Supreme Court stays use of Bombay HC's 7/11 blast verdict as precedent, but won't halt release of acquitted accused
Supreme Court
Thursday stayed the
Bombay High Court
verdict in the
Mumbai train blasts case
of July 11, 2006 to the limited extent that it will not be treated as a precedent in other cases.
A division bench of justices MM Sundresh and N Kotiswar Singh, however, refused to stay the release of the 11 accused who were acquitted by the high court.
Explore courses from Top Institutes in
Please select course:
Select a Course Category
Finance
Others
Operations Management
healthcare
PGDM
Technology
MBA
Data Analytics
Healthcare
CXO
Digital Marketing
Degree
Design Thinking
Public Policy
others
Data Science
Management
Product Management
Project Management
MCA
Leadership
Cybersecurity
Artificial Intelligence
Data Science
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
9 Months
IIM Calcutta
SEPO - IIMC CFO India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
7 Months
S P Jain Institute of Management and Research
CERT-SPJIMR Fintech & Blockchain India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
The bench ordered, "all respondents (accused) released and thus no question to bring them back to prison. However, on the question of law we will say that impugned judgment is not treated as precedent in any other cases. Therefore, to that extent let there be stay on the impugned judgment".
Appearing on behalf of
Maharashtra government
, solicitor general Tushar Mehta argued that the high court ruling could adversely affect other trials under the
Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act
(
MCOCA
).
Hence, Mehta sought an urgent stay on the verdict though he did not press for a stay on the release of the acquitted persons. Mehta said as far as stay is concerned, he is "not on liberty" of the accused.
Live Events
Referring to the high court ruling, Mehta added "there are some findings which will affect all our MCOCA trials. The judgment can be stayed and release be not hampered".
The court agreed and granted limited stay on the judgment as urged by Mehta. The bench issued notice to the respondents, directing them to file their responses to the appeal filed by Maharashtra government challenging the high court verdict.
In its appeal, the Maharashtra government has challenged the Bombay High Court's decision to acquit all the 12 accused in the
7/11 train blasts
case of 2006, nearly a decade after a special court awarded death penalty to five accused and life sentences to the remaining.
The case relates to the serial bomb blasts that occurred on July 11, 2006, in which seven bombs exploded in suburban trains on Mumbai's Western Railway line, killing 187 people and injuring more than 800 people.
A special court had in 2015 sentenced five of the accused to death and seven to life imprisonment. One of the convicts died in 2021 due to Covid-19 while lodged in Nagpur jail.
The Bombay High Court on Monday acquitted all the accused observing that "the prosecution utterly failed in establishing the case beyond reasonable doubts". Lambasting the prosecution, the high court ruled that the prosecution's case gave the public a "misleading sense of resolution" while "the true threat remains at large".
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
21 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Husband suspected wife of poisoning him before she killed 3 relatives with toxic mushrooms
The husband of a woman convicted of killing three people with a meal laced with deadly mushrooms suspected his wife had been poisoning him more than a year before the fatal meal, an Australian court has heard. A judge on Friday lifted a gag order on pretrial evidence that triple murderer Erin Patterson, 50, had wanted kept secret while she attempts to overturn her convictions. The evidence included the suspicions of Patterson's estranged husband Simon Patterson that she had previously attempted to kill him. Husband says he feared estranged wife would poison him Simon Patterson testified at a pretrial hearing that he had declined the lunch invitation out of fear. 'I thought there'd be a risk that she'd poison me if I attended,' the husband told the court months before the trial in testimony that was not presented to jurors. Simon said while he had stopped eating food prepared by his wife, from whom he had been estranged since 2015, he never thought others would be at risk. Erin Patterson was convicted by the Victoria state Supreme Court last month of murdering her parents-in-law Don and Gail Patterson, and Gail's sister Heather Wilkinson at her home in Leongatha with a lunch of beef Wellington pastries containing toxic death cap mushrooms. She was also found guilty of attempting to murder Ian Wilkinson, Heather's husband, who survived the meal but spent weeks in the hospital. Erin Patterson was initially charged with attempting to murder her husband by inviting him to the lunch in July 2023. He had accepted the invitation then cancelled. She was also initially charged with three counts of attempting to murder him on three occasions around Victoria between November 2021 and September 2022. She had denied all charges. Prosecutors dropped all charges relating to the husband before her trial began in April. Simon Patterson testified before the trial that he suspected his wife had deliberately made him seriously ill with dishes including penne bolognese pasta, chicken korma curry and a vegetable curry wrap. No poisons were ever found. The three alleged poisonings occurred during family camping trips. Simon shared his poisoning suspicions with his doctor, who encouraged him to create a spreadsheet listing what he had eaten around the time he became sick. The court on Friday also released video of Erin Patterson's police interview, recorded a week after the fatal lunch. In the interview, Detective Stephen Eppingstall told her that both her female victims were dead and their husbands were critically ill. Eppingstall asked her why she had invited them to lunch. Erin Patterson replied that she wanted to maintain her relationship with the estranged husband's parents because her own parents had died. Don and Gail Patterson had remained supportive and had been the only grandparents to her two children, she said. 'I love them a lot. They've always been really good to me and they always said to me that they would support me with love and emotional support, even though Simon and I were separated, and I really appreciated that,' Erin Patterson said. Disclosures come as Patterson plans to appealJustice Christopher Beale ruled for lawyers representing media who sought to overturn the gag order, ordering that the evidence that jurors had not seen would be made public. Erin Patterson's lawyers wanted all the evidence that was not deemed admissible at her trial kept secret until an appeals court decided whether to overturn her convictions. Their reasons included that media interest in the case was unprecedented. Defense lawyer Colin Mandy argued that reporting of the suppressed evidence as well as references to it in books, podcasts and a planned television mini-series would 'leave an indelible impression on the minds of potential jurors in the event that there is a retrial.' A hearing will begin on Aug. 25 to determine what sentence she will get. She faces a potential life sentence for each of the murders and 25 years for attempted murder. Prosecutor Jane Warren told Beale on Friday 'a lot' of victim impact statements would be presented at that two-day sentencing hearing. Once Erin Patterson is sentenced, she will have 28 days to lodge an appeal against the sentence, the convictions, or both. Her lawyers say they will appeal against her convictions.
