Malegaon Blast verdict today after 17 years of legal proceedings; ex-MP Pragya Thakur among accused
The trial, which started in 2018, got over on April 19, 2025, however. the case was reserved for judgement. BJP leader and former MP Pragya Thakur and Lt Col Prasad Purohit were among the seven accused who faced trial in the case for offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code.
The other acuused include - Major (retired) Ramesh Upadhyay, Ajay Rahirkar, Sudhakar Dwivedi, Sudhakar Chaturvedi and Sameer Kulkarni.
The National Investigation Agency (NIA), which conducted the probe into the case, has sought "commensurate punishment" for the accused.
During its final arguments, the NIA told the court that the Malegaon blast — which occurred in a town with a significant Muslim population — was orchestrated by the conspirators to terrorise a section of Muslim community, disrupt essential services, create communal tensions. The NIA based its finding on "relevant, admissible, cogent, trustworthy, wholly reliable and proved evidence" and "conclusively and cogently" established the crucial circumstances to form a complete chain of events.
The blast took place during the holy month of Ramzan, just before the Navratri festival, the NIA pointed out, claiming the intention of the accused was to strike terror in a section of the Muslim community.
The charges comprised UAPA sections 16 (committing terrorist act) and 18 (conspiring to commit terrorist act) and various IPC sections, including 120 (b) (criminal conspiracy), 302 (murder), 307 (attempt to murder), 324 (voluntarily causing hurt) and 153 (a) (promoting enmity between two religious groups).
During the trial, the prosecution presented 323 witnesses, of whom 37 turned hostile. Thakur, in her final statement, submitted that her implication in the case is "totally illegal, bad in law and contrary to the law of the land and with malafide intention and ulterior motive".
Purohit has submitted that "there is no material evidence" linking him to the alleged offence."The prosecution's case rests on fabricated and contradictory witness statements that are devoid of any independent corroboration and fail to meet the evidentiary threshold required in law," his final arguments claimed.
Six persons were killed and more than 100 injured when an explosive device strapped to a motorcycle went off near a mosque in the town, located about 200 km from Mumbai, on September 29, 2008.
The case was initially probed by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) before being transferred to the NIA in 2011.
(With inputs from agencies)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
25 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Today in Politics: PM Modi to address NDA parliamentary party meeting; state mourning in Jharkhand after Shibu Soren's death
On Tuesday, Prime Minister Narendra Modi will address a meeting of the BJP-led NDA's parliamentary party meeting. The NDA meeting comes just days before the filing of nominations for the Vice-President's election on August 7. After the Monsoon Session ends on August 21, the election will be held on September 9. The meeting comes in the middle of a session that has been all but a washout so far, except for a two-day discussion on the Pahalgam attack and Operation Sindoor, due to a united Opposition's ceaseless protest against the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar by the Election Commission. Modi is expected to speak on a host of current issues as the Opposition has been raising the heat over the poll body's alleged partisan conduct favouring the government, and the Pahalgam terror attack and Operation Sindoor. The meeting also comes amid rumours that the Centre may reinstate Jammu and Kashmir's statehood. Tuesday will mark six years since the abrogation of Article 370 with the J&K Congress observing it as a 'black day' and sitting on a dharna to press for the restoration of statehood. Meanwhile, the government is expected to push through some legislative business on Tuesday, amid the Opposition's continuing protests, said Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju. In the Lok Sabha, at least four Bills will be considered for passage – The Readjustment of Representation of Scheduled Tribes in Assembly Constituencies of the State of Goa Bill, 2024; The Merchant Shipping Bill, 2024; The National Sports Governance Bill, 2025; and The National Anti-Doping (Amendment) Bill, 2025. In the Rajya Sabha on Tuesday, while Union Home Minister Amit Shah is set to move a resolution for the continuation of President's