A special court in Mumbai will deliver its much-awaited verdict on Thursday in the 2008 Malegaon blast case, marking the culmination of nearly 17 years of investigation, legal twists, and prolonged trial.
Special Judge AK Lahoti, who has extensively heard arguments from both the prosecution and defence, will pronounce the judgment in the case in which former BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur and Lieutenant Colonel Prasad Purohit are among the accused.
The case pertains to the September 29, 2008 blast at Bhiku Chowk in Malegaon, a town with a sizeable Muslim population, which claimed six lives and left 101 injured.
The explosion, caused by an IED strapped to a two-wheeler, was initially investigated by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) before being handed over to the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in 2011.
Apart from Sadhvi Pragya and Purohit, five other accused faced trial – Major (retired) Ramesh Upadhyay, Sudhakar Chaturvedi, Ajay Rahirkar, Sudhakar Dhar Dwivedi alias Shankaracharya, and Sameer Kulkarni.
Sadhvi Pragya was arrested in October 2008 and is now out on bail. The motorcycle used in the blast was registered in her name.
Special Public Prosecutor Avinash Rasal, appearing for the NIA, relied on a range of evidence, including call data records, intercepted phone calls, and material allegedly recovered from the accused.
Key to the prosecution’s argument was the claim that RDX was found at Chaturvedi’s residence in Deolali, where the bomb was allegedly assembled under the direction of Lt Colonel Purohit.
Rasal submitted that the prosecution had presented “relevant, admissible, cogent, trustworthy, wholly reliable and proven evidence” to establish a complete chain of events pointing to the involvement of the accused.
The defence strongly contested the prosecution’s narrative.
Sadhvi Pragya’s counsel, JP Mishra, questioned the identification of the motorcycle used in the blast. He argued that the chassis was too damaged to confirm ownership.
Lt Col Purohit’s lawyer, Viral Babar, submitted that his client was falsely implicated, allegedly kidnapped and tortured, and that other military witnesses had been coerced. Babar also highlighted the lack of a Section 65B certificate for electronic call data records, rendering them inadmissible under the Indian Evidence Act.
The defence for Chaturvedi and Dwivedi alleged planting of evidence and procedural lapses.
Ajay Rahirkar, accused of funding the alleged conspiracy under the banner of Abhinav Bharat, claimed he was falsely implicated.
The trial formally began in December 2018. Of the 323 witnesses examined, 39 turned hostile and 26 died before testifying. The NIA dropped MCOCA charges but continued the trial under UAPA, IPC, and the Explosive Substances Act. The judgment was reserved on April 19.
– Ends