
HC acquittal verdict shocking, no witch hunt in probe: Ex-Mumbai top cop A N Roy on 7/11 case
He said the police only chargesheeted the people who had a 'core role' in the blasts, and said there was no 'witch hunt' involved.
Mumbai, Jul 22 (PTI) Former Mumbai police commissioner A N Roy on Tuesday expressed shock over the the Bombay High Court's acquittal of all 12 accused in the 7/11 train blasts case, saying the probe in the case was conducted in a professional manner where evidence was collected 'honestly and truthfully'.
More than 180 people were killed when seven blasts ripped through Mumbai local trains at various locations on the western line. Nineteen years later, the Bombay High Court on Monday acquitted all 12 accused, saying the prosecution utterly failed to prove the case and that it was 'hard to believe the accused committed the crime'.
Talking to PTI, former Mumbai police chief Roy said, 'I am shocked to see the kind of judgment. But it is a judicial verdict, we accept it respectfully.' 'The relevant department, which is ATS, is studying the judgment. They will take legal opinion. I am sure they will file an appeal in the Supreme Court on that,' he said.
The Supreme Court will hear the Maharashtra government's plea against the high court verdict on July 24.
Roy reminded that the trial court had sided with the prosecution while giving the harshest sentences to the accused people and added that the apex court of the country will see merit in the case.
'We presented a very good, strong case to the court through the chargesheet,' Roy said, asserting that it was a professionally conducted, thorough investigation where evidence was collected 'honestly and truthfully'.
Maintaining that he has not read the judgment delivered on Monday, he said the high court seems to be apprehensive on how witnesses could identify the accused after 100 days and questioned if there was any prescribed procedure that explicitly disallows such a practice.
'There are a number of cases on judicial records where the witnesses have identified the accused after 10 years in the court,' Roy said.
Speaking about the delay in the trial, he said the trial went on for several years because the accused kept on moving applications across the legal system and also went up till the Supreme Court for seeking bail or some 'frivolous issues'.
They also made allegations of torture, of getting beaten up and forced to confess which consumed time, Roy said, adding that none of these allegations were accepted in the court.
Reminiscing about the investigation into the case, the former top cop said officers worked overnight to build the case, after which the trial began.
According to the police, members of the proscribed Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) and other brainwashed youth conspired to bomb the local trains, called as the lifeline of the financial capital, during the peak hour. Bombs assembled inside pressure cookers were put on first-class compartments of the trains.
Investigators had claimed that the bombers had travelled with the bombs to south Mumbai's Churchgate after assembling them in distant suburbs, and alighted at railway stations before the timers went off.
Roy said, 'We did not do any witch hunt. We only chargesheeted the people who had the core role in the blast.' 'I retired from the service 16 years ago, I was not closely monitoring the court hearings. But I was the police commissioner when the bomb blast happened. I was very closely supervising the investigation and I own up whatever was done in the investigation,' he said on the HC judgement.
'I have accorded the sanction for prosecution under the MCOC Act to all the accused. I stood in the court for 5 days to prove my sanction. Now, after completing the investigation very professionally, very thoroughly, after collecting all the evidence possible to collect, truthfully, honestly presented a very good, strong case to the court through the chargesheet,' he said.
Roy said the court took a long time to pronounce the judgment because it was a very voluminous chargesheet, and added that the trial court judgment alone went into 2,000 pages.
Every single person's evidence was mentioned there in detail. The evidence brought in by the prosecution side, the cross examination by all the 9 to 10 defence lawyers for every witness is all recorded in that 2,000-page judgement of the trial court, he said.
'All the eyewitnesses, all the witnesses who identified the accused, all the recoveries which were made, all other circumstantial evidence, all of that is mentioned in great detail in that 2,000 page judgement. The police officers who were investigated or played any other role during that – they were all examined and cross-examined,' he said.
'I withstood cross examination for 5 days, morning till evening,' the former police commissioner added.
The judgement seems to mention only what the defence lawyers have argued in the high court and saying yes or no to that, Roy said, adding that he found it bizarre.
'We will have to wait for the next verdict. We have got from the trial court's full verdict in our favour. For whatever reason, if the high court has given a contradictory verdict, we accept that as well,' he said.
