Abu Jundal among 12 held guilty in 2006 Aurangabad arms haul case (Roundup, With Images)

Mumbai, July 28 (IANS) A Special MCOCA Court on Thursday found 12 accused, including LeT operative and 26/11 plotter Sayed Zabiuddin Ansari alias Abu Jundal, guilty and acquitted eight others in the sensational 2006 Aurangabad arms haul case.

Special MCOCA Judge S.L. Anekar also upheld the prosecution’s plea that the case was part of a larger post-2002 Gujarat communal riots conspiracy to eliminate then Chief Minister (now Prime Minister) Narendra Modi and Vishwa Hindu Parishad leader Praveen Togadia.

“It was a conspiracy after the 2002 Gujarat riots to eliminate then Gujarat CM Narendra Modi and VHP leader Pravin Togadia,” Special Judge Anekar observed while delivering the verdict.

The Special Court will start hearing the arguments on the quantum of punishment for the convicts from Friday between the lawyers of the convicts and the Special Public Prosecutor Vaibhav Bagade and lawyer Abhijeet Mantri.

There were a total of 22 accused who were charged with procuring a huge amount of explosives, arms and ammunition, and allegedly planned to target various political leaders for their role in the 2002 Gujarat riots.

The trial, which had resumed in 2013 after the arrest of Abu Jundal, had concluded in March this year before the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act Special Court here.

The 12 found guilty are: Abu Jundal, Aslam Kashmiri, Faisal Ataur-Rehman Shaikh, Afroz Khan Shahid Pathan, Sayyed Akif S. Jafruddin, Bilal Ahmed Abdul Razaq, medico M. Sharif Shabbir Ahmed, Afzal K. Nabi Khan, Mushtaq Ahmed M. Isaf Shaikh, Javed A. Abdul Majid, M. Muzafar Mohammed Tanveer and Mohammed Amir Shakil Ahmed.

One of the convicts, Faisal Ataur-Rehmah Shaikh had earlier been sentenced to death in the July 11, 2006 Mumbai serial blasts in suburban trains case.

They were found guilty under various sections of Indian Penal Code, Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, Explosives Act and Arms Act, but charges under the stringent MCOCA were dropped against them.

The eight accused acquitted on various grounds, including lack of evidence, are: Mohammed Juber Sayyed Anwar, Abdul Azim Abdul Jalil, Riyaz Ahmed M. Ramzan, Khatib Imran Akil Ahmed, Vikar Ahmed Nisar Shaikh, Abdul Samad Shamsher Khan, Mohammed Akil Ismail Momin and Firoz Tajuddin Deshmukh.

The trial of two other accused – an absconder Shaikh Abdul Naim, and an approver-turned hostile witness Mehmud Sayyed – shall be conducted separately in the case.

The Special Court also accepted the prosecution’s contention that the arms, ammunition and explosives had been procured from Pakistan, and all the accused had a common through process for Islam with intentions to wage a ‘jihad’ (holy war).

Following a tip-off, the Maharashtra Anti Terrorist Squad (ATS) teams chased a speeding Tata Indica and a Tata Sumo on the Chandwad-Manmad highway near Aurangabad on May 8, 2006.

They apprehended three suspects from the Tata Sumo — Mohammed Aamir Shakil Ahmed, Juber Sayed Anwar and Abdulazeem Abduljameel Shaikh — while the Tata Indica, allegedly driven by Abu Jundal, managed to give the slip.

In all, a total of 16 AK47 army assault rifles, 3,200 live cartridges, 43 kg of RDX and 50 hand grenades were seized from Khultabad, Yeola and Malegaon areas on two separate occasions by the ATS.

After escaping the police team, Jundal dumped the vehicle with another associate in Malegaon in Nashik district and fled to Bangladesh and then to Pakistan on a forged passport.

A native of Beed in Maharashtra, he was arrested after his deportation from Saudi Arabia in June 2012.

He then revealed to the ATS another hideout from where they recovered 13 kg RDX, 1,200 cartridges, 50 hand grenades and 22 magazine rounds.

In 2013 the ATS filed its chargesheet against all the 22 accused, including Jundal, for conspiring in various terror cases since 2006. The prosecution examined 100 witnesses while the defence examined 16 witnesses during the long trial.

Earlier, the trial had been stayed by the Supreme Court after one of the accused had challenged the constitutional validity of certain provisions in the MCOCA invoked on the accused but the stay was lifted in 2009.



Related Posts

Leave a Reply