Pragya Thakur, Prasad Purohit, and others acquitted: Who are the seven accused of Malegaon 2008 blast case?

Pragya Thakur has previously been elected as an MP from Bhopal. (X/sadhvipragyag)

ACCUSATION: The ATS claimed that a golden-coloured LML Freedom motorcycle, on which the explosive device was planted, belonged to Thakur. The ATS accused her of having participated in conspiracy meetings, where she was alleged to have agreed to provide the individuals who would be needed to execute the plan.

The ATS claimed that Thakur had links with wanted accused Ramchandra Kalsangra alias Ramji, also a resident of MP, who it said was using the motorcycle at the time, and had planted the bomb.

The ATS alleged that Thakur had introduced Kalsangra and Sandeep Dange, another wanted accused, to the other co-accused in July 2008, a couple of months before the bombing.

DEFENCE: Thakur maintained that she was not involved in the conspiracy, and alleged that the ATS had illegally detained and tortured her. She accused the then Congress government of arresting her wrongfully.

While lodged in Byculla jail, Thakur complained repeatedly about her health, and claimed that she was suffering from cancer. Her bail applications on health grounds were rejected by various courts.

TURN IN THE CASE: In 2016, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) which had taken over the case from the Maharashtra ATS some years previously, filed a chargesheet, saying there was not enough evidence to proceed against Thakur.

The NIA claimed that the motorcycle used in the bombing was not in the possession of Thakur and had not been used by her from long before the blast. It said that a key witness who had told the ATS that he had attended the conspiracy meetings, had re-recorded his statement before the NIA, denying any such knowledge.

The special court, however, refused to accept the NIA’s contention. It said that there was prima facie evidence to put Thakur on trial, since she “owned” the motorcycle.

Thakur was granted bail in April 2017 by the Bombay High Court. Throughout the trial, Thakur through her lawyers has maintained that she is innocent, and there is no evidence that she had knowledge of the blast.

ENTRY INTO POLITICS: In 2019, Thakur was chosen by the BJP as its candidate for the Parliament, even though she continued to face terror allegations. She was elected to Lok Sabha from Bhopal.

During her term in Parliament, Thakur described Mahatma Gandhi’s killer as a “deshbhakt” (patriot), causing outrage. Thakur apologised, but Prime Minister Narendra Modi said that he would not be able to forgive her “from his heart”.

Thakur also said that the late ATS chief Hemant Karkare, who was leading the investigation when she was arrested, had died due to her “curse”. Karkare was murdered on November 26, 2011, by Pakistani terrorists who attacked Mumbai.

Thakur was not given a ticket by the BJP for the 2024 Lok Sabha election, but she remains a member of the party.

RAMESH UPADHYAY

ACCUSATION: A retired Major of the Indian Army, Ramesh Upadhyay, was the fourth person to be arrested in the case. The ATS claimed that in a meeting in Faridabad in 2008, Upadhyay had agreed, along with co-accused Lt Col Prasad Purohit, on the idea of a separate constitution for a “Hindu Rashtra”.

The ATS also claimed that in a meeting held at Bhosla Military School in Nashik, Upadhyay was elected as working president of the Abhinav Bharat organisation.

NIA’S CASE: The NIA in its chargesheet maintained that there was sufficient evidence to prosecute Upadhyay. Apart from his alleged participation in the meetings, the NIA said there was proof of his role in the form of “legally intercepted calls” among the co-accused.

Among these calls was one that was recorded on October 23, 2008, after Thakur’s arrest. The ATS claimed that in one of the calls Purohit told Upadhyay that the “cat is out of the bag”, which it said was a reference to Thakur’s arrest. During another call, it was allegedly mentioned that “Singh has sung a song quite a bit”, which the ATS claimed was a reference to Thakur’s interrogation.

DEFENCE: Upadhyay submitted through his lawyers that the interception of the calls was in violation of laws and his personal liberty. He alleged that the ATS had fabricated evidence, and that witnesses had deposed about being forced into giving statements against him and others, disproving the allegations.

HAND AT POLITICS: During his nine-year incarceration as an undertrial, Upadhyay contested state Assembly elections in 2012 from his native town in Uttar Pradesh, Ballia, on an Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha ticket, which he lost.

