces are specifically targeted section 121 is not attracted.

"The dividing line i.E., terrorist act or waging war in some cases may be there but the present case has its own peculiarities like the location where the bomb exploded, animus which has been attributed, the email, etc.," the bench said. (MORE)

  

Also Read

First Published: Dec 03 2012 | 4:05 PM IST

Next Story