Mumbai: The Maharashtra government has filed an appeal in the Supreme Court challenging the Bombay High Court’s ruling to acquit all 12 defendants in the 2006 train blasts case from 7/11. The Supreme Court has decided to schedule the case for a hearing on 24 July.
The explosions that took place on July 11, 2006, resulted in the deaths of more than 180 individuals and wounded many others throughout Mumbai’s suburban train system.
The Bombay High Court has annulled the 2015 convictions made by a special court, indicating that the prosecution did not substantiate the allegations. The judges observed that the specific kind of bombs used hadn’t been determined, and the evidence provided was inadequate for a conviction.
The Bombay High Court acquitted all the accused in the 2006 Mumbai train blasts case, overturning the 2015 special court judgment that had convicted several men, including five sentenced to death. The High Court criticized the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) for failing to provide credible evidence to support the charges against the accused. The bombings on July 11, 2006, resulted in 189 deaths and 824 injuries, prompting an extensive investigation by the ATS.
In its decision, the High Court pointed to various issues with the prosecution's case, particularly the reliability of witness testimonies and the validity of confessions obtained under duress. The court noted that many witnesses, such as taxi drivers and individuals claiming to have seen the bombings, failed to provide credible and timely evidence. For instance, the taxi drivers did not report their encounters until months after the blasts, and discrepancies in their testimony further undermined their credibility.
The court found the confessional statements of the accused untrustworthy, suggesting they were obtained through torture. The prosecution's inability to properly handle and seal the confiscated explosives weakened the evidence, preventing the identification of the bomb's materials. Judges criticized the false sense of justice from the conviction, asserting it overlooked the actual threat from others at large.
The case's shortcomings included an overreliance on confessions and questionable eyewitness identification. Procedural irregularities, like improper Test Identification Parade conduct, further led to case dismissal. The High Court ruled the ATS failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, stressing the importance of a fair justice system. This case highlights the significance of maintaining evidentiary standards and the challenges in terrorism prosecutions, emphasizing the need for thorough investigations and reliable evidence.
