A special National Investigation Agency (NIA) court in Mumbai acquitted all seven accused in the 2008 Malegaon blast case, citing a lack of cogent evidence. Special Judge A.K. Lahoti stated that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The judge also highlighted the failure to prove that the bomb was fitted on the motorcycle in question, suggesting it could have been placed there later.
The blast, which occurred on September 29, 2008, in Malegaon, Maharashtra, killed six people and injured over 100. The incident took place near a mosque during the holy month of Ramadan, a time of fasting for the Muslim community. It was suspected that the perpetrators chose this timing to incite communal tensions.
Among those acquitted were Pragya Singh Thakur, a former BJP MP, and Lt Col Prasad Purohit. The other acquitted individuals include Major (retired) Ramesh Upadhyay, Ajay Rahirkar, Sudhakar Dwivedi, Sudhakar Chaturvedi, and Sameer Kulkarni. They faced charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA), and the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The prosecution's case hinged on the allegation that the motorcycle used in the blast belonged to Pragya Singh Thakur. However, the court found that the prosecution failed to provide conclusive evidence linking the bike to her. Judge Lahoti noted that the chassis number of the motorcycle was wiped out, and the engine number was under doubt. The court also pointed out that Thakur had become a 'sanyasi' (renunciant) two years before the blast, relinquishing material possessions.
Another key aspect of the prosecution's case was the alleged procurement of RDX by Lt Col Prasad Purohit from Kashmir and its assembly into a bomb. The court found no evidence to support these claims, stating there was no proof of RDX storage in Purohit's house or that he assembled the bomb.
The court also addressed the issue of conspiracy, noting that the prosecution failed to provide reliable evidence of meetings held by an organization called Abhinav Bharat to plan the attack. Witnesses turned hostile, and their testimonies were deemed unreliable. The judge observed that interceptions were not authorized during the specific period, and permissions were obtained belatedly, rendering the intercepted data unusable as evidence.
Furthermore, the court criticized the handling of the crime scene, noting that it was compromised shortly after the explosion due to mob violence. This contamination raised doubts about the integrity of the evidence collected. The court also noted inconsistencies in the number of injured persons.
The NIA court highlighted several loopholes in the investigation, including the disputed ownership of the motorcycle, the lack of evidence for RDX procurement or assembly, and the contamination of the crime spot. The judge also found sanction orders granted under the UAPA to be defective and invalid, issued without proper application of judicial mind.
Following the verdict, the court ordered compensation of ₹2 lakh to the families of the deceased and ₹50,000 to each of the injured victims, to be provided by the government. The acquittal has sparked debates, with some questioning the investigation and prosecution's handling of the case. AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi raised concerns about who was responsible for the deaths of the six people.
