In a significant development, the NIA Court in Mumbai acquitted all accused in the 2008 Malegaon bomb blast case on Thursday. Seven individuals faced trial, including former BJP MP Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, Lieutenant Colonel Prasad Purohit, retired Major Ramesh Upadhyay, Sudhakar Chaturvedi, Ajay Rahirkar, Sudhakar Dhar Dwivedi, and Sameer Kulkarni. The court noted the absence of two accused and ordered a fresh charge sheet against them.
Insufficient Evidence for Conviction
Judge A.K. Lahoti remarked some charges were dismissed while others were accepted. The evidence presented in court was insufficient to prove guilt beyond doubt. No proof was found of Colonel Purohit procuring RDX, nor of him manufacturing the bomb.
Read More:
The court highlighted the lack of proof regarding the parking of the bike at the blast site, stone-pelting, damage to public property, or the snatching of a police gun post-incident.
Investigation Flaws Highlighted
The NIA Court pointed out procedural lapses like improper documentation and site barricading, alongside forensic report discrepancies rendering conclusions impossible. No evidence was found linking Sadhvi Pragya to the bike ownership. She had renounced worldly ties years before the incident, and the prosecution failed to prove her conspiracy involvement.
Read More:
The court ruled UAPA non-applicable due to baseless accusations. No evidence supported 'Abhinav Bharat' funds being used for terrorism. The prosecution lacked substantial evidence, relying on conjecture.
Call Interception Records Questioned
All seven accused were arrested by Maharashtra ATS, with the trial led by NIA. Special Public Prosecutor Avinash Rasal cited call data records, intercepts of Sadhvi Pragya after her October 2008 arrest, among other evidence.
Source: aajtak
Rasal argued the prosecution established critical circumstances via reliable evidence unfolding a compelling narrative against the accused.
Pragya Thakur's Meetings' CD Damaged
During the trial, despite 39 witnesses turning hostile, a pivotal setback was the broken CDs containing meeting footage of Thakur, Purohit, and others, recorded secretly by co-accused Sudhakar Dhar Dwivedi. No attempts were made to recover or present copies in court.
Read More:
Prosecution alleged the bomb-strapped bike belonged to Pragya Thakur. However, her lawyer J.P. Mishra cited conflicting witness statements, questioning the actual ownership. The vehicle's chassis number was obliterated, complicating identification.
The Mystery of the Blast-Used Bike
Sadhvi claimed she relinquished worldly possessions, including the vehicle. The prosecution argued incomplete ownership transfer documentation post-sale, contradicting her statement.
Colonel Purohit's lawyer Viral Babbar contended the officer was kidnapped and tortured, while witnesses, coerced by ATS officials including Army personnel, were subjected to harassment. A judge queried Babbar why the witnesses did not report complaints, to which Babbar replied one tried the Human Rights Commission, with no result.
CDR Evidence Dismissed
Babbar highlighted the prosecution's CDR lacking Section 65B certification, a mandatory electronic record authentication document under the Evidence Act, leading to court dismissal.
Babbar underscored deficient witnesses and proof supporting the prosecution's theory of Purohit storing 80 kg RDX and conspiring with Chaturvedi for bomb production at Devlali residence, transported for the Malegaon blast.
Interception Rules Not Followed
Post Pragya's arrest, ATS intercepted calls made by accused Major (Retired) Ramesh Upadhyay and activist Sameer Kulkarni. Babbar, alongside Upadhyay and Kulkarni, questioned interception guideline adherence.
Defense referenced the NIA charge sheet asserting ATS planted RDX at Chaturvedi's residence—an ATS officer refuted these claims, but Chaturvedi's defense remained concentrated on this point.
Sudar Dhar Dwivedi's lawyer Ranjit Sangle argued ATS targeted an individual named Dayanand Pande based on a tip-off. Sangle stressed the absence of witnesses proving Dwivedi being Pande.
Sudhakar Dwivedi's Arrest Tainted
Sangle contended the irregular Kanpur-to-Lucknow arrest, unlawful upon Mumbai presentation days later. He alleged procedural flaws in Dwivedi's double arrest and equipment seizure sans seizure documentation implied ATS evidence fabrication.
ATS accused Ajay Rahirkar, an Abhinav Bharat treasurer, of masterminded conspiracy fund disbursement for explosions, proven unsubstantiated.
The Tragic Malegaon Blast Claiming 6 Lives
The Malegaon blast, striking on September 29, 2008, killed 6 and injured about 100, initiating local police FIR filed, ultimately handled by the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS). ATS portrayed 'Abhinav Bharat' as an organized crime entity since 2003.
ATS indicted Pragya Singh Thakur, Colonel Purohit, claiming the bomb-strapped bike was hers. Purohit was accused of RDX and bomb-making involvement. Seventeen individuals, including Ramesh Upadhyay, Sameer Kulkarni, Ajay Rahirkar, and Sudhakar Chaturvedi, were accused collectively.
