In a significant turn of events, all seven accused in the 2008 Malegaon blast case, including former BJP MP Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur and Lt Colonel Prasad Shrikant Purohit, have been acquitted by a special National Investigation Agency (NIA) court. The verdict, delivered nearly 17 years after the deadly attack, brings an end to a long and politically charged legal battle. The court cited defective sanction orders and lapses in the investigation as key reasons for the acquittal, stating that the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) could not be invoked.

The courtroom was packed as the verdict was announced, with all accused present as per the court's direction. The 2008 Malegaon blast, which occurred on September 29, 2008, near a mosque in Malegaon, Maharashtra, claimed six lives and injured over 100 people. The incident took place during the holy month of Ramzan and ahead of the Hindu festival of Navratri, further fueling the communal sensitivity of the case.

The NIA had sought "commensurate punishment" for the accused. However, the court pointed to serious lapses in the investigation, including the absence of crucial evidence and inconclusive forensic reports. The court also noted there was no proof that the bomb was on a motorcycle. Charges under the UAPA, the Arms Act, and the Indian Penal Code (IPC) were dropped due to a lack of sufficient evidence.

During the trial, the prosecution examined 323 witnesses, but 34 of them turned hostile, significantly weakening the prosecution's case. The case, initially investigated by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS), was later transferred to the NIA in 2011. In 2016, the NIA filed a supplementary charge sheet, dropping charges against several accused, including Sadhvi Pragya, citing insufficient evidence under stringent anti-terror laws. However, the court rejected Sadhvi Pragya's discharge plea, and she stood trial along with the other accused.

The special NIA court also directed compensation of ₹2 lakh to the families of each of the six deceased and ₹50,000 to each injured victim.

Sadhvi Pragya has faced warrants in the past for not attending court proceedings, citing health reasons. The court had stated that the main accused must be present in court as the case was in its final stages.

The verdict has evoked varied reactions, given the case's history and the involvement of individuals with political affiliations. The case has been linked to debates around "Hindu terror" and "saffron terrorism". With the acquittal of all accused, the focus shifts to the implications of the court's observations regarding the investigation and the evidence presented.