He contested again unsuccessfully in 2017 and in 2022, and was in the first list of candidates of the JD(U) before being dropped.

LT COL PRASAD PUROHIT

ACCUSATION: A serving Army officer, Prasad Purohit was arrested by the ATS in 2008, claiming his role in founding the Abhinav Bharat organisation in 2006, through which funds were allegedly collected and the conspiracy planned.

Purohit was at the centre of the case, with the ATS claiming that he had actively participated in the conspiracy meetings and had given speeches on the need to execute the plan, including as “revenge”. He was also accused of having discussed the need for a separate constitution and a flag, and the idea of forming a government in exile in Israel or Thailand.

The ATS relied on intercepted conversations with co-accused Ramesh Upadhyay (mentioned above) which the NIA too had claimed as evidence, showing their alleged complicity in the blast.

DEFENCE: Purohit claimed in bail applications that documents from the Army would show that he had participated in the meetings in discharge of his duty as a Military Intelligence officer for collecting intelligence on extremism and creating new sources.

While the ATS had claimed that RDX for the blast was procured by Purohit when he was posted in Jammu & Kashmir, Purohit had relied on documents from the Ministry of Defence to show that it was impossible to do so, and that he was working in an intelligence unit and did not have access to any explosives.

Purohit also relied on the NIA chargesheet filed in 2016 which cast doubt on the recovery of RDX from co-accused Sudhakar Chaturvedi’s home.

During the trial, some of the witnesses, including Army officials, deposing on Purohit’s role, said that the ATS had forced and threatened them into giving statements. Purohit rejoined the Army after his release in 2017 after the Supreme Court granted him bail.

AJAY RAHIRKAR

ACCUSATION: The Pune based businessman was arrested by the ATS on November 2, 2008. The ATS said that he was the treasurer of Abhinav Bharat, and that the organisation was formed in Pune in 2006 at his address.

The ATS claimed that he had participated in a “conspiracy” meeting. He was also booked for allegedly collecting funds for Abhinav Bharat from various persons and disbursing them to procure weapons on the directions of accused Prasad Purohit.

BAIL FROM COURT: The Bombay High Court granted bail to Rahirkar two years after he was arrested on November 9, 2011.

The court said that while the ATS had alleged that he had attended a meeting, there is nothing in the alleged conversation from the meeting to show his involvement, and that the purchase of arms was not linked to the blast.

Rahirkar has claimed that he was falsely implicated and had nothing to do with the blast.

SUDHAKAR CHATURVEDI ALIAS CHANAKYA

ACCUSATION: Chaturvedi was a source of the Military Intelligence officials of the Indian Army. The ATS claimed that he was working full-time with Abhinav Bharat.

He resided in Deolali in Nashik at the time of the offence. The ATS claimed that traces of RDX were found during their search of his rented home on November 25, 2008. It also relied on a forensic report that the explosive ingredients detected at the blast site were similar to the samples seized from his house.

NIA’S CASE: The NIA, however, said in its chargesheet filed in 2016 that it had re-recorded the statements of two Army officers who had deposed in the Court of Inquiry carried out by the Army.

They told the NIA that on November 3, 2008 – before the ATS search – they had seen an ATS officer in Chaturvedi’s house, and that he was rubbing something on the floor. The NIA said in its chargesheet that this created doubts about the evidentiary value of the forensic report on the traces of the RDX found at Chaturvedi’s home.

The ATS officer who deposed in the case as a witness, denied the allegations of planting and said that they were first made only in 2015 as an “afterthought” by the accused to save themselves.

The NIA chargesheet said that despite the shortcomings in the evidence, there was sufficient evidence to prosecute Chaturvedi. It claimed that he had organised and conducted various meetings with the accused, and was in agreement with other accused on the formation of a government in exile, Aryawrat, against the Indian government.

But the witnesses related to the meetings were declared hostile and did not depose anything about Chaturvedi’s participation in them during the trial.

SUDHAKAR DHAR DWIVEDI ALIAS DAYANAND PANDEY ALIAS SWAMI AMRUTANAND DEVTIRTH

ACCUSATION: Dwivedi was the 10th accused to be arrested in the case in 2008.