Rule in Manipur for another six months with effect on August 13. The Lok Sabha has already passed this resolution. The Upper House will also consider for passage The Carriage of Goods by Sea Bill, 2025. The mortal remains of veteran tribal leader and Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) patriarch Shibu Soren reached state capital Ranchi on Monday evening, with thousands of people waiting outside the airport and lining the streets to pay their final respects to the former CM, affectionately known as Dishom Guru. Soren, 81, who was undergoing treatment at the Sir Ganga Ram Hospital in Delhi for over a month for kidney-related problems, passed away on Monday morning. On Tuesday, his body will be taken to his native village Nemra in Ramgarh district, where his last rites will be performed there, JMM sources said. Among those expected to attend the funeral is Lok Sabha Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi, whose Congress party is a state- and national-level ally of the JMM. Recommended reading | Pivotal figure in Jharkhand movement, Shibu Soren had a storied career with fleeting stints in power To coincide with the Karnataka Congress's protest over alleged vote theft, the state BJP chief B Y Vijayendra had announced their own protest against the Congress's 'anti-constitutional attitude'. While the Congress's protest, which was set to be led by Rahul Gandhi, has been postponed to August 8 on account of Shibu Soren's death, the BJP is now set to continue its protest in Bengaluru. Vijayendra alleged that the Congress was unable to 'digest Narendra Modi's leadership' at the Centre and that Gandhi was misguiding the people of Karnataka and India with his repeated allegations against the Election Commission. The Telangana Congress, meanwhile, is going ahead with its protest Presidential assent for the Backward Classes reservation bills passed by the state legislature. Party workers led by Chief Minister Revanth Reddy are expected to participate in a three-day protest beginning on Tuesday. On Tuesday, party MPs will move an adjournment motion in Parliament to demand a debate on the BC quota Bills. On Wednesday, the CM, along with his Cabinet colleagues and other Congress leaders, will stage a dharna at Jantar Mantar. On Thursday, Reddy and other senior leaders will seek an appointment with President Droupadi Murmu to submit a memorandum regarding the pending Bills. – With PTI inputs
Hans India
27 minutes ago
- Hans India
Union Minister Varma celebrates birthday
Bhimavaram: Union Minister of State for Heavy Industries and Steel Bhupathiraju Srinivasa Varma's birthday was celebrated grandly at KS Raju Function Hall in Bhimavaram on Monday. West Godavari district unit of BJP organised this programme. The occasion saw the large-scale organisation of a blood donation drive, a free specialised medical camp, and a free eye camp, all inaugurated by Minister Srinivasa Varma. Activists and supporters from various parties actively participated in the event. BJP District President Ainampudi Sridevi noted that a large number of people availed of the medical services provided. Several prominent leaders and officials attended the event to extend their wishes to the Union Minister. These included State Water Resources Minister Nimmala Ramanaidu, Legislative Council Chairman Koyye Moshen Raju, MLC Somu Veerraju, Combined West Godavari District ZP Chairperson Ghanta Padmasri, Bhimavaram MLA Pulaparthi Ramanjaneyulu, Narasapuram MLA Bommidi Nayakar, Tanuku MLA A Radhakrishna, APIIC Chairman Mantena Rama Raju, Jana Sena Combined West Godavari District President Kotikalapudi Govinda Rao, former Rajya Sabha MP Thota Seetharama Lakshmi, In-charge district collector Rahul Kumar Reddy, District SP Adnan Nayeem Asmi, Bhimavaram DSP R Jayasurya, and DCMS Chairman Chaganti Muralikrishna. The Union Minister extended gratitude to Union Minister Nitin Gadkari on behalf of the people of Narasapuram for sanctioning ₹2,500 crore for the NH 165 Greenfield Project. As a gesture of appreciation, Srinivasa Varma performed an Abhishekam with milk (ritual bathing) for a portrait of Gadkari. Recalling the recent elections, Srinivasa Varma became emotional while addressing the gathering. He stated that some had spread false rumours, labelling him as a 'weak candidate' when he contested from Narasapuram as the NDA coalition's Lok Sabha candidate. He acknowledged the strong support and encouragement he received during that time from the BJP's central and state leadership, as well as from TDP and Jana Sena chiefs, Chandrababu Naidu and Pawan Kalyan.
