Lucknow: A Special NIA Court in Lucknow has acquitted Mohammed Naeem, now 78 years old, in a criminal case that stretched across more than three decades. The case originated in the turbulent aftermath of the Babri Masjid demolition, making the acquittal a moment of considerable legal significance for the accused and for observers of India’s criminal justice system.
Additional District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge (NIA) Umakant Jindal acquitted Naeem of charges under Sections 295A, 124A and 153B of the Indian Penal Code. These sections relate to deliberate acts intended to outrage religious feelings, sedition, and imputations prejudicial to national integration.
The prosecution alleged that on January 26, 1993, in Gorakhpur’s Ismailpur locality, Naeem and others displayed black flags from residential premises and raised slogans including “Pakistan Zindabad” and “Ganatantra Diwas Murdabad.” The police, deployed for Republic Day security, claimed the conduct threatened India’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
The Court, after carefully reviewing the evidence, found the prosecution’s case riddled with critical gaps. Prosecution witnesses themselves stated that the alleged slogan-shouters had fled the scene before the police arrived. The Court noted that the prosecution failed to satisfactorily establish how Naeem was identified as one of the individuals involved.
The investigation itself drew sharp scrutiny. The original investigating officer submitted a final report in 2003, recording that the case had gone stale and that available material was insufficient to warrant a trial. Although a chargesheet was eventually filed in 2005, the officer who subsequently handled the case admitted during cross-examination that he had never visited the alleged scene or recorded statements there. The chargesheet was prepared entirely on material gathered by his predecessor.
Further weakening the prosecution’s position, black flags allegedly recovered from Naeem were never produced before the Court. The recovery memo was also absent from the record. A police constable associated with the recovery acknowledged in testimony that he could not say where the seized flag was.
On an overall review of the evidence, the Court concluded that the prosecution failed to prove Naeem had assembled at the location, displayed black flags, or raised the alleged slogans. It extended the benefit of reasonable doubt to him and ordered his acquittal.
Naeem was approximately 45 years old when proceedings commenced. He is now 78. The case underlines the principle that suspicion, however grave, cannot replace legally admissible evidence in securing a criminal conviction.
