July 05, 2026 03:51 am (IST)
Follow us:
facebook-white sharing button
twitter-white sharing button
instagram-white sharing button
youtube-white sharing button
'Why can't citizens protest against the government? They are being made slaves by slapping cases': Bombay HC slams Mumbai Police, quashes activist's externment | 'First he cheats on me...': Siya Goyal's old pub video goes viral amid probe into fiancé Ketan Agarwal's alleged murder | Ronaldo's goal, Ramos' last-gasp winner send Portugal past Croatia, set up Spain clash | India-US trade deal almost done! Piyush Goyal hints at breakthrough | Ram Mandir donation scam: Champat Rai points finger at his own driver | PM Modi welcomes Japanese PM Sanae Takaichi as India-Japan ties enter a new era | 'Not an isolated incident': India slams Pakistan after 125-year-old historic Gurdwara is demolished | Ram Mandir donation theft: Six accused were employed by Varanasi-based security firm, probe reveals | Ayodhya Ram Temple donation theft: Probe says majority of money was allegedly stolen during Kumbh Mela | Commercial LPG price slashed by Rs 183.50 from July 1; check new rates in Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata and Chennai
Pakistan Terrorism
Representational image from Wallpaper Flare

Pakistan: Four suspected militants acquitted in explosives case

| @indiablooms | May 31, 2022, at 05:05 am

Islamabad: An anti-terrorism court in Pakistan recently acquitted four suspected members of a militant outfit who were arrested by the counter-terrorism department (CTD) last year on the charge of possessing explosives.

The judge pronounced that the prosecution failed to prove its case against the four accused, including Zeenat Shah, Rehmatullah, Said Jamal and Saeed alias Aswad, and the evidence available on record didn’t connect them with the crime, reports The Dawn.

The CTD, however claimed, the accused were wanted men and were active members of the militant Islamic State (IS) group.

Shabbir Hussain Gigyani, lawyer for the accused, contended that his clients were falsely implicated in the case and they had no linkage with any militant outfit.

He argued that the statements of the prosecution witnesses were in conflict with that of the expert of the bomb disposal unit.

The counsel contended that the case property allegedly recovered from his clients was not produced before the court on pretext that the recovered items had been destroyed.

He argued that the alleged destruction of the case property was not in accordance with law and the legal requirements provided under the Code of Criminal Procedure and Explosive Substance Rules had not been followed.
 

Support Our Journalism

We cannot do without you.. your contribution supports unbiased journalism

IBNS is not driven by any ism- not wokeism, not racism, not skewed secularism, not hyper right-wing or left liberal ideals, nor by any hardline religious beliefs or hyper nationalism. We want to serve you good old objective news, as they are. We do not judge or preach. We let people decide for themselves. We only try to present factual and well-sourced news.

Support objective journalism for a small contribution.