In a significant legal development, the Supreme Court on Thursday has temporarily stayed the Bombay High Court’s judgment from July 21, 2023, which acquitted all 12 convicts in the infamous 2006 Mumbai train blasts case.
The apex court’s decision effectively halts any immediate arrest of the accused who had been released from jail following the High Court’s verdict.
Legal Implications & Directions
A bench led by Justice M M Sundresh, in response to a plea by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, ruled that the High Court’s decision would not be treated as a legal precedent for other pending cases under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA).
Additionally, the bench issued a notice to all 12 accused individuals, following a special leave petition filed by the Maharashtra government, challenging the Bombay High Court’s ruling.
The Solicitor General emphasized that the purpose of seeking the stay was not to re-arrest the accused immediately, but rather to address concerns regarding findings in the High Court judgment that could potentially impact ongoing MCOCA cases. The Supreme Court also took note of the fact that some of the accused were Pakistani nationals.
High Court’s Acquittal Decision
The controversial July 21 judgment by the Bombay High Court overturned the previous conviction of the accused, setting aside the special MCOCA court’s sentences. Five of the accused had been handed the death penalty, while seven others were serving life sentences. The High Court concluded that the evidence against the defendants was weak and that the police investigation was flawed.
The bench, consisting of Justices Anil Kilor and Shyam Chandak, found “gaps” in the investigation and expressed doubt about the confessional statements of the accused, as well as the credibility of certain witnesses.
The bombing, which occurred on July 11, 2006, involved the detonation of seven bombs aboard Mumbai’s local trains. The attack resulted in the deaths of 189 people and left over 800 others injured. The bombs were set to explode during the evening rush hour, causing maximum casualties.
Court’s Critique Of The Investigation
The High Court cited several key flaws in the case against the accused. The judges noted that crucial evidence was improperly handled, and the test identification parade did not occur until months after the initial arrests.
Furthermore, some of the witnesses involved in the case had been previously involved in the 2002 Ghatkopar bomb blast case, and their testimonies had been discredited during cross-examination.
The Bombay High Court’s judgment also ordered the immediate release of the 12 convicts from jail, contingent on their providing a bond of Rs 25,000 each. This decision was met with dismay by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS), which had investigated the case and expressed its intention to challenge the High Court’s ruling in the Supreme Court.
Fallout For The Maharashtra ATS
The acquittal of all 12 convicts has dealt a major blow to the Mumbai ATS, which had pursued the case for nearly two decades. The ATS has maintained that it will seek to overturn the Bombay High Court’s judgment at the Supreme Court, further prolonging the legal battle.
In the original trial, the special MCOCA court had sentenced Kamal Ansari (now deceased), Mohammad Faisal Shaikh, Ehte-sham Siddiqui, Naveed Hussain Khan, and Asif Khan to death. Meanwhile, Tanveer Ahmed Ibrahim Ansari, Mohammed Majid Shafi, Shaikh Mohammed, Mohammed Sajid Margub Ansari, Muzammil Ataur Rahman Shaikh, Suhail Mehmood Shaikh, and Zameer Ahmed Shaikh were sentenced to life imprisonment.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s stay on the Bombay High Court’s acquittal of the 2006 Mumbai train blasts convicts has reopened the case for further scrutiny. With the Maharashtra government challenging the judgment and the ATS expressing its intention to appeal, the final legal resolution remains pending.
The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for how similar cases under MCOCA are handled in the future.
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International