Hans India
27 minutes ago
- Hans India
Use RTI to seek reasons for public employment and policy deviations
Recently, an RTI questioner from Coimbatore sought some very useful information. The query was built around RTI's utility in questioning the re-employment order by the Department of Higher Education, with a focus on the use of RTI queries as a tool for public accountability. In a compelling example of how the Right to Information (RTI) Act can be used to challenge administrative decisions, a former professor and RTI activist has raised critical questions about a recent order issued by the Department of Higher Education in Tamil Nadu, which allows re-employment of certain college-level administrative officers beyond the age of superannuation. On July 31, the department issued an order permitting the re-employment of those engaged in administrative functions, even after crossing the age of 60 years. This move, based on a request from the Commissioner of Collegiate Education, sparked concern over its legality and consistency with existing government norms. RTI activist seeks answers: N R Ravisankar, an RTI activist and former Head of the Mathematics Department at CBM College, Coimbatore, submitted a formal representation to the Principal Secretary, Department of Higher Education, raising a red flag on the order. He cited Government Order (G.O.) 192 dated November 12, 2024, which had categorically barred re-employment for such positions beyond the age of 60. Prof. Ravisankar argues that the new order contradicts this amendment to G.O. 92, which states: 'Every government servant in the superior as well as basic service shall retire from service on the afternoon of the last day of the month in which they attain the age of 60 years. They shall not be retained in service after that age.' Questions raised under RTI: The activist's move highlights how RTI can be effectively used to demand transparency and rationale behind policy reversals or deviations. Through RTI applications and petitions, the following key questions can be posed to the Department of Higher Education and relevant authorities: Did the Higher Education Department consult the Law Department before issuing this July 31 G.O.? If yes, provide copies of such legal opinions. Has any review committee or expert panel been constituted to examine the impact of re-employment on governance, recruitment opportunities for younger candidates, and institutional autonomy? How many officials have been re-employed under this new order? Please provide a district-wise list with names, designations, and dates of reappointment. Was the re-employment order placed before the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly or its relevant committee for oversight, especially in light of its policy implications? Is there any provision under existing UGC regulations or the Tamil Nadu Government Servants' Conduct Rules that permits administrative staff to continue beyond superannuation age, specifically in aided colleges? What was the rationale behind cancelling re-employment in an earlier instance—such as the case of a government-aided college in Coimbatore where a new principal was directed to be appointed upon the previous incumbent's retirement? Does the July 31, 2025 G.O. apply to government-aided institutions as well? If yes, how does this comply with the statutory and financial norms applicable to such institutions? Legal and ethical dilemma: Prof Ravisankar underscores that such re-employment orders not only defy the retirement age rule but also block opportunities for younger aspirants in the education sector. 'If the rule is clear that retirement is mandatory at 60, how can administrative exceptions be allowed selectively? It defeats the very purpose of uniformity and public interest in service rules,' he said in his representation. His RTI-based challenge exemplifies how citizens and professionals can act as watchdogs over executive discretion, especially in sectors like education, where transparency and accountability are vital for fair governance. An administrative question: Whether the Department of Higher Education will issue a clarification or revoke the July 31 order remains to be seen. To reinforce the utility of the Right to Information (RTI) in questioning government re-employment policies post-superannuation, we can refer to a landmark decision by this author (Prof. (Dr.) M. Sridhar Acharyulu, former Central Information Commissioner (CIC)). This answer underscored citizens' right to seek reasons and file queries regarding public employment and policy deviations, especially those affecting transparency and equal opportunity. In File No: CIC/SA/A/2016/001978, the CIC ruled that: 'Public authorities are bound to give reasons for selection, extension, or re-employment of public servants, especially when there is a departure from standard procedure or existing policy.' This judgment arose in the context of an RTI applicant seeking details about the re-employment of a retired officer in a central government department. The Central Information Commission directed the public authority to: Disclose the note sheets and file notings showing the rationale for re-employment. Provide copies of approval orders, correspondence, and minutes of meetings that led to the decision. Clarify whether any rules were relaxed or amended to allow such re-employment. In his detailed reasoning, he emphasised: 'When a government servant is re-employed post-retirement, especially when young and qualified aspirants are awaiting regular appointments, the authorities must place on record the compelling public interest that justified such a move.' This principle is directly relevant to the July 31, 2025 re-employment order issued by the Tamil Nadu Department of Higher Education. Based on that ruling, the following implications arise: Citizens can question: Activists like Prof Ravisankar can seek: 1. The file notings, justifications, and correspondence from the Higher Education Department and Collegiate Education Commissioner-On whether any rules under G.O. 92 or G.O. 192 were amended or bypassed. 2. Lack of transparency violates the RTI mandate-If the July 31 order does not disclose public interest justifications, it could be seen as arbitrary or opaque, inviting challenge under RTI as well as judicial review. 3. Re-employment must serve public interest, not individual continuity-As noted in the order: Public offices are not meant for the convenience of individuals but for the service of the public. 4. RTI is a tool to uphold equality and fair opportunity-Re-employment of individuals beyond 60, without open recruitment or advertisement, raises serious concerns about denial of opportunity to eligible younger candidates, which can be pursued through RTI. Activists or citizens can file RTIs asking for: Copy of the July 31 G.O. with background file notes and recommendations; Details of consultation with the Law Department, if any. This judgment of CIC affirms that RTI is a powerful legal mechanism to challenge arbitrary re-employment, demand transparency in administrative decisions, and protect the rights of deserving aspirants. In the current Tamil Nadu case, this precedent strengthens the position of public-spirited individuals like Prof Ravisankar in ensuring that public policy does not become a tool for preferential or non-transparent governance. (The writer is a former CIC and Advisor, School of Law, Mahindra University, Hyderabad)