Indian Express
21 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Prez Trump plans to sign an order requiring US colleges to prove they don't consider race in admissions
President Donald Trump plans to sign an executive order requiring colleges to submit data to prove they do not consider race in admissions, according to a fact sheet shared by the White House ahead of the Thursday signing. In 2023, the Supreme Court ruled against the use of affirmative action in admissions but said colleges may still consider how race has shaped students' lives if applicants share that information in their admissions essays. Trump's Republican administration is accusing colleges of using personal statements and other proxies to consider race. The executive order is similar to parts of recent settlement agreements the administration negotiated with Brown University and Columbia University, restoring their federal research funding. The universities agreed to give the government data on the race, grade point average and standardised test scores of applicants, admitted students and enrolled students. The schools also agreed to an audit by the government and to release admissions statistics to the public. Conservatives have argued that despite the Supreme Court ruling, colleges have continued to consider race through proxy measures. The planned executive order makes the same argument. 'The lack of available admissions data from universities — paired with the rampant use of diversity statements' and other overt and hidden racial proxies — continues to raise concerns about whether race is actually used in admissions decisions in practice,' the fact sheet said. The first year of admissions data after the Supreme Court ruling showed no clear pattern in how colleges' diversity changed. Results varied dramatically from one campus to the next. Some schools, such as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Amherst College, saw steep drops in the percentage of Black students in their incoming classes. But at other elite, selective schools such as Yale, Princeton and the University of Virginia, the changes were less than a percentage point year to year. Some colleges have added more essays or personal statements to their admissions process to get a better picture of an applicant's background, a strategy the Supreme Court invited in its ruling. 'Nothing prohibits universities from considering an applicant's discussion of how race affected the applicant's life, so long as that discussion is concretely tied to a quality of character or unique ability that the particular applicant can contribute to the university,' Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in 2023 for the court's conservative majority. As an alternative to affirmative action, colleges for years have tried a range of strategies to achieve the diversity they say is essential to their campuses. Many have given greater preference to low-income families. Others started admitting top students from every community in their state. Prior to the ruling, nine states had banned affirmative action, starting with California in 1996. The University of California saw enrollment change after the statewide ban in 1996. Within two years, Black and Hispanic enrolments fell by half at the system's two most selective campuses — Berkeley and UCLA. The system would go on to spend more than $500 million on programs aimed at low-income and first-generation college students. The 10-campus University of California system also started a program that promises admission to the top 9% of students in each high school across the state, an attempt to reach strong students from all backgrounds. A similar promise in Texas has been credited for expanding racial diversity, and opponents of affirmative action cite it as a successful model. In California, the promise drew students from a wider geographic area but did little to expand racial diversity, the system said in a brief to the Supreme Court. It had almost no impact at Berkeley and UCLA, where students compete against tens of thousands of other applicants. Today at UCLA and Berkeley, Hispanic students make up 20% of undergraduates, higher than in 1996 but lower than their 53% share among California's high school graduates. Black students, meanwhile, have a smaller presence than they did in 1996, accounting for 4% of undergraduates at Berkeley. After Michigan voters rejected affirmative action in 2006, the University of Michigan shifted attention to low-income students. The school sent graduates to work as counselors in low-income high schools and started offering college prep in Detroit and Grand Rapids. It offered full scholarships for low-income Michigan residents and, more recently, started accepting fewer early admission applications, which are more likely to come from white students. Despite the University of Michigan's efforts, the share of Black and Hispanic undergraduates hasn't fully rebounded from a falloff after 2006. And while Hispanic enrollments have been increasing, Black enrollments continued to slide, going from 8% of undergraduates in 2006 to 4% in 2025
Indian Express
21 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Bengaluru metro's Yellow Line to be inaugurated on Sunday: Why the project was delayed for years
