Serial Train Blast: Mumbai Court Rejects 2006 Convict’s Plea For Action Against 3 Witnesses

FacebookFacebookTwitterTwitterEmailEmailWhatsAppWhatsAppLinkedInLinkedInShareShare

The Mumbai court recently rejected the plea filed by Ehtesham Siddiqui, the convict in the 2006 Mumbai serial train blasts, seeking to action against three prosecution witnesses.

Therefore, he claimed that the witnesses falsely testified in the case leading to his conviction.

Ehtesham Siddiqui, an alleged SIMI member, was sentenced to death in October 2015, along with 4 others, for their involvement in the 2006 serial bomb blasts that killed 188 people.

Presently, Siddiqui is lodged in Nagpur Central Jail and filed the application under Section 340 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) along with certain documents.

There he contended that after delivery of judgment, if documents establishing the falsity of evidence of a witness are brought to the notice of the court, then only the Court is competent to proceed under section 340 of CrPC.

Claiming that Siddiqui got evidence about certain witnesses on the basis of whose statements he and others were sentenced to death by the court.

Therefore, he claimed that the documents submitted along with this application would prove the falsity of the deposition of those witnesses.

The prosecution then opposed Siddiqui’s application, stating that the trial in the case lasted for 7 years and 192 witnesses were examined by them, while the defense examined 51 people. During this entire exercise, Siddiqui got ample opportunity, but nothing was brought on record to discredit the evidentiary value of the prosecution witnesses, the prosecution said, adding that the application was filed at a “belated stage”.

The special judge AM Patil, noted after hearing both sides that the court passed the judgment appreciating the evidence on record.

The judge said that, “Now, after seven years, Siddiqui filed this application and prayed to initiate action against the respondents number 1 to 3 (prosecution witnesses) under section 340 of CrPc. There is no explanation as to the delay in filing this application.”

There, the judge looked through each of the evidence put forth by Siddiqui regarding each of the witnesses and noted that the issues were being pointed out now, thus, have been addressed during the trial.

Further, the judge added that “In such circumstances, it is seen that the present application is devoid of any merit and thus it needs to be rejected.”

Meera Verma

Recent Posts

Asaduddin Owaisi Approaches Supreme Court Against Waqf Amendment Bill

Hyderabad MP and All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen Chief Asaduddin Owaisi on Friday has filed a…

6 hours ago

Rahul Gandhi Urges Law For Dedicated Budget Share To Dalits & Adivasis

Congress leader Rahul Gandhi on Friday has called for the establishment of a national law…

7 hours ago

SC Allows Jharkhand To Cut Power On Ram Navami Routes To Prevent Electrocution

The Supreme Court on Friday allowed the Jharkhand government and its power distribution company to…

8 hours ago

Delhi HC Bar Honours Justice DK Sharma As He Moves To Calcutta HC

Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma recently bid farewell to the Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA)…

8 hours ago

“No To Plea For Barring Kids Below 13 From Using Social Media: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Friday declined to entertain a public interest litigation seeking a ban…

9 hours ago

IOA Moves Delhi HC Against Order Rejecting Ad-hoc Panel For Bihar Olympic Association

The Indian Olympic Association on friday filed an appeal in the Delhi High Court, challenging…

9 hours ago