2006 Mumbai train blasts: Torture of accused barbaric, inhuman, says HC

Time of India

21-07-2025

In this July 11, 2006 file photo, a train coach is damaged by a bomb blast at Matunga railway station in Mumbai. (PTI)
MUMBAI: Bombay HC termed the 'torture' of accused number 1 in the train blasts case as 'barbaric and inhuman' and, saying that complaints of many other accused also raised doubts that torture was inflicted, discarded the confessions obtained by the state Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) as 'unreliable and inadmissible.
'
The HC in its judgment elaborated on the complaints of torture by police to extract confessional statements from the accused. The alleged methods included splitting legs 180 degrees wide, tying individuals to a chair all night, denying food from morning to evening, and putting cockroaches in vests and rats in underwear amid a lot of beating.
Justices Anil Kilor and Shyam Chandak, while acquitting all the dozen accused, invoked two-century-old history to invalidate confessions eked from threats, saying, 'We can get the evidence of police atrocities from 1817… the passing of Bengal Police Regulation, 1817, is the example.
This shows that for more than two centuries, the safeguards and checks are tried to be placed on malpractices of police officers.
'
Six minutes of terror
The defence argued that though the accused were in custody for over 60 days, police complained of non-cooperation. However, once MCOCA was invoked on Sept 24, 2006, 11 confessions poured in, showing they 'are not voluntary but the result of continuous torture in police custody.'
On Oct 9, 2006, when produced in court, all retracted the confessions and detailed the torture inflicted by ATS, defence counsel Yug Chaudhri argued.
They also stepped in as defence witnesses, and their evidence merits acceptance, the HC held, since the cross-examination failed to dislodge their claim, which was 'corroborated by medical and other evidence' to a 'very substantial degree.'
The HC said, 'Not allowing a person to sleep, making him stand the whole night with his arms tied above his head, or stretching his legs to 180 degrees, as has been repeatedly testified to by the accused, will not leave visible scars on the body, no matter how much this may bruise the mind or injure the psyche.'
While accused number 1, Kamal Ansari, who died in 2021 in prison, did not testify as a witness, HC noted his complaint in detail, alleging a DCP had said, 'I won't kill you, I have a pen, with this pen, I will make your life hell, your entire family will come on the road.' The high court said such detailed third-degree methods can't be an 'afterthought' as argued by the prosecution.
Medical and ocular evidence 'not only corroborates the complaint of A.1 of torture and its truthfulness but also the fact that police warned him not to disclose about the torture meted out to him by them to the doctor.'
'The torture was barbaric and inhuman, and it exposes the frustration the officers might have had at the relevant time for obvious reasons,' said the HC, holding his confession can't form the basis of convictions. The HC also came to a similar conclusion of torture being inflicted on many other accused.
For instance, in the case of accused number 5, the HC said 'evidence sufficiently hints at the possibility of torture being inflicted… to extort his confession.'
The HC also said, 'Detailed narration of torture with all the specific details creates doubt about torture to extort confession.'
The judgment devoted 350-odd pages to confessions and about 100 pages to complaints of torture. The HC also said the prior approval to invoke MCOCA by an additional police commissioner was vitiated on grounds of complete non-application of mind by the then additional police commissioner.
'The procedure(s) of sanction provided in the legislation are meant to be followed strictly, to the letter, more so to the spirit. Even the slightest of variation from the written word may render the proceedings arising therefrom to be cast in doubt,' the HC noted.