The Hindu: Published on 4th August 2025.
Why in News?
On July 31, 2025, a Special National Investigation Agency (NIA) Court acquitted all seven accused in the 2008 Malegaon bomb blast case. The verdict attracted national attention due to the high-profile nature of the accused, including BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur and Army Lt. Col. Prasad Purohit, and the serious allegations involving terrorism, religious extremism, and procedural lapses.
Background:
Date of Incident: September 29, 2008, during the month of Ramzan.
Location: Malegaon, Maharashtra – a communally sensitive town.
Nature of Incident: A bomb, concealed in an LML Freedom motorcycle, exploded near a transport company.
Casualties: 6 people killed, 95 injured, and extensive property damage.
Initial Investigation: Carried out by Nashik Rural Police and Mumbai ATS.
Case Transfer: In 2011, transferred to the NIA.
Accused: Originally 14 people were arrested; charges dropped against 7, trial continued against 7, including:
Key Allegations:
Accused allegedly conspired to target a Muslim locality.
Conspiracy meetings reportedly held under the leadership of Pragya Thakur.
ATS claimed RDX used in the bomb was procured by Col. Purohit from his posting in Jammu & Kashmir.
Confessional statements were recorded under MCOCA, later dropped.
Key Issues in the Trial:
Confession Admissibility: Confessions recorded under MCOCA became inadmissible after MCOCA was dropped in 2016.
Witness Retractions: Several key witnesses, including Army officers, retracted their statements citing coercion.
Forensic Weaknesses: No conclusive scientific evidence on bomb placement in the motorcycle.
Procedural Lapses:
Improper sanctioning of UAPA and MCOCA.
Sanction under UAPA given without consulting the investigating officer.
Court's Findings:
Insufficient Evidence: No credible direct or circumstantial evidence against any accused.
No Direct Link:
Pragya Thakur: Not in "conscious possession" of the motorcycle.
Col. Purohit: Documentary proof of his involvement in Abhinav Bharat, but no direct link to the blast.
Expert Testimony Flawed: Forensic expert’s testimony dismissed as “guesswork” with no scientific basis.
Legal Reasoning:
MCOCA Dropped: Since it was dropped, confessions under it became inadmissible.
UAPA Sanction Flawed: Sanctioning authority did not apply judicial mind, so reverse burden provisions of UAPA could not be applied.
The court emphasized due process and burden of proof, ruling that in absence of credible evidence, convictions cannot be sustained.
Impact and Reactions:
Political Impact:
BJP leaders hailed the verdict as a vindication.
Opposition parties criticized alleged misuse of investigative powers and "soft-pedaling" of terrorism cases.
Victims’ Families: Expressed dismay, citing "failure of justice"; plan to appeal in Bombay High Court.
Legal Experts: Highlighted that the judgment pointed to systemic investigative failures.
What Happens Next?
Victims’ Appeal: Affected families intend to challenge the acquittal in a higher court.
State Government's Role: Under pressure to file an appeal, similar to the response after the 2006 Mumbai train blasts acquittals.
Future of Case: Likely to be revisited in Bombay High Court, and may even reach Supreme Court, depending on legal strategy.
Wider significance:
This case shows that:
Commonwealth Games 2022: India Medal Tally
Read MoreFrom ’conclave’ to ’white smoke,’ a glossary of terms used in a papal transition:
Read MoreWhy Netanyahu accepted a ceasefire with Hezbollah:
Read MoreSri Lankan economic crisis
Read MoreJapan back to long-term LNG deals on AI boom, energy plan:
Read More