Delhi Court Orders Framing Of Charges Against Indian Mujahideen Co-founder Yasin Bhatkal, Others In Terror Case

A Delhi court has ordered the framing of charges against banned terrorist organisation Indian Mujahideen's (IM) co-founder Yasin Bhatkal and several of its operatives, including Mohammad Danish Ansari, in a case of conspiring to wage war against India in 2012.
     
Additional Sessions Judge Shailender Malik said there was enough evidence to put the accused on trial.
    
In an order on March 31, the court said prime facie the accused, who were members of the IM, entered into a criminal conspiracy to wage war against India.
     
It noted that in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy, functionaries of the IM undertook large-scale recruitment 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 Delhi.
     
Indian Mujahideen operatives and its frontal organisations had been receiving regular funds from abroad through hawala channels for their terrorist activities, the NIA told the court.
     
It said the accused used to raise the issue of Babri masjid, Gujarat riots, and other alleged atrocities on Muslims to radicalise the minds of Muslim youth in their effort to recruit them for terror activities.
     
The court framed charges against Bhatkal, Ansari, Mohd Aftab Alam, Imran Khan, Syed, Obaid Ur Rehman, Asaudullah Akhtar, Ujjair Ahmad, Mohd Tehsin Akhtar, Haider Ali, and Zia Ur Rehman.
     
The judge discharged Manzar Imam, Ariz Khan, and Abdul Wahid Siddibappa, saying the prosecution failed to provide prima facie evidence against them.
     
Advocates M S Khan and Qausar Khan, appearing for the accused, opposed the NIA submission, claiming the evidence produced by the probe agency has already been taken into consideration in an earlier trial against an accused, and that the same evidence alone cannot be taken into consideration again in another trial of same accused or even with other co-accused.
    
The defence counsel said they will challenge the order before the superior court.