FASIH MAHMOOD Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner Fasih Mahmood seeks regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in case FIR No.54/2011 registered under Sections 471/489B/489C/120B ; Sections 16/18/19/20 Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, (in short 'UAPA'); Section 25 Arms Act and Sections 3,4,5 Explosive Substances Act at PS Special Cell, Lodhi Colony. Status report is on record.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. Petitioner's counsel urged that the petitioner is in custody since 13.05.2012. At present, he is facing trial only for commission of offence punishable under Section 20 'UAPA'. Despite examination of several witnesses, no credible evidence has emerged to implicate the petitioner in the case. PW-42 (Inspector Pankaj Singh) from Cyber Cell is the sole prosecution witness to depose about the examination of the petitioner's laptop. He categorically stated that the only information that he found therein was two e-mail IDs being "gauhar@rediffmail.com" and gauhar_khoomani@yahoo.nimbus. com. Merely because e-mail IDs of the petitioner's cousin brother were found on his laptop, it cannot be taken as an incriminating circumstance against him. No evidence has surfaced to infer if the petitioner ever attempted to exhort any individual to carry out the activities of Indian Mujahideen in India.

(3.) Learned counsel urged that the FSL report has since been received after a gap of about four years. PW-42 admitted in the crossexamination that the laptop examined by him on 29.01.2013 was not in a sealed condition. He admitted that he had not made any recording of the date and time of his examination, even for his personal records and he was not aware as to what had happened to the said laptop after his examination. On 17.03.2017, the prosecution filed supplementary charge-sheet with the report from FSL Rohini. The contents of the report do not reveal anything incriminating against the petitioner. It is urged that substantial evidence has already been recorded and no useful purpose will be served to deny bail to the petitioner who has a clean record and no conviction has been recorded so far against him, the petitioner has since been enlarged on bail by the High Court of Karnataka in CR No. 96/2010 of Cubbon Park Police Station, Bengaluru City on 16.10.2017.