The Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by the Government of NCT of Delhi challenging the acquittal of Muraif Qamar and Irshad Ali alias Deepak in a 2006 case involving the alleged recovery of arms, ammunition and explosives by the Delhi Police Special Cell. The Court held that the prosecution failed to establish the respondents’ guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and found no infirmity in the trial court’s acquittal judgment.
A Division Bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Madhu Jain, by judgment dated May 29, 2026, upheld the December 22, 2016, acquittal recorded by the trial court and observed that the prosecution’s case lacked credibility. The Court noted that several crucial investigative steps that could have established the authenticity of the alleged recovery were not taken.
The High Court observed that the Central Bureau of Investigation’s closure report contained an analysis of the respondents’ call detail records, indicating that their mobile phones had been switched off from December 2005. The Court noted that if the Special Cell possessed material contradicting the CBI’s findings, it ought to have produced the same during the trial. The Bench also noted that independent witnesses interviewed by the CBI at Mukarba Chowk were not examined during trial, and the persons allegedly supplying weapons to the accused were neither effectively investigated nor produced as witnesses.
The Court further found significant deficiencies in the prosecution’s case, including the absence of independent public witnesses despite the alleged recovery taking place at a busy public location, failure to associate the bus driver and conductor with the investigation, non-maintenance of records regarding private vehicles used in the raid, and the failure to obtain fingerprints from the allegedly recovered weapons and explosives. The Bench held that these shortcomings undermined the credibility of the prosecution’s version.
Referring to settled principles governing appeals against acquittal, the High Court reiterated that interference is warranted only when the trial court’s view is perverse or wholly unsustainable. The Bench held that the trial court’s assessment was a plausible view based on the evidence on record and therefore did not warrant appellate interference.
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the Government of NCT of Delhi’s appeal, disposed of all pending applications, and ordered that the personal bonds, bail bonds and sureties furnished by the respondents stand discharged. (ANI)
Source The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.
