Onlykashmir.in News Desk
Mirwaiz-e-Kashmir Dr Moulvi Muhammad Umar Farooq has questioned the absence of accountability after two young men from Baramulla spent six years in jail under stringent anti-terror laws before being acquitted by a court that found the evidence against them unreliable.
Expressing deep concern over the prolonged detention, the Mirwaiz said the case highlights the grave human cost of keeping people behind bars for years when the evidence ultimately fails to sustain a conviction. The six years lost by the two men can never be restored, he said, and their case raises wider concerns about the arrest and continued detention of Kashmiri youth.
In a post on X, he described the case as deeply saddening and asked whether anyone would be held accountable for the years the two men spent in prison. “Deeply saddening that two young men from Baramulla had to spend six precious years in jail under stringent anti-terror laws, before being acquitted as the evidence against them was found unreliable. This case once again highlights the indiscriminate arrest and prolonged detention of Kashmiri youth. Will accountability be fixed for their wasted years? Authorities should review this approach and relook and do justice to the thousands of youth under prolonged detention,” he wrote.
The Mirwaiz also urged the authorities to review their approach and reconsider cases involving youth who remain under prolonged detention.
The statement is in keeping with his recent public comments on civil liberties and political prisoners. Last Friday, he referred to the International Crisis Group’s report on Jammu and Kashmir in his address at the Jama Masjid, highlighting similar concerns. He has since remained under house detention for about a week.
Cases under stringent laws such as the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act are often characterised by long periods of pre-trial custody because bail is difficult to obtain, and trials can take years. When the accused are eventually acquitted, as in this case, questions about compensation and accountability arise, and rights groups have repeatedly called for reforms. The authorities have generally maintained that such cases are pursued on the basis of evidence and security considerations, and that acquittals are part of the judicial process.
The statement did not name the two men or give details of the court’s findings, and no official response was available in the information provided. The Mirwaiz’s demand for a review of the approach towards detained youth is likely to be echoed by families of those still in custody, who have long appealed for speedy trials and for the release of those against whom the evidence is weak.
