Malegaon blast verdict: Top 10 things NIA court said

All the seven accused in the September 2008 Malegaon blast case in which six persons were killed and 101 others injured have been acquitted by a special National Investigation Agency (NIA) court in Mumbai on Thursday (July 31), with the judge pointing out several loopholes in the prosecution’s case and the investigation and stated that the accused persons deserved the benefit of doubt.

The accused in the case comprised BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur, Lt Col Prasad Purohit, Ramesh Upadhyay, Ajay Rahirkar, Sudhakar Dwivedi, Sudhakar Chaturvedi, and Sameer Kulkarni. They were all charged for committing a terrorist act under provisions of the UAPA and relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act.

Top 10 highlights of verdict

1) Flagging several loopholes in the prosecution's case and the investigation, Special Judge AK Lahoti, assigned to hear cases of the National Investigation Agency (NIA), said that the accused persons in the case deserved the benefit of doubt.

"Upon comprehensive evaluation, the prosecution has failed to bring any cogent evidence, and the evidence is riddled with inconsistencies," stated the judge as quoted by the Bar and Bench.

2) The court further stated that the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) did not apply to the case, adding “All bail bonds of the accused are cancelled and sureties are discharged".

3) As for the charges against former BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur, the court said it was not established that the motorbike used in the blast was registered in the name of Thakur, as claimed by the prosecution. It further stated that it had also not been established that the blast was carried out by the bomb allegedly planted on the bike.

"Prosecution proved that a blast occurred in Malegaon but failed to prove that a bomb was placed in that motorcycle," Judge Abhay Lahoti said.

Also Read: Pragya Thakur, 6 others acquitted in Malegaon blast case; ‘can’t convict on moral evidence’: NIA court

4) The court also mentioned that there was some manipulation of medical certificates. "Court has come to a conclusion that injured people were not 101 but 95 only, and there was manipulation in some medical certificates," the court said, as quoted by ANI.

5) The court further said that there is no evidence of storing or assembling the explosives in Prasad Purohit's residence, who was another accused in the case.

6) The NIA court pointed out that the investigation officer neither got a sketch done at the blast site while doing panchnama nor did he collect any fingerprints from the spot.

"No sketch of spot was done by the investigation officer while doing panchnama. No finger print, dump data, or anything else was collected from the spot. The samples were contaminated, so reports can't be conclusive and relied upon," the court said.

7) As for the alleged role of the Abhinav Bharat organisation, the court said that there was no evidence of the funds of the organisation being used for terror activities.

Also Read: Maharashtra: Judge conducting trial in 2008 Malegaon blast case transferred

8) According to the Bar and Bench, the court observed that although there were financial transactions between Purohit and another accused, Ajay Rahirkar, as officials of Abhinav Bharat, Purohit only used the amount for the construction of his house and LIC policy and not for any terrorist activity.

9) The NIA court has also ordered the Maharashtra government to award ₹2 lakh compensation to the families of the victims and ₹50,000 compensation to the injured.

10) The court stated that terrorism has no religion but conviction cannot take place on moral grounds, reported the Bar and Bench.

(With agency inputs)