A special NIA court has recently issued a bailable warrant against former BJP MP Pragya Thakur, a key accused in the 2008 Malegaon blasts case.
The warrant was issued after Thakur failed to appear in court, having been absent since June 4. The warrant, set at Rs 10,000, is returnable on November 13, meaning Thakur must either attend court by that date or pay the amount to cancel the warrant.
Special judge A.K. Lahoti noted that Thakur’s legal team had repeatedly requested exemptions for her presence, submitting a photocopy of a medical certificate indicating she is undergoing treatment.
However, the original certificate was not provided, prompting the judge to emphasize the necessity of her presence during the final hearings, leading to the issuance of the bailable warrant.
This is not the first warrant issued against Thakur. The Malegaon blasts on September 29, 2008, resulted in 6 fatalities and over 100 injuries when an explosive device strapped to a motorcycle detonated near a mosque.
Thakur is considered a primary accused as the bomb was allegedly planted on her motorcycle.
The trial court is currently in the final stages of hearing the case, which recently received a bomb threat. Despite this, security measures have not been significantly increased. A threat call was reported to the Sessions Court registrar’s office during Diwali on October 31, prompting an investigation by Colaba Police.
In related developments, Sameer Kulkarni, another accused in the case, filed an application to halt the release of a film based on the Malegaon blasts. Special public prosecutor Avinash Rasal was scheduled to respond to this application but requested the court to view the film’s trailer.
The court viewed the trailer on Tuesday and will continue the review on Wednesday, when Rasal will provide his response, and the court will issue a ruling.
Kulkarni argued that the trial court had previously prohibited any media coverage, including interviews or discussions, regarding the Malegaon blasts, claiming that the film’s release would violate that order.
The ongoing legal proceedings highlight the complexities surrounding the case and the efforts to manage the implications of media portrayals of sensitive issues related to the blasts.