'We'll go and appeal to the higher court to wait for the final judgement to come. We are very confident that we have a very good case,' he said, adding that they will wait for the final judgement from the Supreme Court. PTI DC NP
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


India.com
17 minutes ago
- India.com
Big setback for Donald Trump as Federal Court strikes down birthright citizenship order across US; how will it affect Indians?
(Image: Reuters) New Delhi: A federal court in America has again stayed President Donald Trump's order which said that if a child's parents are living illegally in America, then that child will not get American citizenship. This is the third time that the court has stopped Trump's order from being implemented. The court also said that the final decision on this matter will be taken by the Supreme Court, but until any order comes from there, this rule of Trump will not be implemented. When was the order passed? Trump had banned Birthright Citizenship by signing an executive order on January 20, the day of his swearing-in. A few days after this, the US Federal Court had stayed President Donald Trump's decision to end the right to birthright citizenship for 14 days. Earlier on June 28, the US Supreme Court had given a decision in favour of President Trump. The Supreme Court had said that the judges of the lower courts cannot stop Trump's birthright citizenship order across the country. They should reconsider their order. What did the US Supreme Court say? The Supreme Court had said with a majority of 6-3 that a federal judge alone cannot decide to stop policies across the country. Now if a case like Trump's order has to be stopped, then many people will have to sue together, not just one state or person. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who wrote the decision, had said – the job of federal courts is not to monitor government orders. Their job is to resolve matters according to the powers given by Parliament. However, the court did not give any immediate decision on Trump's order and also ordered not to allow Trump's order to be implemented for 30 days i.e. till July 28. This means that for now, children born in America will continue to get citizenship, as they used to get earlier. Under which 3 situations citizenship is not granted by Trump's order? The executive order by which Trump abolished the birthright citizenship law is named 'Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship'. This order refuses to grant American citizenship in 3 situations. If the mother of a child born in America is living there illegally. At the time of the child's birth, the mother is a legal but temporary resident of America. The father should not be a US citizen or a legal permanent resident at the time of the child's birth. The 14th Amendment to the US Constitution gives the right to birthright citizenship. Through this, children of immigrants living in the US also get the right to citizenship. What will be the effect on Indians? According to the data of the US Census Bureau till 2024, about 54 lakh Indians live in America. This is about one and a half percent of the US population. Two-thirds of these people are first generation immigrants. That is, they went to America first in the family, but the rest are citizens born in America. If the Supreme Court gives an order in favour of Trump's bill, then it will become difficult for first generation immigrants to get American citizenship. However, if it gives an order against it, then citizenship will remain as before.


The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Assam's Foreigners' Tribunals disregard constitutional safeguards: report
The quasi-judicial Foreigners' Tribunals (FTs) in Assam have become routine instruments of exclusion by disregarding due process and constitutional safeguards, a comprehensive study of these tribunals and the broader legal crisis of India's citizenship adjudication has found. The report by the Bengaluru-based National Law School of India University (NLSIU) and the Queen Mary University of London, to be formally released on Sunday (July 27, 2025), called for an urgent, fundamental rethinking of the legal structures governing citizenship in India given the possibility of an Assam-like exercise to update the National Register of Citizens (NRC) across the country. Titled 'Unmaking Citizens: The Architecture of Rights Violations and Exclusion in India's Citizenship Trials', the report has been authored by Mohsin Alam Bhat of Queen Mary University, Arushi Gupta, and Shardul Gopujkar, with the support of researchers and law students from the NLSIU, and members of Parichay Legal Aid Clinic. 'As of 2025, Assam's tribunals have declared nearly 166,000 people as 'foreigners'. In addition to more than 85,000 pending cases, these tribunals may also soon hear more than a million appeals from those excluded from the NRC,' Mr. Bhat said. The report analyses more than 1,200 Gauhati High Court orders, key Supreme Court judgments, and extensive interviews with lawyers and litigants. It documents 'widespread arbitrariness in decision-making, including the wholesale rejection of documentary and oral evidence, and the absence of legal norms to protect individuals from wrongful targeting'. 