Supreme Court agrees to hear Maha govt's plea against acquittal in 2006 Mumbai train blasts case
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai agreed to urgently list the matter for hearing on Thursday, after Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta mentioned it.
Seeking an urgent hearing on the state government's special leave petition (SLP), SG Mehta said that it was a 'serious matter' requiring the top court's consideration on 'some important issues'.
In a major ruling delivered on Monday, the Bombay High Court acquitted 12 accused, of whom five were on death sentence and seven others on life imprisonment, in the July 11, 2006, Mumbai blast case.
Directing their immediate release from jail, the acquittal order passed by a bench of Justices Anil Kilor and S. Chandak came as a major blow to the investigation agencies.
The Justice Kilor-led Bench castigated the shoddy probe prosecution, opining that the prosecution failed to even establish the type of bombs used in the crime.
The 12 accused -- incarcerated for 19 years -- succeeded in establishing before the Bombay High Court the fact of torture inflicted on them to extort confessional statements.
As a result, it held the statements inadmissible, saying, "On all the tests relating to voluntariness and truthfulness of the confessional statements, the prosecution failed."
Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis termed the Bombay High Court verdict as "shocking", saying that the Maharashtra government will move the Supreme Court against it.
On July 11, 2006, seven bomb serial blasts in packed Mumbai local trains brought the maximum city to its knees within 11 minutes.
The terror attack left 189 dead and over 800 injured.
Earlier in 2015, a special court convicted 12 individuals in the case, sentencing five -- Faisal Shaikh, Asif Khan, Kamal Ansari, Ehtesham Siddiqui, and Naveed Khan -- to death, while the remaining seven were given life imprisonment.
The prosecution had argued that the attack was planned by Pakistan's intelligence agency, ISI, and carried out by operatives of Pakistan-based militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba with help from the Students' Islamic Movement of India, a banned Indian group.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
17 minutes ago
- Time of India
‘Undeclared emergency@11': Farooq Abdullah calls BJP's rule ‘dangerous', will fight for Indian democracy
Delhi | National Conference president Farooq Abdullah says, "...They talk of Indira Gandhi's emergency. That only lasted for 18 months. This (emergency) has been going on for 11 years. I hope it ends. And I hope people in the Parliament will fight for Indian democracy. That's all I want..." Show more Show less
News18
17 minutes ago
- News18
UN's top court in landmark climate change decision enshrines human right
Agency: Last Updated: July 23, 2025, 20:30 IST Representational image (Image: News18) The Hague, Jul 23 (AP) Judges with the United Nations's top court say in a landmark climate decision that a 'clean, healthy and sustainable environment" is a human right. The International Court of Justice is delivering an advisory opinion Wednesday about nations' obligations to tackle climate change and consequences they may face if they don't. The non-binding opinion, which runs to over 500 pages, is seen as a potential turning point in international climate law. Enshrining a sustainable environment as a human right paves the way for other legal actions, including states returning to the ICJ to hold each other to account, as well as domestic lawsuits. 'The human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment is therefore inherent in the enjoyment of other human rights," court President Yuji Iwasawa said. The decision could serve as the basis for other legal actions, including domestic lawsuits, and legal instruments like investment agreements. The case is led by the Pacific island nation of Vanuatu and backed by more than 130 countries. All UN member states including major greenhouse gas emitters like the United States and China are parties to the court. Outside the court, climate activists gathered. They held a banner that read: 'Courts have spoken. The law is clear. States must ACT NOW." The courtroom, known as the Great Hall of Justice, was packed. After years of lobbying by vulnerable island nations who fear they could disappear under rising sea waters, the UN General Assembly asked the ICJ in 2023 for an advisory opinion, an important basis for international obligations. A panel of 15 judges was tasked with answering two questions: What are countries obliged to do under international law to protect the climate and environment from human-caused greenhouse gas emissions? Second, what are the legal consequences for governments when their acts, or lack of action, have significantly harmed the climate and environment? 'The stakes could not be higher. The survival of my people and so many others is on the line," Arnold Kiel Loughman, attorney general of the island nation of Vanuatu, told the court during a week of hearings in December. In the decade up to 2023, sea levels rose by a global average of around 4.3 centimeters (1.7 inches), with parts of the Pacific rising higher still. The world has also warmed 1.3 degrees Celsius (2.3 Fahrenheit) since preindustrial times because of the burning of fossil fuels. Vanuatu is one of a group of small states pushing for international legal intervention in the climate crisis but it affects many more island nations in the South Pacific. 'The agreements being made at an international level between states are not moving fast enough," Ralph Regenvanu, Vanuatu's minister for climate change, told The Associated Press. Any decision by The Hague-based court would be unable to directly force wealthy nations into action to help struggling countries. Yet it would be more than just a powerful symbol, since it could serve as the basis for other legal actions, including domestic lawsuits. 