ISKCON Temple In Mumbai's Girgaon Receives Bomb Threat Email
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
3 hours ago
- News18
‘2006 Blast Acquittals Over Seal For RDX, Minor Details': Why SC Agreed To Hear Maharashtra's Plea
Maharashtra Plea Against HC 2006 Mumbai Train Blasts Case Acquittals: The Maharashtra government said the recovery of RDX was disbelieved on a "hyper-technical ground" The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday agreed to hear on Thursday the Maharashtra government 's appeal challenging the Bombay High Court (HC) judgment acquitting all 12 accused. On July 11, 2006, seven blasts within a span of 11 minutes in the first-class compartments of Western Railway (WR) local trains left 189 dead and several injured. The MCOCA court in September 2015 convicted 12 of the 13 arrested in the case. Kamal Ansari (now dead), Mohammad Faisal Ataur Rahman Shaikh, Ehtesham Qutubuddin Siddiqui, Naveed Hussain Khan and Asif Khan were sentenced to death, while Tanveer Ahmed Mohammed Ibrahim Ansari, Mohammed Majid Mohammed Shafi, Shaikh Mohammed Ali Alam Shaikh, Mohammed Sajid Margub Ansari, Muzammil Ataur Rahman Shaikh, Suhail Mehmood Shaikh and Zameer Ahmed Rehman Shaikh were sentenced to life imprisonment. The Bombay High Court (HC) on Monday acquitted all 12 accused, saying the prosecution utterly failed to prove the case and it was 'hard to believe they committed the crime". The Maharashtra government has appealed against the HC judgment on grounds that the recovery of RDX from an accused was disbelieved on a 'hyper-technical ground" that the seized explosives were not sealed with a lac seal. Earlier in the day, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, on behalf of the state government, mentioned the plea before an apex court bench headed by Chief Justice B R Gavai and sought an urgent hearing. The court agreed to hear it on July 24. The state government, in its appeal, has raised several serious objections to the high court's order of acquittal. The plea has asserted that due procedural safeguards under Section 23(2) of Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) were observed, including proper sanctioning by senior officers like prosecution witness (PW) no. 185 Anami Roy. It said the high court overlooked the validity of these approvals despite no substantial contradiction in the prosecution's evidence. #WATCH | Mumbai: On Bombay High Court acquitting all 12 people in relation to 2006 Mumbai train bombings, Maharashtra CM Devendra Fadnavis says, 'The verdict of the Bombay High Court is very shocking and we will challenge it in the Supreme Court." — ANI (@ANI) July 21, 2025 Lac seal for RDX: What Maharashtra government said in plea The plea has assailed the high court's rejection of the recovery of 500 grams of RDX from one of the accused on the ground that it lacked a lac seal. The plea has said that RDX, being highly inflammable, was not sealed for safety reasons and the recovery was duly sanctioned and documented. 'That, the Hon'ble High Court has disbelieved the recovery of 500 gms of RDX from Accused No. 1 on a hyper-technical ground that the RDX which was seized was not sealed with a lac seal. It will be pertinent to note that the same was not sealed with a lac seal because RDX is an inflammable substance. 'It is pertinent to note that the High Court records that the sanctioning authority for explosive substances has been examined by the prosecution. However, the Hon'ble High Court has not found any infirmities in the evidence of PW 26, who is the sanctioning authority under the Explosive Substances Act for seizure of RDX from Accused No. 1. Therefore, the High Court has erred in disbelieving the recovery of RDX from Accused No. 1," the plea has said. Minute details in confession: What Maharashtra government said in plea It has also disputed the high court's dismissal of the confession of an accused for lacking minute details, such as the date of arrival of the Pakistani co-conspirators in India, the description of the six Pakistanis and information like whether they had trained in terrorist camps. 'The entire confessional statement has been disbelieved which is an unacceptable conclusion," the plea has said, adding that omissions regarding the identities and origins of the Pakistani co-conspirators do not invalidate the overall confession. The appeal also challenges the high court's disregard of the recovery of detonators and explosive granules from another accused, pointing out that these items cannot be easily procured or planted, and their evidentiary value should not have been dismissed over technicalities. The petition says the high court failed to address the validity of the convictions under various provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and relevant provisions of the Explosive Substances Act. It says the high court ignored key findings and legal interpretations from previous landmark judgments. The plea addresses