High Court acquits all 12 convicted in 2006 Mumbai train blasts case
One witness, the court found, had deposed in multiple unrelated crime branch cases, including the Ghatkopar blast case, making his testimony 'unreliable'. Several others failed to explain how they could suddenly recall and identify the accused after years.The judges also highlighted procedural lapses. "Some witnesses were not even examined during the trial. As for recoveries like RDX and other explosive material, the prosecution could not establish that the evidence was sacrosanct until it reached the Forensic Science Laboratory," the bench said.Observing "non-application of mind", the High Court concluded that the prosecution had "thoroughly failed" to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. "It is difficult to say that the prosecution can sustain its charges," the bench held, quashing the special Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) court's October 2015 judgment that had sentenced five to death and seven to life imprisonment.Of the 12 originally convicted, one, Kamal Ansari, died in 2021 due to Covid-19 while lodged in Nagpur prison. The remaining 11, who have spent 19 years behind bars, are now set to walk free.Advocate Yug Mohit Chaudhry, representing some of the accused, said, "This judgment will be a sign of hope for those wrongly incarcerated". The bench responded, "We did our duty and it was our responsibility".Public Prosecutor Raja Thakare, while acknowledging the verdict, said the judgment would serve as a "guiding light" for future trials.The 2006 Mumbai train blasts remain one of India's deadliest terror attacks, with seven bombs exploding in first-class compartments during peak hours on the Western Railway line.- Ends
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
CJI Gavai inaugurates Bombay HC's 4th bench in Kolhapur
Chief Justice of India B R Gavai on Sunday inaugurated the Bombay High Court 's new circuit bench in Kolhapur district. Independence Day 2025 Modi signals new push for tech independence with local chips Before Trump, British used tariffs to kill Indian textile Bank of Azad Hind: When Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose gave India its own currency Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis and Deputy CM Eknath Shinde were present on the occasion. The setting up of the fourth bench in Kolhapur comes amid demands from various quarters over the years so as to ease the burden on litigants and lawyers who have to travel to Mumbai, located 380 km away, for hearing of their pleas. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Play War Thunder now for free War Thunder Play Now Undo At present, apart from the principal bench in Mumbai, the HC has two more benches -- at Nagpur in Vidarbha region and Aurangabad (Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar) in the state's Marathwada region. A third bench of the high court sits in adjoining Goa. Live Events On August 1, a notification was issued by Bombay HC's Chief Justice Alok Aradhe appointing Kolhapur as a circuit bench. The Kolhapur bench will be functional from Monday (August 18) with a division bench and two single benches. The new bench will have jurisdiction over six districts - Satara, Sangli, Solapur, Kolhapur, Ratnagiri and Sindhudurg (last two located in coastal Konkan region). The Kolhapur division bench will comprise Justices M S Karnik and Sharmila Deshmukh, while Justices S G Dige and S G Chapalgaonkar will preside over the single benches. The division bench is expected to hear matters including Public Interest Litigations, civil writ petitions, first appeals, family court appeals, contempt appeals as well as all other civil and criminal matters from the districts of Kolhapur, Satara, Sangli, Solapur, Ratnagiri and Sindhudurg. The single bench of Justice Dige will hear criminal appeals, criminal revision applications, bail applications and other criminal matters. Justice Chapalgaonkar will preside over a single bench hearing civil writ petitions, civil applications and other civil matters assigned to a single judge. PTI
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
$1,390 stimulus check in your bank account soon? IRS' crucial update for millions of Americans
Rumours have spread online last week that the US government will soon be issuing stimulus checks to taxpayers in certain income brackets. But, the truth is US citizens won't receive any stimulus payment this summer. But Congress has not passed legislation to authorize such payments, and, according to the IRS, no new stimulus checks will be distributed in the coming weeks. What is the claim around stimulus payment in the US? According to news agency AP, claims are doing round on social media that the Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury Department have approved $1,390 stimulus checks that will be distributed to low- and middle-income taxpayers by the end of the summer. But these claims don't hold any truth. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like When the Camera Clicked at the Worst Possible Time Read More ALSO READ: $5,108 Social Security August payment arriving next week: Are you getting the amount this month? Check exceptions An IRS official clarified to AP that taxpayers in the US will not receive new stimulus checks of any amount this summer. A stimulus check is a payment made to a taxpayer by the US government. Stimulus checks are made by paper check or through direct deposit and are intended to encourage spending during times of economic contraction. Also known as economic impact payments, stimulus checks are authorized by Congress through legislation and distributed by the Treasury Department. Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri last month introduced a bill that would send tax rebates to qualified taxpayers using revenue from tariffs instituted by President Donald Trump. Hawley's bill has not passed the Senate or the House. Live Events Earlier this year, the IRS revealed it would release roughly $2.4 billion to taxpayers who missed out on claiming the Recovery Rebate Credit on their 2021 tax returns. This refundable credit was designed for individuals who did not receive one or more of the COVID-19 stimulus payments, with a maximum benefit of $1,400 per person. ALSO READ: Millions of US citizens to receive $1,390 stimulus soon? Check if you qualify and when to expect it To qualify, taxpayers who hadn't already filed their 2021 return needed to do so by April 15. An IRS spokesperson has confirmed that no new credit is available for taxpayers to claim. The rumor may stem from a separate IRS announcement earlier this year about distributing about $2.4 billion to taxpayers who failed to claim a 2021 Recovery Rebate Credit. That refundable credit, worth up to $1,400 per person, was tied to COVID-era stimulus programs — but the deadline to claim it was April 15. The IRS has not announced any new relief programs, and no similar proposals are currently moving through Congress other than one from Sen. Josh Hawley that remains in committee. American Worker Rebate Act Republican Sen. Josh Hawley proposed the American Worker Rebate Act in July, which would send at least $600 per taxpayer from tariff revenue, plus extra payments for qualifying children. The bill has not passed either the House or Senate. ALSO READ: Hurricane Erin 2025 turns deadly? NHC's urgent warning of flash food, heavy rainfall as these US states are at risk Hawley said Americans "deserve a tax rebate" and likened his proposal to one floated by President Donald Trump. Supporters argue that sharing tariff revenue would put money back in Americans' pockets. Opponents say such rebates could be unpredictable because they rely on fluctuating tariff revenue and would need congressional approval before reaching taxpayers. Rebates could increase if tariff revenue is higher than expected. Taxpayers with an adjusted annual gross income above a certain amount — $75,000 for those filing individually — would receive a reduced rebate. 'Like President Trump proposed, my legislation would allow hard-working Americans to benefit from the wealth that Trump's tariffs are returning to this country,' Hawley said in a press release. ALSO READ: Apple Watch blood oxygen feature returns: Stunning update rolls out with iOS 18.6.1 and watchOS 11.6.1. How can you access it?
Scroll.in
3 hours ago
- Scroll.in
SC overturns 2022 gram panchayat poll result in Haryana after recounting votes
The Supreme Court has overturned the result of a 2022 gram panchayat election in Haryana after issuing summons for the Electronic Voting Machines used during the polls and directing its registrar to conduct a recount of the votes. The case pertained to an election in November 2022 for the post of sarpanch of Buana Lakhu village in Panipat district. After the registrar recounted the votes in the Supreme Court, the defeated candidate Mohit Kumar was found to have obtained 51 more votes than Kuldeep Singh, the candidate who had been declared the winner. Subsequently, a bench of Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta and N Kotiswar Singh on August 11 ordered the Panipat deputy commissioner-cum-election officer to issue within two days a notification declaring the defeated candidate as the elected sarpanch. The Supreme Court also said that the newly-elected sarpanch, who was the petitioner in the matter, would be entitled to assume his office immediately and perform his duties. It added that the result was subject to the final judgement of the election tribunal. The bench said that there was 'prima facie no reason to doubt the report submitted by the OSD [officer on special duty/registrar] of this court, especially when the entire recounting has been duly videographed and its result is signed by the representatives of the parties'. It added: '…we are satisfied that the appellant deserves to be declared as the elected sarpanch' in the election held in November 2022. During the hearing, Kant said that the candidate who was earlier declared as the winner of the election was not to be blamed as the 'blunder' happened only in one booth, Live Law reported. '…complete mess created by returning officer/the counting officer, it is he who committed a blunder,' Live Law quoted the judge as saying. 'In these kind of matters, the only solution is, you go for thought that High Court will write 15 pages to deny recount!' The case In 2022, a candidate Kuldeep Singh was declared the winner of the gram panchayat election in Buana Lakhu. However, the returning officer suo motu ordered a recounting of votes on the same day because of an error in the preparation of the result by the presiding officer at one of the booths, Live Law reported. Following this, another candidate named Mohit Kumar was declared elected. Kuldeep Singh had challenged the result the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which noted that the outcome of the election could not be suo motu changed by recounting the votes once a candidate was declared elected. The appropriate remedy available to an aggrieved party was to file an election petition, it added. The bench had set aside Kumar's election and directed authorities to notify Kuldeep Singh as the elected sarpanch. In response, Kumar filed an election petition, after which Kuldeep Singh raised a preliminary objection on the grounds of limitation. The matter eventually reached the Supreme Court, which rejected Kuldeep Singh's objection and directed the election tribunal to decide the case within four months, Live Law reported. In April, the election tribunal held that there was a need to recount the votes at one of the booths and the deputy commissioner-cum-election officer was directed to conduct the exercise. However, this order was set aside by the High Court after Kuldeep Singh filed an appeal. Subsequently, Kumar moved the Supreme Court against the High Court order. In July, the Supreme Court ordered the production of the EVMs before a nominated registrar, Live Law reported. The registrar was directed to recount the votes for all five booths and this exercise was videographed. The report submitted by the registrar after the recount indicated that Kumar had secured 51 votes more than Kuldeep Singh in the revised result. On August 11, the Supreme Court reversed the earlier results but added that since one of the petitioners contended that certain other issues remained to be adjudicated, the parties were at liberty to present it before the tribunal.