'What makes this case so important is that it addresses the past, present, and future of climate action. It's not just about future targets — it also tackles historical responsibility, because we cannot solve the climate crisis without confronting its roots," Joie Chowdhury, a senior attorney at the Centre for International Environmental Law, told AP. Activists could bring lawsuits against their own countries for failing to comply with the decision and states could return to the International Court of Justice to hold each other to account. And whatever the judges say will be used as the basis for other legal instruments, like investment agreements, Chowdhury said. The United States and Russia, both of whom are major petroleum-producing states, are staunchly opposed to the court mandating emissions reductions. Swipe Left For Next Video View all Simply having the court issue an opinion is the latest in a series of legal victories for the small island nations. Earlier this month, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights found that countries have a legal duty not only to avoid environmental harm but also to protect and restore ecosystems. Last year, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that countries must better protect their people from the consequences of climate change. In 2019, the Netherlands' Supreme court handed down the first major legal win for climate activists when judges ruled that protection from the potentially devastating effects of climate change was a human right and that the government has a duty to protect its citizens. (AP) RD RD (This story has not been edited by News18 staff and is published from a syndicated news agency feed - PTI) view comments News agency-feeds UNs top court in landmark climate change decision enshrines human right Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
The Hindu
17 minutes ago
- The Hindu
After 5 years, India to issue visas to Chinese tourists
India will start issuing tourist visas to Chinese nationals after a gap of five years, the Indian Embassy in Beijing announced on Wednesday. The announcement, that was called 'positive' by the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, marks another step in normalising India-China ties ruptured by the military standoff at the Line of Actual Control and Galwan clashes in 2020. According to an official notice posted online and on Chinese social media, the visas can be applied for online beginning from Thursday and obtained after an appointment at the Indian Embassy in Beijing and consulates in Shanghai and Guangzhou. Amidst the bonhomie, Beijing rejected concerns in Delhi and Dhaka about China's latest dam project on the Yarlung Sangpo or Brahmaputra River in Tibet and said it had communicated with both the governments. Responding to a question about the visa issuance on Wednesday, a Chinese MFA spokesperson said that Beijing had taken note of the 'positive move'. 'Easing cross-border travel is widely beneficial. China will maintain communication and consultation with India to further facilitate travel between the two countries,' said spokesperson Guo Jiakun in Beijing. After the Covid pandemic and then violence between the two militaries after China amassed troops at the LAC, both countries had cancelled all flights and most visa services between them. China restored visa applications for Indian students in 2022 and for business and tourism purposes subsequently. It issued an estimated 85,000 visas between January and June 2025. India had issued visas in business and student categories, but not for tourism until now. According to the Ministry of Tourism figures in 2019, before the lockdown, more than 3,00,000 Chinese tourists had visited India and about 8,69,000 Indian tourists had gone to China. After Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping met in Kazan last October and agreed to restore ties, a series of high-level meetings discussed the next steps, including the start of the Kailash Manasarovar Yatra. Most recently, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar travelled to China on July 14-16, and met with his counterpart Wang Yi, and also called on Chinese President Xi Jinping and Vice-President Hang Zheng, before attending the SCO Council for Foreign Ministers. In an interview to The Hindu, Chinese Ambassaor Xu Feihong said that resuming the Kailash pilgrimage was 'an important initiative taken by China to improve relations between the two countries', indicating that it was India's turn to take the next positive step. Both sides are also working on resuming direct flights between the two countries soon, understood to be announced before PM Modi's visit to China for the SCO summit, which is expected on August 31-September 1, officials said. When asked by reporters about the hydropower project being constructed on the Yarlung Sangpo, Mr. Guo said that it was 'fully within China's sovereignty'. 'China is engaged in cooperation with downstream countries on sharing hydrological data, flood prevention and disaster reduction,' he said, adding that Beijing has had the 'necessary communication' with India and Bangladesh. Construction for the massive 60,000 MW Medog Hydropower station, set to be the world's largest, began last week, and was flagged off by Chinese Premier Li Qiang. In a response in Parliament, the government had said that India had 'registered its concerns' with China over the ecological and disaster risks of the project in December 2024, while the Bangladesh's Ministry of Water Resources had also requested Beijing's response on its concerns in March this year.