the defence's contention that the accused did not meet the definition of 'continuing unlawful activity" under the MCOCA due to earlier offences being punishable by less than three years. top videos View all Citing Supreme Court precedents, the plea says the conspiracy and scale of the attack clearly fall under MCOCA provisions. With PTI Inputs About the Author News Desk The News Desk is a team of passionate editors and writers who break and analyse the most important events unfolding in India and abroad. From live updates to exclusive reports to in-depth explainers, the Desk More tags : 2006 Mumbai Train Blasts 2006 Mumbai Train Bomb Blast Bombay High Court Devendra Fadnavis supreme court view comments Location : Mumbai, India, India First Published: July 23, 2025, 13:20 IST News cities '2006 Blast Acquittals Over Seal For RDX, Minor Details': Why SC Agreed To Hear Maharashtra's Plea 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 Print
9 hours ago
- The Print
7/11 blasts: HC disbelieved recovery of RDX on hyper-technical ground, Maha govt tells SC
Earlier in the day, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, on behalf of the state government, mentioned the plea before an apex court bench headed by Chief Justice B R Gavai and sought an urgent hearing. The court agreed to hear it on July 24. The state government rushed to the top court a day after the high court acquitted all the 12 accused, saying the prosecution utterly failed to prove the case against them and it was 'hard to believe' that the accused had committed the crime. New Delhi, Jul 22 (PTI) The Maharashtra government has assailed a Bombay High Court judgment acquitting all 12 convicts in the 2006 Mumbai train blasts case in the Supreme Court on grounds including that the recovery of RDX from an accused was disbelieved on a 'hyper-technical ground' that the seized explosives were not sealed with a lac seal. The state government, in its appeal, has raised several serious objections to the high court's order of acquittal. The plea has asserted that due procedural safeguards under Section 23(2) of Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) were observed, including proper sanctioning by senior officers like prosecution witness (PW) no. 185 Anami Roy. It said the high court overlooked the validity of these approvals despite no substantial contradiction in the prosecution's evidence. The plea has assailed the high court's rejection of the recovery of 500 grams of RDX from one of the accused on the ground that it lacked a lac seal. The plea has said that RDX, being highly inflammable, was not sealed for safety reasons and the recovery was duly sanctioned and documented. 'That, the Hon'ble High Court has disbelieved the recovery of 500 gms of RDX from Accused No. 1 on a hyper-technical ground that the RDX which was seized was not sealed with a lac seal. It will be pertinent to note that the same was not sealed with a lac seal because RDX is an inflammable substance. 'It is pertinent to note that the High Court records that the sanctioning authority for explosive substances has been examined by the prosecution. However, the Hon'ble High Court has not found any infirmities in the evidence of PW 26, who is the sanctioning authority under the Explosive Substances Act for seizure of RDX from Accused No. 1. Therefore, the High Court has erred in disbelieving the recovery of RDX from Accused No. 1,' the plea has said. It has also disputed the high court's dismissal of the confession of an accused for lacking minute details, such as the date of arrival of the Pakistani co-conspirators in India, the description of the six Pakistanis and information like whether they had trained in terrorist camps. 'The entire confessional statement has been disbelieved which is an unacceptable conclusion,' the plea has said, adding that omissions regarding the identities and origins of the Pakistani co-conspirators do not invalidate the overall confession. The appeal also challenges the high court's disregard of the recovery of detonators and explosive granules from another accused, pointing out that these items cannot be easily procured or planted, and their evidentiary value should not have been dismissed over technicalities. The petition says the high court failed to address the validity of the convictions under various provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and relevant provisions of the Explosive Substances Act. It says the high court ignored key findings and legal interpretations from previous landmark judgments. The plea addresses the defence's contention that the accused did not meet the definition of 'continuing unlawful activity' under the MCOCA due to earlier offences being punishable by less than three years. Citing Supreme Court precedents, the plea says the conspiracy and scale of the attack clearly fall under MCOCA provisions. Of the 12, five were sentenced to death and seven to life imprisonment by a special court. One of the death-row convicts died in 2021. More than 180 people were killed when seven blasts ripped through Mumbai local trains at various locations on the western line on July 11, 2006. PTI SJK RC This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
