2 min read
Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram
Journalism of Courage
Premium
This is an archive article published on February 17, 2017
Malegaon blast: NIA objects to Purohit’s bail, cites evidence
Purohit’s lawyer, Shrikanth Shivde, had earlier argued that the sanction for prosecution obtained under Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) was defective.
Malegaon blast accused Lt Col Prasad Purohit. (Source: File Photo)
The NIA on Thursday opposed Lt Col Prasad Purohit’s bail plea and told the Bombay High Court that there is prima facie evidence against him in the 2008 Malegaon blast case. The agency denied any procedural flaw in arresting the accused.
Purohit’s lawyer, Shrikanth Shivde, had earlier argued that the sanction for prosecution obtained under Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) was defective. He had said that as per the law, an independent officer is to be appointed to conduct a review before sending it for sanction. Shivde maintained that NIA bypassed this while obtaining the sanction.
NIA’s counsel Sandesh Patil told the court Thursday, “The state government’s sanction was obtained for prosecution and as far as the sanction by an independent authority is concerned, it should not be looked into at the bail stage as such procedures are examined at the trial stage.”
Shivde had also claimed that the Anti-Terrorism Squad planted the RDX that Purohit had allegedly procured days after he was taken into custody. He added that there is no prima facie case against Purohit.
Patil said that even if the sanction obtained under UAPA is under question, there is enough evidence to prove a prima facie case against Purohit under other serious acts. “He is also charged under the Explosives and Arms Act,” said Patil.
Advertisement
Loading Taboola...
Live Blog
Top Stories
Advertisement