Rameshwaram Cafe blast: NIA registers FIR on MHA directive, to take over probe soon

The central agency’s FIR was registered on Monday on the basis of a provision in the NIA Act of 2008 which allows the Centre to order the agency to register a suo motu case even without a reference or receipt of information from the state government.

“There is a provision in the NIA law that allows the registration of a case on the orders of the central government. This has been done and the case will be formally handed over to the NIA in the next couple of days and until then the Bengaluru police will continue the probe,” a senior officer of the Karnataka Police said.

Under section 6, clause 5 of the NIA Act, which outlines the rules for investigation of scheduled offences: “if the Central Government is of the opinion that a Scheduled Offence has been committed which is required to be investigated under this Act, it may, suo motu, direct the Agency to investigate the said offence”.

With the Bengaluru police invoking terrorism clauses under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) of 1967 in an FIR registered with the HAL police station soon after the bomb blast at the Rameshwaram Cafe, the case involves a scheduled offence that the NIA is mandated to probe, a senior officer of the Karnataka Police said.

On Monday an inspector general of police (IGP), a deputy inspector general (DIG) and a superintendent of police (SP) of the NIA met Karnataka Director General of Police Alok Mohan and Bengaluru Police Commissioner B Dayananda to discuss the handing over of the case.

“The NIA has registered an FIR. The Bengaluru police are still conducting the investigations until the formal process of handing over the case is completed. There will be a meeting of NIA and Bengaluru police officers in the next few days to exchange notes on the progress of the investigations since March 1,” the commissioner said.

The new NIA FIR incorporates the facts stated in the FIR filed by the Bengaluru police at the HAL police station on March 1 under the UAPA law.

Earlier an FIR was registered soon after the incident on March 1 at the HAL police station on the basis of a complaint filed by K V Rajesh, a floor supervisor at the cafe. The FIR was registered under terrorism clauses of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act of 1967 as well as the Indian Penal Code section for attempt to murder and sections of the Explosive Substances Act.

The FIR says that between 12.50 pm and 1 pm, a loud explosion was heard in the hand wash area of the cafe which is near the customer seating area. Due to the impact of the explosion, the tarpaulin shelter attached to the window outside the eatery was torn, the roof of the hotel damaged, and the windows were shattered.

“Later when the complainant carefully inspected the place, all the tiles that were placed on the iron pillar of the balcony were torn off, iron bolts, washers and other things were scattered in the surrounding area, and there were blast marks on the wall and tiles of the balcony. Several places, including the roof of the hotel, were found to be damaged due to the intensity of the blast,” the FIR stated.

Early investigations in the blast case have indicated possible links to two terrorism cases that are currently being probed by the NIA in Karnataka. The IED was designed using almost the same equipment – timer, detonator, batteries, explosives – and the same internal structure as IEDs linked to a 2022 bomb blast case in Mangaluru and another in Shivamogga that year.

“The investigation is likely to be long drawn. The NIA may be better equipped to conduct the probe when it is long drawn on account of the involvement of modules that may already be under investigation from past incidents,” a Karnataka Police officer said.