'Citizenship adjudication engages constitutionally significant questions with profound consequences, including the risk of statelessness. Such determinations require bodies that are legally constituted, independent, impartial, and composed of competent legal officers,' the study summarises in a chapter on 'institutionalised arbitrariness'. The report argued that the FT system fails on all these counts. 'It lacks a secure legal foundation, is vulnerable to executive interference, and is staffed by inadequately qualified adjudicators. It thus stands in stark violation of the rule of law and the right to an effective remedy under both domestic and international law,' it said, adding that the FTs have become routine instruments of exclusion and violate the right to a fair trial. 'Lowering standards' Assam currently has 100 FTs, each headed by a judge-like member, which were formed after the Supreme Court scrapped the controversial Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act of 1983 in 2005. Of these 100 tribunals, 36 are permanent and 54 require periodic extension of terms from the Ministry of Home Affairs. The study further highlights that the appointment process for FT members is opaque, with no guaranteed tenure. Advertisements by the Gauhati High Court and notifications from the Assam Government's Political Department specify terms of one or two years, varying by executive whim, and extendable at the State's discretion, it says. 'This tenure is governed by no legislation or by-laws and depends entirely on executive whim, despite being an essential legislative function. Moreover, it is violative of the Supreme Court's judgments holding that a tenure of less than 5 years threatens to compromise the quality of adjudication by tribunals,' it said. 'The qualifications for FT members have progressively weakened. In 2011, only retired judicial officers from the Assam Judicial Service, experienced in procedural law, were eligible. They could serve until age 67, with salaries based on last drawn pay plus allowances. This ensured appointments of individuals with judicial expertise. By 2015, eligibility expanded to include advocates with at least 10 years of practice, lowering the standard,' the report said. Appointments became two-year contracts with fixed monthly pay, enabling lawyers without judicial experience to decide critical citizenship matters. The 2019 revisions diluted requirements further; minimum practice dropped to seven years, minimum age to 35, and appointments became more flexible, allowing less experienced candidates to adjudicate complex citizenship issues, thereby compromising the quality of justice,' it stated. A Gauhati High Court notification added criteria of 'fair knowledge of the official language of Assam' and 'Assam's historical background giving rise to foreigners' issues.' Yet, no requirement exists for expertise in immigration or citizenship law, the report pointed out. The authors noted with concern that citizenship determination under the FTs has remained unchanged even after Parliament enacted the Immigration and Foreigners Act of 2025. 'The stakes for legal violations have become unprecedented, with the prospects of a nationwide NRC exercise and the recent spree of 'pushback' deportations in Assam,' they said, calling for an overhaul of the legal structures governing citizenship in India.


Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Minor crashes father's car in Delhi, e-rickshaw driver killed
An e-rickshaw driver died after a car being driven by a 16-year-old boy rammed into his three-wheeler in southwest Delhi's Dwarka, police said on Saturday. The incident took place around 11.15 am on Friday on the Dwarka Nala Road stretch.(PTI/Representative image) The incident took place around 11.15 am on Friday on the Dwarka Nala Road stretch, they said The teenage boy was accompanied by his younger sister, a senior police officer said, adding that after losing control, the car overturned and crashed into an oncoming e-rickshaw, critically injuring its 40-year-old driver, a resident of Najafgarh. "The victim was rushed to a nearby hospital but succumbed to severe head injuries. He was declared unfit to give a statement before he passed away," said a senior police officer. He added that initial findings suggest the car was being driven at a high speed and flipped before colliding with the rickshaw. The police said the vehicle, a private car owned by the boy's father, was being driven without a valid licence. The minor reportedly took the car out without permission, the officer added. "The impact of the crash left the car overturned on one side of the road, while the e-rickshaw came to a halt diagonally on the opposite side. A forensic crime team visited the scene, and both vehicles were seized for further examination," he said. A case has been registered under BNS sections 281 (rash driving or riding on a public way), 125 (act endangering life or personal safety of others), and 106 (causing death by negligence), the police said. "The investigation is ongoing. Since the boy is a minor, legal action will be initiated against the father for allowing him to drive the car," the officer added.