Bombay High Court Delays Appeal Hearing in 2008 Malegaon Blast Case

The Bombay High Court has postponed the hearing regarding an appeal challenging the acquittal of seven individuals involved in the 2008 Malegaon blast case. The delay was prompted by concerns over incomplete details submitted by the appellants representing the families of the victims. The appeal was initially filed last week, and the hearing was scheduled for Wednesday but has now been adjourned to Thursday.

The accused in this case include notable figures such as former BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur and Lt Col Prasad Purohit, both of whom had been acquitted by a special court. The 2008 Malegaon blast, which occurred on September 29, resulted in the deaths of six individuals and injured over 100 others when an explosive device attached to a motorcycle detonated near a mosque in Malegaon, located approximately 200 kilometers from Mumbai.

During the proceedings, the appellants’ lawyer presented a chart detailing the family members of the victims. However, Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad found the submissions lacking, stating that the information did not clarify whether these family members had been examined as witnesses during the trial. The lawyer representing the victims’ families noted that Nisar Ahmed, the first appellant whose son died in the blast, was not called as a witness but was allowed to assist the prosecution.

The court expressed its dissatisfaction with the chart, labeling it “confusing” and stating, “You need to verify it properly. Whether these persons were examined or not, that is the question. The chart is incomplete.” Consequently, the hearing has been rescheduled for further review.

The ongoing appeal contests the special court’s judgment, which acquitted the seven accused, asserting that flaws in the investigation should not serve as grounds for acquittal. The petitioners argue that the conspiracy behind the blast was executed covertly, making direct evidence unattainable. They also emphasized that the trial court’s role is not merely to act as a “postman” but to actively engage in eliciting facts and summoning witnesses when necessary.

Concerns have been raised regarding the handling of the investigation by the National Investigation Agency (NIA). The appellants claim that the NIA has diluted the charges against the accused. The appeal criticizes the NIA’s approach, suggesting that the acquittal decision was flawed and should be overturned.

The special court’s ruling highlighted that mere suspicion cannot replace substantial evidence. Presiding Judge A K Lahoti stated that there was insufficient reliable evidence to convict the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. The prosecution maintained that the blast was perpetrated by right-wing extremists aiming to intimidate the local Muslim community in the sensitive area of Malegaon.

Since the arrest of the seven individuals by the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS), there have been no subsequent blasts in areas populated by the minority community, according to the appeal. The petitioners argue that the NIA’s intervention has undermined the case initially built by the ATS.

The high court’s decision to adjourn the hearing underscores the complexities involved in legal proceedings related to high-profile terrorism cases. The appeal continues to raise critical questions about the adequacy of the investigation and the rights of the victims’ families seeking justice. As this case progresses, the Bombay High Court will need to navigate these challenging legal waters on its next scheduled date.