Mint
10 hours ago
- Mint
7/11 blasts acquittal: Bombay HC disbelieved recovery of RDX on technical ground, Maharashtra Govt tells Supreme Court
The Maharashtra government has challenged a Bombay High Court judgment acquitting all 12 convicts in the 2006 Mumbai train blasts case in the Supreme Court on grounds including that the recovery of RDX from an accused was disbelieved on a "hyper-technical ground" that the seized explosives were not sealed with a lac seal. Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis-led government rushed to the top court on July 22, a day after the high court acquitted all 12 accused, saying the prosecution utterly failed to prove the case against them and it was "hard to believe" that the accused had committed the crime. Earlier on Tuesday, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, on behalf of the state government, mentioned the plea before an apex court bench headed by Chief Justice B R Gavai and sought an urgent hearing. The court agreed to hear it on July 24. Seven blasts had ripped through Mumbai local trains at various locations on the western line on July 11, 2006, killing more than 180 persons and injuring several others. Nineteen years later, the Bombay High Court on Monday acquitted all 12 accused, saying the prosecution utterly failed to prove the case and it was "hard to believe theycommittedthe crime". The state government, in its appeal against the Bombay HC verdict, has raised several serious objections to the high court's order of acquittal. The plea asserts that due procedural safeguards under Section 23(2) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) were observed, including proper sanctioning by senior officers like prosecution witness (PW) no. 185 Anami Roy, news agency PTI reported. It said the high court overlooked the validity of these approvals despite no substantial contradiction in the prosecution's evidence. The plea has assailed the high court's rejection of the recovery of 500 grams of RDX from one of the accused on the ground that it lacked a lac seal. The plea has said that RDX, being highly inflammable, was not sealed for safety reasons and the recovery was duly sanctioned and documented. "That, the Hon'ble High Court has disbelieved the recovery of 500 gms of RDX from Accused No. 1 on a hyper-technical ground that the RDX which was seized was not sealed with a lac seal. It will be pertinent to note that the same was not sealed with a lac seal because RDX is an inflammable substance, according to the PTI report. "It is pertinent to note that the High Court records that the sanctioning authority for explosive substances has been examined by the prosecution. However, the Hon'ble High Court has not found any infirmities in the evidence of PW 26, who is the sanctioning authority under the Explosive Substances Act for seizure of RDX from Accused No. 1. Therefore, the High Court has erred in disbelieving the recovery of RDX from Accused No. 1," the plea has said. It has also disputed the high court's dismissal of the confession of an accused for lacking minute details, such as the date of arrival of the Pakistani co-conspirators in India, the description of the six Pakistanis and information like whether they had trained in terrorist camps. "The entire confessional statement has been disbelieved which is an unacceptable conclusion," the plea has said, adding that omissions regarding the identities and origins of the Pakistani co-conspirators do not invalidate the overall confession. The appeal also challenges the high court's disregard of the recovery of detonators and explosive granules from another accused, pointing out that these items cannot be easily procured or planted, and their evidentiary value should not have been dismissed over technicalities. The petition says the high court failed to address the validity of the convictions under various provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and relevant provisions of the Explosive Substances Act. It says the high court ignored key findings and legal interpretations from previous landmark judgments. The plea addresses the defence's contention that the accused did not meet the definition of "continuing unlawful activity" under the MCOCA because earlier offences were punishable by less than three years. The plea cites Supreme Court precedents, saying the conspiracy and scale of the attack clearly fall under MCOCA provisions. Of the 12, five were sentenced to death and seven to life imprisonment by a special court. One of the death-row convicts died in 2021. More than 180 people were killed when seven blasts ripped through Mumbai local trains at various locations on the western line on July 11, 2006.
