July 16, 2026 07:27 am (IST)
Follow us:
facebook-white sharing button
twitter-white sharing button
instagram-white sharing button
youtube-white sharing button
'He could die in two days': Delhi HC plea seeks force-feeding of Sonam Wangchuk as fast enters Day 18 | 'Tonight's defeat is hard to take': Emmanuel Macron reacts after France crash out of World Cup, congratulates Spain | Spain cruise past France to storm into FIFA World Cup 2026 final with clinical 2-0 victory | Taslima Nasrin announces Kolkata return after 20 years to attend literary event at Rabindra Sadan | 'We must not watch one of our greatest minds be sacrificed': Zeenat Aman backs Sonam Wangchuk, urges govt to open dialogue | 'I don't want Phunsukh Wangdu to die': '3 Idiots' star Omi Vaidya's emotional appeal for Sonam Wangchuk | Middle East Crisis: Iran strikes UAE tankers in Strait of Hormuz, Indian crew member killed | Picnic turns into horror: Woman allegedly harassed, family chased for 15 km in Nashik | 'Mannat is a private property': Supreme Court clears renovation of Shah Rukh Khan's Bandra residence | Bengal CM Suvendu Adhikari backs move to stop entry to Bankra Mosque inside Kolkata airport operational area
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.