Mumbai: Abhinav Bharat, a right-wing organisation reportedly founded in 2006, came under national scrutiny after its alleged involvement in the 2008 Malegaon blast. The group, which initially presented itself as a patriotic and cultural organisation, was accused of turning into a radical platform for individuals who propagated extremist Hindutva ideologies. Several of its founding members and affiliates, including Lt. Col. Prasad Purohit and Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, were accused in the Malegaon blast case, triggering a nationwide political storm.
ATS Claimed Abhinav Bharat Orchestarted Blast
The Malegaon blast took place on September 29, 2008, when an explosive-laden motorcycle detonated near Bhikku Chowk in Malegaon, killing six people and injuring over 100. Initial investigations were carried out by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS), which later transferred the case to the National Investigation Agency (NIA). The ATS claimed that Abhinav Bharat had orchestrated the attack as part of a larger conspiracy to avenge jihadi terror strikes and establish a Hindu Rashtra.
The NIA, in its supplementary chargesheet, maintained that the accused were part of Abhinav Bharat and had planned the attack during meetings held in Faridabad and Bhopal. However, during the trial, several key witnesses turned hostile and the court found the prosecution’s claims unsubstantiated.
No Funds Of Abhinav Bharat Used For Terrorist Activities
Today, the special NIA court in Mumbai acquitted all seven accused in the case, including Purohit and Thakur after 17 years. While Abhinav Bharat was believed to be central to the conspiracy, the court said there was no concrete evidence to prove that the organisation's funds were used for any terror activity. The court observed that although Purohit was a trustee of Abhinav Bharat and used the group’s funds for personal expenses like house construction and LIC payments, there was no proof linking the funds to the Malegaon blast.
Court Raps ATS Over Lapses In Probe
The court also highlighted serious lapses in the investigation. It ruled that the evidence collected by ATS, including injury certificates and forensic material, was unreliable. The court noted that the site of the blast was contaminated and that the panchnama was faulty. There was no evidence of who planted the bomb or that the motorcycle belonged to Thakur. Given the weak and manipulated evidence, the court said it was unsafe to convict the accused and gave them the benefit of the doubt.
