Six family members of individuals who lost their lives in the 2008 Malegaon bombing have filed an appeal with the Bombay High Court, challenging the complete acquittal of seven accused—including BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur and Lt Col Prasad Purohit—by a Special National Investigation Agency (NIA) court. These victims’ relatives, represented by advocate Mateen Shaikh, petitioned the High Court to set aside the acquittals, arguing that the judgment was erroneous both on factual and legal grounds.
The High Court will likely hear the appeal before a division bench consisting of Justices Ajey S. Gadkari and Ranjitsinha R. Bhosale. The matter is scheduled for hearing on September 15.
The appeal asserts that the NIA court’s verdict—delivered on July 31—was not sustainable in law. The petitioners emphasized that the judgment was “wrong and bad in law” and sought its quashing. They argue that substantial evidence was adduced during the trial that, if accepted fully, could have supported a conviction.
Key factual elements cited in the appeal include proof that the motorcycle used in the blast belonged to Pragya Singh Thakur, which the trial court dismissed without adequate substantiation. The petitioners pointed out that Thakur did not present documentary proof showing she had parted with or lost the motorbike before the bombing.
The appeal also refers to call detail records (CDRs) of the accused, which demonstrated communication among them surrounding the time of the explosion. The petition contends that the court erred in treating such evidence merely as generating “strong suspicion” rather than as indicative of conspiracy.
Further, Lt Col Purohit’s own statement acknowledging participation in meetings to plan the alleged conspiracy was reportedly overlooked by the trial court as insufficient for conviction. The appeal argues that such admission itself should have been sufficient to establish criminal conspiracy under applicable laws.
The Malegaon blast occurred on September 29, 2008, when a bomb affixed to a motorcycle exploded near a mosque, killing six people and injuring more than 100. The case was initially investigated by the state Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS), whose investigation implicated the accused, including Thakur and Purohit. Following the ATS chargesheet, later overturned by political shifts, the NIA took over the investigation in 2011 and filed a supplementary chargesheet in 2016.
In contrast to the ATS version, the NIA ultimately declined to press charges against Thakur, citing insufficient evidence to prove her involvement. The special court, in its ruling, held that reasonable doubt existed and that “strong suspicion” alone could not form the basis for conviction. It noted shortcomings in the investigation, including weak evidence linking the motorcycle or explosives to the accused.
Nevertheless, the victims’ families and their legal counsel argued that the court should have examined the totality of the evidence, including electronic records and witness testimony, rather than reaching an exoneratory conclusion. They also criticized investigative lapses and the potential downgrading of initial ATS findings.
The history of this case includes sustained efforts by relatives of the deceased to oppose attempts to discharge or exculpate Thakur and others. One such family member, now aged 75, remains determined to continue pursuing the matter through the legal system up to the Supreme Court.
With the appeal ongoing, the Bombay High Court now holds an opportunity to re-examine the trial court’s findings, assess the interpretation of evidence, and consider whether justice has been truly served for the victims and their families.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.