Malegaon blast case detailed judgment: Court raises doubts over Purohit’s defence that he had joined Abhinav Bharat to collect intelligence

Special Judge A K Lahoti on Thursday acquitted Purohit of all charges and six others stating that while there was strong suspicion against them, there was no reliable evidence and that mere suspicion cannot take the place of legal proof.

The court said that the investigating agencies, first the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad and then the National Investigation Agency in 2016 had alleged that Purohit was a founder member of Abhinav Bharat and had collected huge funds and utilised them for private use. On the utilisation of funds, the court said that there was no proof. But it said that there was no proof that he had joined the organisation as official duty.

“Nothing material came on record to show that, all those allegations or charges were fake, baseless and all those acts are done by the A-9 with the permission of his superior officer. Merely the prosecution failed to prove the charges levelled against the accused in the absence of cogent evidence doesn’t mean that, all the charges were baseless or without foundation,” the court said. It did not accept his argument that a sanction was required as the allegations pertained to acts of terrorism which cannot be part of official duty.

Purohit as a serving officer of the Indian Army had also faced a Court of Inquiry. The court said that as per Army rules, the evidence before the proceedings cannot be used in any court except the Inquiry. Due to the pending criminal trial, no decision of the Inquiry was pronounced.

The court referred to testimonies of Army officials, who deposed before it as prosecution and defence witnesses. It said that in these testimonies, they had not said that Purohit had permission to join Abhinav Bharat as an officer, or they had seen any documents about the permission granted to him. It said no evidence was brought to show if he had informed the military about the amount of funds he had collected.

“There is no documentary evidence on record to show that his superior authority had granted him express permission to join the said trust as a member/trustee and to collect the funds or utilise the funds. He has not pointed out any documents in that regard,” the court said.

One defence witness had said that Purohit was operating a source network to obtain intelligence inputs and he had informed his superior at an appropriate level about the inputs. The court said that there was no correspondence between the ATS and the Military Intelligence on such proof.

The court noted that after his arrest, no steps were taken by the Army to ‘protect their officer’ and said that if ‘he would have really discharged the duty under the colour of his office, there would have been protection to him’. The court said instead they kept mum at the time.

“Their own inaction shows that, they might have noticed the action taken by ATS was proper, as their senior officers had also not shown any interest to protect their own officer considering the allegations and charges levelled. It shows that they had accepted the fact of arrest at the hands of ATS was proper at the relevant time,” the court said.

It said that while Purohit in his defence had said that he was assigned duty to collect information from banned organisations like SIMI, he had not claimed that he had become a member of any such organisation.

“Becoming a member of selective organization without express permission is nothing but act done out of the purview of discharge of duty,” the court said, stating that joining an organisation as a member or trustee is different than mixing with other members to raise sources.

The court has in its judgment also noted that there is no evidence to show that Abhinav Bharat funds were used for any terrorist activities or that it was banned for any unlawful activities.