The ATS claimed that crucial evidence was recovered, as a laptop seized from him had audio and video recordings of some of the conspiracy meetings held by the accused. The ATS had also recorded voice samples of the accused and a witness to confirm their presence in the meetings.

The ATS claimed that in a meeting held in Nashik in August 2007, Dwivedi and Purohit had shown a CD containing alleged atrocities on Hindus, and in another meeting in January 2008 in Faridabad, a discussion was held on creating a separate constitution and flag. In a meeting in Bhopal in April 2008, the accused allegedly agreed that they needed to take revenge against Muslims by exploding a bomb at Malegaon, a town with a large Muslim population.

NIA’S CLAIM: The ATS had claimed that Dwivedi had revealed these in a confession statement under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Act (MCOCA). After the Act was dropped following the NIA’s submissions that the manner in which it was invoked by the ATS was flawed, and the special court accepted this stand, the statements were inadmissible.

The accused had also claimed that he was coerced and threatened into giving a false, fabricated statement and that the ATS had arrested him in a case of mistaken identity – as he is not Dayanand Pandey, but a Shankaracharya.

The NIA in its chargesheet claimed that there was material against him in the form of the recordings in the laptop and voice samples report from the forensic sciences laboratory.

DEFENCE: While the prosecution claims that the recordings can be relied on, Dwivedi and other co-accused have said that the laptop was not sealed and its contents cannot be relied on as there is a possibility of tampering.

Dwivedi also took a stand during the trial that the injuries and deaths were not caused by a blast at all. He had also filed a plea before the court seeking to be called Swami Amrutanand or Shankaracharya, stating that he had renounced the world when he took sanyaas, which the court had dismissed.

SAMEER KULKARNI

ACCUSATION: A social worker from Pune, Kulkarni was the fifth person to be arrested in the case in 2008.

Kulkarni appeared in person to defend himself during the trial, and regularly attended all hearings throughout the trial. Kulkarni defended himself as being falsely implicated by the ATS first and then the NIA, which in its chargesheet in 2016 claimed that there was sufficient evidence to proceed against him.

The allegations against Kulkarni were that he was in agreement with the other co-accused on the formation of “Aryawrat” and had participated in discussions on taking revenge on Muslims.

The ATS had also claimed that on October 24, 2008, after the first arrest in the case of Pragya Singh Thakur, co-accused Prasad Purohit had sent Kulkarni a text message about how the ATS had entered his house in Pune and directed him to delete his numbers from his phone.

The ATS claimed that this showed complicity. The NIA in its chargesheet too relied on this and other intercepted conversations between the accused to claim that there is evidence to prosecute Kulkarni.

DEFENCE: He denied his involvement, claiming that he was illegally detained and arrested by the ATS officials and that evidence was tampered with.

Kulkarni also challenged the validity of the sanction under the anti-terror law, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in the case. He argued that there was no sanction granted by a competent authority to invoke the Act and hence the trial could not have proceeded.

The Bombay High Court upheld the special court’s order which had rejected the pleas of the accused challenging the validity of the sanction. The Supreme Court last year declined to interfere with the High Court’s order.

TWO WANTED ACCUSED

The ATS and NIA also named two men as wanted accused who were never arrested: Ramchandra Kalsangra alias Ramji, and Sandeep Dange, both of whom were referred to in the NIA chargesheet as “RSS workers”.

It is alleged that both men, residents of Indore in Madhya Pradesh, were active members in the conspiracy. It is alleged that Kalsangra was using the LML Freedom motorcycle on which the IED was placed for the blast at Malegaon.

The ATS claimed that Thakur had introduced the two men to the other co-accused. Kalsangra’s role was alleged to have been to plant the bomb.

The two men are proclaimed offenders, wanted in other cases as well, including a blast on the Samjhauta Express train in 2007, in which 68, mostly Pakistani citizens, were killed.

A suspended police inspector had claimed in 2016 that the two men were “killed” by the ATS in 2008. Kalsangra’s kin had sought a probe into the allegations, but so far no revelation has been made about their whereabouts. A reward for any information on them has been published on the central agencies’ websites.