2008 Malegaon bomb blast: special court acquits all 7 accused, says strong suspicion, but not enough to punish them

The case relates to the blast that occurred on September 29, 2008, in Malegaon, about 100 km northeast of Nashik in Maharashtra. The blast, which took place during Ramzan in an area with a sizable Muslim population, killed six people and injured nearly 100 others.

“I am fully aware of the degree of agony, frustration and trauma caused to society at large, more particularly the family of victims, by the fact that (a) heinous crime of this nature has gone unpunished. However, law does not permit the court to convict the accused solely on the basis of moral conviction or suspicion,” Special Judge Lahoti said.

“Terrorism has no religion because no religion in the world preaches violence. The court of law is not supposed to proceed based on popular or predominant public perceptions about the matter,” the Special Judge said.

The court said the more serious the offence, higher the degree of proof needed to convict, and evidence beyond reasonable doubt was not available in this case. The court, however, ordered compensation of Rs 2 lakh to the families of the victims, and Rs 50,000 to the injured to be given by the state government.

Apart from Thakur and Purohit, the other accused include Major Ramesh Upadhyay (retired), Ajay Rahirkar, Sameer Kulkarni, Sudhakar Chaturvedi and Sudhakar Dhardwivedi. They were cleared of all charges, including criminal conspiracy and murder under the IPC and sections of the anti-terror Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

Most of the accused were out on bail from 2017, after being arrested in 2008 by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS). Rahirkar was granted bail in 2011 by the Bombay High Court. The National Investigation Agency (NIA) took over the probe in 2016.

Following the verdict, Special Public Prosecutor Avinash Rasal, representing the NIA, said that a decision on filing an appeal will be taken after the judgment copy is studied.

Advocate Shahid Nadeem, representing Nisar Ahmed Haji Sayyed Bilal who lost his son in the blast, said the case highlights “significant failures” on the part of the NIA. “Witnesses turned hostile during the trial yet the NIA did not pursue perjury charges against any of them despite requests from the victims. The victims will pursue legal remedies by filing an independent appeal in the Bombay High Court after reviewing the judgment,” Nadeem said.

The acquitted accused told the court that they had suffered for 17 years and their reputations were tarnished due to the allegations. “I was summoned and I went to the ATS as I respect the law. I was detained illegally for 13 days and tortured. I was living my life as a sanyasi and was labelled a terrorist,” Thakur told the court.

Lt Col Purohit thanked the court for giving him “an opportunity to serve my organisation and my nation with the same conviction as I was serving before my arrest”.

In its order, the court said, “The testimony of the prosecution witnesses is riddled with material inconsistencies and contradictions. Such discrepancies undermine the credibility of the prosecution case. Though there was strong suspicion on the accused, it cannot take the place of legal proof.”

The NIA did not provide evidence to prove that the accused were part of conspiracy meetings as material witnesses did not support its case, the court said.

The investigators had alleged that in meetings held in Faridabad, Bhopal, Ujjain and other locations, the accused had participated in discussions on planning a “revenge” attack and the formation of a “Hindu rashtra” with a separate Constitution and flag, with a “government in exile” either in Israel or Thailand.

None of these allegations were proven in court.

Of the 323 witnesses examined, 39 turned hostile, mostly related to the alleged conspiracy meetings. “The witnesses have retracted from their earlier statements given to the ATS. Therefore, neither conspiracy nor the meetings are proved,” the court said.

The witnesses had told court that they were coerced into giving false statements by ATS officers. During further probe, the NIA had re-recorded statements of some of the witnesses, pointing to contradictions in the ATS probe.

The court also said there were two sanctions obtained to charge the accused under UAPA but both were “defective and invalid” as there was no “application of judicious mind”.

The ATS had suspected that an improvised explosive device had been planted on an LML Freedom motorcycle to cause the blast. According to the court, while it was proved that the explosive was “placed on” the motorcycle, the prosecution failed to establish that the bomb was “fitted” inside the two-wheeler. It also said the prosecution could not prove that the motorcycle belonged to Thakur or was in her possession or used by her, as she had become a “sanyasi” two years before the blast and had “renounced the material world”.

The court also said that other evidence, including intercepted calls and electronic gadgets of the accused, did not prove the conspiracy as proper procedure was not followed. The ATS had claimed that Purohit had founded an organisation named Abhinav Bharat, from where funds were collected for terrorist activity. The court said there was no proof of this claim, either.