CourtKutchehry.com
Supreme CourtDivision Bench(2019) 11 SC CK 0127

National Investigation Agency vs Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali

Supreme Court Of India · Decided on 5 November 2019

HON’BLE JUDGES
A.M. Khanwilkar, J · Ajay Rastogi, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Application No.1937 Of 2019 In Criminal Appeal No.578 Of 2019

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 346 words
1.

After hearing counsel for the applicant for some time, it appears that the grievance of the applicant is limited to the observation in paragraph 29 of the judgment dated April 02, 2019, which reads thus:

"29. xxx xxx xxx Additionally, the charge­sheet is accompanied with documents D­9b and D­9c, which are photographs of ex­militant Aftab Hilali Shah @ Shahid­ul­Islam (A­3) holding AK­47, seen with other terrorists. These photographs were seized from the residence of the said ex­militant on 3rd June, 2017. The prosecution case is that the respondent (Accused No.10) was in constant touch with the said ex­militant Aftab Hilali Shah @ Shahid­ul­Islam (A­3), as noticed from the inter­linkage chart depicted above. That fact is backed by the CDR analysis report, also part of the charge­sheet. "

2.

It is urged that there is mismatch between CDR analysis report and the inter-linkage chart incorporated in the charge-sheet (at Page 55 of the bound copy filed in this Court). Further, the last two sentences in the aforequoted portion of the judgment are likely to be used against the applicant at every stage of the pending proceedings.

3.

In the context of this apprehension, we make it amply clear that the stated observation is only a prima facie view expressed by us whilst dealing with the prayer for bail. It cannot be construed as the final determination of the matter in issue regarding the correctness of the contents of the concerned document, including the factum of mismatch, as such. The trial Court will have to consider the plea of the applicant on the basis of the material available before it, on its own merits, independent of the observation made in paragraph 29, referred to above.

4.

It is also made clear that if the trial Court records a finding in reference to the factual position as contended, it will be open to the applicant to pursue appropriate remedy, as may be permissible in law.

5.

In this view of the matter, nothing more is required to be said in this application. The application is accordingly disposed of.