Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Wednesday adjourned till Thursday the hearing of an appeal filed by families of victims of the 2008 Malegaon blast, after finding gaps in the information submitted about them.
Appeal Against Acquittals
The appeal challenges a special court’s decision last year to acquit seven accused, including BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur and Lt Col Prasad Purohit. Six people were killed and over 100 injured in the blast that struck Malegaon in September 2008.
Court Seeks Clarity on Appellants
On Tuesday, the High Court had made it clear that “it is not an open gate for everyone” to file an appeal against acquittal, and asked whether the victims’ family members who are appealing were examined as witnesses during the trial.
Bench Finds Chart Incomplete
When the matter was heard again on Wednesday, the appellants’ lawyer submitted a chart of details. The judges, however, found it unsatisfactory.
“The chart is confusing. You need to verify it properly. Whether these persons were examined or not, that is the question. The chart is incomplete,” observed the bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad.
Details of Appellants’ Role
The lawyer explained that Nisar Ahmed, one of the appellants whose son died in the blast, was not examined as a witness. However, the trial court had allowed him to assist the prosecution during the trial. He further added that of the six appellants, only two were examined as prosecution witnesses — a point not reflected in the chart. The High Court will resume the hearing on Thursday.
Background of Blast and Trial
On September 29, 2008, an explosive strapped to a motorcycle detonated near a mosque in Malegaon, killing six people and injuring 101. The Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) initially arrested 11 persons. A decade later, only seven faced trial, while others were discharged. The NIA took over the probe in 2011.
Special Court’s Verdict
On July 31, special judge AK Lahoti acquitted all seven accused observing that there was no “reliable and cogent evidence” against the accused that proved the case beyond a reasonable doubt.
The families, however, contended that the trial court wrongly acted as a “post office” and failed to test the prosecution’s case against missing or hostile evidence.
Also Watch:
Claims of Dilution and Pressure
The appeal claims that faulty investigation or procedural defects should not have resulted in acquittals, especially in a terror case. It also alleges that the NIA deliberately diluted the case.
The petition points to former special prosecutor Rohini Salian’s public statement that she was pressured to go slow against the accused. Her replacement, the petition claims, lacked experience in terror trials.
To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/
