Six relatives of victims who lost their lives in the 2008 Malegaon bomb blast have moved the Bombay High Court, challenging the acquittal of 7 accused by a special court.
The appeal, filed on Monday by Nisar Ahmed Sayyed Bilal and 5 others through their lawyer Mateen Shaikh, seeks to set aside the judgment delivered by the National Investigation Agency special court.
The accused include high-profile figures such as former BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur and Lt Col Prasad Purohit, along with Major Ramesh Upadhyay (retired), Ajay Rahirkar, Sudhakar Dwivedi, Sudhakar Chaturvedi, and Sameer Kulkarni.
Background
On September 29, 2008, a powerful explosive device attached to a motorcycle detonated near a mosque in Malegaon, a town about 200 km from Mumbai in Nashik district, Maharashtra. The blast resulted in the deaths of 6 people and injuries to 101 others. Malegaon, a communally sensitive town, was deeply affected by the violence and loss.
The prosecution had alleged that the blast was orchestrated by right-wing extremist groups, intending to instil fear and terrorise the Muslim community.
Challenge To The Acquittal
The petitioners in the High Court argued that the special court’s acquittal order, passed on July 31, was “wrong and bad in law” and must be quashed. They contended that the judgment ignored the gravity of the crime and dismissed vital pieces of evidence that pointed towards the accused.
In its defense, the NIA court had observed that “mere suspicion cannot replace real proof” and that there was no “reliable and cogent evidence” to warrant a conviction beyond reasonable doubt.
The special court, led by Justice A K Lahoti, pointed to several gaps and inconsistencies in the investigation and prosecution’s case. The judgment stated that the accused deserved the benefit of doubt, as the prosecution failed to establish the charges conclusively.
This reasoning formed the basis for acquitting all 7 accused, including Pragya Singh Thakur and Lt Col Purohit, who had been at the center of political and public scrutiny for years.
Next Steps
The petitioners seek judicial intervention to reopen the matter and question the acquittal. They argue that justice has not been served for the victims and that the court must take cognizance of the prosecution’s allegations and the broader impact on communal harmony.
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International
