Malegaon blasts case saw NIA court reject RSS chief link and acquit all accused citing procedural lapses, weak UAPA sanction, and conflicting investigations by ATS and NIA.
Case in News
Malegaon blasts court rejects RSS chief link while acquitting all seven accused due to weak evidence .
Case Overview
Case Name – State of Maharashtra vs. Lt Col Prasad Purohit & Ors. (Malegaon Blasts Case, 2008)
A Special NIA Court in Mumbai, presided over by Judge A.K. Lahoti acquitted all seven accused including Pragya Thakur and Lt Col Prasad Purohit in the 2008 Malegaon Blasts case . The court highlighted serious contradictions in the investigations conducted by the Anti Terrorism Squad (ATS) and the National Investigation Agency (NIA), ultimately concluding that the prosecution failed to provide cogent, reliable and admissible evidence .
Key Aspects
The court examined multiple issues surrounding evidence conflicting investigative findings, and procedural lapses. It scrutinized witness testimonies, alleged coercion and alternative angles that were ignored .
- ATS and NIA investigations presented differing conclusions on key facts .
- Witness testimonies were inconsistent and allegedly obtained under duress by ATS .
- No direct or circumstantial evidence of the accused’s presence at the blast site .
- Allegations of a conspiracy to implicate RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat lacked legal support .
- Possible SIMI involvement was neither thoroughly investigated nor evidenced .
Legal Insights
Before giving its verdict, the court reviewed the relevant statutory provisions and principles of criminal law . It held that basic safeguards under criminal procedure were not followed and the accused could not be convicted merely on suspicion .
- Section 313, Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1973 : The statement made by the accused under this provision cannot be treated as substantive evidence unless backed by sworn testimony . The claim regarding framing of RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat lacked evidentiary backing and was recorded in a different court rendering it inadmissible here.
- Sections 15, 16, 17 & 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA) : These sections deal with terrorist acts, their punishment, raising funds and conspiracy . The court found that the UAPA sanction was legally defective, making these charges inapplicable to the accused .
- Section 43E, UAPA : This section allows the court to presume guilt if certain conditions are met such as recovery or confessional evidence . The court clarified that such presumptions cannot arise without valid sanction and credible, proven facts .
- Principle of “Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt” : The court reiterated that suspicion, however strong, cannot replace the necessity for legal proof in a criminal trial, especially in terrorism cases .
Court’s Verdict
The special court acquitted all accused, stating that the prosecution failed to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt . It rejected claims of an alleged conspiracy to frame RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat, held the UAPA sanction invalid and condemned the ATS’s coercive methods that compromised the investigation’s credibility .
Source – India Code
Read also – Criminal Procedure Code
