|
Wrongly Convicted Database Record
|
Charge: |
Corruption (including Public Corruption) |
Sentence: |
|
Years Imprisoned: |
|
Year Crime: |
1998 |
Year Convicted: |
|
Year Cleared: |
2017 |
U.S. State or Country of Crime: |
India |
County or Region of Crime: |
Jammu and Kashmir |
City of Crime: |
|
Result: |
Judicially Exonerated Released |
Summary of Case: |
"Ghulam Ahmad Dar was wrongly convicted of public corruption when he was the director of horticulture department in Jammu and Kashmir for allegedly approving 121 "backdoor appointments" from November 1997 to June 1998. Ghulam Dar's prosecution was based on the testimony of witnesses related to being given employment appointments without adhering to set procedure and norms. However, no one testified that Dar took any money for any appointment. After his conviction Dar appealed. In December 2017 the Jammu and Kashmir High Court set-aside the convictions of Dar and ordered his acquittal based on insufficient evidence to prove hisr guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The Court stated in its judgment: “One does not understand as to how trial court has come to the conclusion that criminal misconduct in the present case is made out against (Dar) and how he distinguished the judgment cited by the defence counsel in support of their case. ... The cumulative effect of the evidence on record by the prosecution, therefore, does not prove any nexus between the appellant (Dar) and the beneficiaries direct or otherwise. None of them is neither alleged nor proved to be of his relation, therefore, the charge against the appellant for having obtained pecuniary advantage for himself or for somebody else is just a feeble allegation which cannot stand the test of law." " |
Conviction Caused By: |
|
Innocence Proved By: |
"In December 2017 the Jammu and Kashmir High Court set-aside the convictions of Dar and ordered his acquittal based on insufficient evidence to prove hisr guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The Court stated in its judgment: “One does not understand as to how trial court has come to the conclusion that criminal misconduct in the present case is made out against (Dar) and how he distinguished the judgment cited by the defence counsel in support of their case. ... The cumulative effect of the evidence on record by the prosecution, therefore, does not prove any nexus between the appellant (Dar) and the beneficiaries direct or otherwise. None of them is neither alleged nor proved to be of his relation, therefore, the charge against the appellant for having obtained pecuniary advantage for himself or for somebody else is just a feeble allegation which cannot stand the test of law."" |
Defendant Aided By: |
|
Compensation Awarded: |
|
Was Perpetrator Identified? |
|
Age When Imprisoned: |
|
Age When Released: |
|
Sex: |
Male |
Skin/Ethnicity: |
Indian |
Information Source 1: |
"‘Backdoor Appointment’ Case: HC Acquits Former Horticulture Director, By Marouf Ali, Kashmir Observer, December 29, 2017" |
Information Location 1: |
https://kashmirobserver.net/2017/local-news/backdoor-appointment-case-hc-acquits-former-horticulture-director-27178 |
Information Source 2: |
|
Information Location 2: |
|
Information Source 3: |
|
Information Location 3: |
|
Information Source 4: |
|
Information Location 4: |
|
Information Source 5: |
|
Information Location 5: |
|
Book About Case: |
|
Book Information: |
|
Book About Case (2): |
|
Book Information (2): |
|
Movie About Case: |
|
Comments About Case: |
Innocents Database Created and Maintained by Hans Sherrer innocents@forejustice.org