After eight years of delays, Bengaluru metro network's much-anticipated 19.15-km Yellow Line will finally be inaugurated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Sunday (August 10). The corridor connects RV Road and Bommasandra, linking south Bengaluru to key manufacturing and tech firms at Electronic City, including Infosys, Biocon, and TCS. With 16 stations, the new line will expand Bengaluru's metro network to 96 km and is expected to significantly reduce traffic congestion, especially near the Silk Board junction. The project was delayed due to a host of issues ranging from land acquisition delays to rolling stock production problems compounded by the Indo-China conflict. Here is a look at how the project went off track and eventually reached completion. Missed deadlines & bottlenecks The Yellow Line was originally outlined in the Detailed Project Report (DPR) prepared by the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) in 2011, with an estimated cost of Rs 4,255 crore and a targeted completion date of March 2016. Construction began in 2017 with a revised deadline of December 2021 and an updated budget of Rs 5,744 crore. What followed was a series of bureaucratic delays, supply chain setbacks, and leadership lapses that repeatedly derailed the project timeline. Civil work gained momentum in 2018-19, but land acquisition delays began affecting project schedules. In 2020, the Covid-19 pandemic further stalled progress, causing widespread disruption in supply chains and manpower. Geopolitical tensions between India and China following the 2020 Galwan clash delayed the supply of rolling stock from CRRC Nanjing, the Chinese train manufacturer. To tackle this issue, the government revised its strategy and directed CRRC to partner with Kolkata-based Titagarh Rail Systems Ltd to manufacture the trains domestically. However, this localisation brought its own challenges: production line delays, visa issues for CRRC engineers, and hold-ups in delivering the Train Control and Management System (TCMS) software by Mitsubishi Electric Corporation (MELCO) further pushed the project timeline into uncertainty. Attempt to fast-track the project At this point, Bangalore South Member of Parliament Tejasvi Surya pressed both state and central authorities to fast-track the remaining work. In 2023, he launched a campaign advocating for the appointment of a full-time managing director (MD) for BMRCL. After three months of sustained lobbying and meetings with the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA) and the state government, a dedicated MD was finally appointed — freeing up much-needed executive bandwidth to resolve bottlenecks. Meanwhile, the Yellow Line's cost escalated to Rs 7,610 crore — about Rs 400 crore per km, representing a 32% increase from BMRCL's original estimate. Finally, CRRC delivered its first six-coach prototype (driverless with CBTC) train set in February 2024. Through collaboration with the Ministry of External Affairs and the Union Finance Ministry, issues related to visas and customs clearance for CRRC engineers and imported components were resolved to speed up coach production at the Titagarh factory. On January 6, 2025, the first train set was rolled out and dispatched from Titagarh Rail Systems, followed by a second train set that arrived at Bengaluru's Hebbagodi depot on February 9. Between April and May, six additional coaches reached Bengaluru, bringing the total to three train sets and prompting BMRCL to accelerate preparations for commercial operations. Despite these advancements, BMRCL had not committed to an official launch date by mid-2025 due to delays in receiving the Independent Safety Assessment (ISA) report, which would allow BMRCL to request a Commissioner of Metro Railway Safety (CMRS) inspection. The ISA report was delayed due to technical glitches discovered during the review of key datasets, requiring software updates. Without this report, BMRCL could not proceed with the mandatory CMRS inspection. However, ISA clearance was granted on July 19, after which CMRS inspection was requested. Green light for commercial operations On August 1, the CMRS cleared the Yellow Line for revenue operations but flagged several issues, including unauthorised welding work, incomplete structural tests, non-functional lifts, and incorrect signage at some stations. On August 2, Union Minister for Home and Urban Affairs Manohar Lal Khattar announced that Prime Minister Modi would inaugurate the Yellow Line connecting RV Road to Bommasandra and lay the foundation stone for the 44.65-km Phase-3 expansion of Bengaluru Metro on August 10. Currently, BMRCL plans to operate the Yellow Line from Monday (August 11) with three trains running at a frequency of 25 minutes from RV Road to Bommasandra. Sanath Prasad is a senior sub-editor and reporter with the Bengaluru bureau of Indian Express. He covers education, transport, infrastructure and trends and issues integral to Bengaluru. He holds more than two years of reporting experience in Karnataka. His major works include the impact of Hijab ban on Muslim girls in Karnataka, tracing the lives of the victims of Kerala cannibalism, exploring the trends in dairy market of Karnataka in the aftermath of Amul-Nandini controversy, and Karnataka State Elections among others. If he is not writing, he keeps himself engaged with badminton, swimming, and loves exploring. ... Read More
