SC Records Pak Hand Behind Kashmir Militancy22 July 2010
Times of India
New Delhi: At a time when Pakistan is seeking evidence from India to prove its hand in fuelling militancy in Jammu and Kashmir, the Supreme Court has recorded Islamabad's hand in the killing of Mirwaiz Moulvi Farooq by militants from Jamat-e-Islami and Hizbul Mujahideen in 1990 in Srinagar. While upholding the conviction and life sentence to Mohammad Ayub Dar for the murder, a Bench comprising Justices V S Sirpurkar and M K Sharma said Dar's confession was clear about the training in use of firearms he and his accomplices received in Pakistan during his visit there in 1989. While Dar was carrying a German pistol, his associates Inayat had a French pistol and Bilal was armed with a Chinese pistol. Bilal was the one who shot dead the Mirwaiz while the others gave cover for the escape. 'Dar has given details of the whole outfit including the names of the leader and other companions and the confession also refers to the firearms brought by the group of terrorists from Pakistan and the training which was for bringing into effect the terrorist activity in the Kashmir valley,' the SC said. After killing the then Mirwaiz, the militant group got Rs 35,000 from their handlers and went to Delhi and carried out five bomb blasts, a graphic description of which had come in his confessional statement. 'It has also come in the confession that Dar had visited Pakistan, Lahore and Muzzaffarabad to meet other members of the group namely Hyder, Hanif Hyder, Nasir Khan and Yusuf Bangroo on fake passport. The said confession also gives details that the said passport was issued in Sikar, Rajasthan, with visa of Pakistan,' the Bench noted. Though Dar attempted to wriggle out of the confessional statement by saying that the police had forcibly extracted it from him under coercion, the Bench did not buy the argument. It said: 'We are thoroughly convinced that this confession is not only a good, voluntary and truthful confession but a reliable one also and the trial court has committed no mistake whatsoever in relying upon the said confession.'