After 17 years, a special court on Thursday acquitted all seven accused in the 2008 Malegaon blast case. The court said the evidence was weak and could not prove the charges beyond doubt.

Blast Killed Six in 2008

On September 29, 2008, a bomb exploded near a motorcycle in Malegaon, Maharashtra. As a result, six people died and 101 got injured.

Court Gives Final Verdict After Years of Trial

The trial stretched over nearly two decades. Eventually, Special Judge A.K. Lahoti evaluated all evidence submitted by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) and later by the National Investigation Agency (NIA). Based on the findings, he cleared all accused, including ex-BJP MP Pragya Thakur and Lt. Col. Prasad Purohit.

No Direct Evidence Against Purohit

According to the court, the bomb was likely kept outside the motorcycle, not planted inside it. Moreover, the court noticed irregularities in some medical certificates.

Importantly, it said, “There is no evidence to suggest the source, transportation or storage of RDX at Lt. Col. Purohit’s residence.” The court also found no proof that he made the bomb.

Furthermore, officials failed to identify who parked the motorcycle or planted the explosive. The panchnama at the blast site had flaws. Since experts did not collect the forensic evidence and the site was contaminated, the court said the forensic reports were not reliable.

No Proof Linking Bike to Pragya Thakur

In addition, the court said there was no solid proof that the motorcycle belonged to Pragya Thakur or that she was connected to it.

The alleged conspiracy meetings in Faridabad and Bhopal also could not be confirmed. In fact, key witnesses turned hostile. Therefore, the court said the prosecution failed to prove that the meetings happened or that a plot was planned there.

The voice samples presented as evidence were rejected too. The court explained that they were recorded without proper authorization, so they were not acceptable.

UAPA Charges Invalid Due to Faulty Sanction

Significantly, the court found that the government did not follow proper legal process when applying charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). Due to this error, UAPA charges could not be used in the case.

Abhinav Bharat Funds Not Used for Terror

The court also reviewed the role of Abhinav Bharat, the right-wing group linked to the accused. It confirmed that Purohit was a trustee and Sudhakar Chaturvedi was the treasurer.

Although Purohit used some of the organisation’s money for personal purposes like building a house and paying LIC premiums, the court said, “there is no evidence to suggest that the funds were used for any terrorist activities.”

Witnesses Failed to Support Prosecution

Moreover, many key witness statements did not support the prosecution’s claims. The court said that although there may be suspicion, it cannot convict someone without clear and reliable evidence.

It added that both witness testimony and documents were too weak to trust. Therefore, it gave the benefit of the doubt to all the accused and acquitted them.

Additionally, the court ordered the state to compensate victims: ₹2 lakh to the families of the deceased and ₹50,000 to the injured.

Only 7 of 11 Accused Went to Trial

Originally, the ATS arrested 11 people in connection with the blast. However, over time, only seven faced trial:

• Pragya Singh Thakur

• Lt. Col. Prasad Purohit

• Major (retd) Ramesh Upadhyay

• Sameer Kulkarni

• Ajay Rahirkar

• Sudhakar Chaturvedi

• Sudhakar Dwivedi, also known as Swami Amritanand Devtirth

Trial Ended in 2023

The trial ended in July 2023. The prosecution examined 323 witnesses and submitted nearly 10,000 documents and 404 physical exhibits. However, 34 witnesses went back on their statements and were declared hostile.

NIA Later Gave Clean Chit

In 2011, the NIA took over the case. On May 13, 2016, the agency filed a supplementary chargesheet. It supported the ATS theory but cleared Pragya Thakur and some others.

The NIA said the ATS probe was flawed and also recommended dropping the charges. It said that the MCOCA law did not apply. Even then, the special court had refused to drop charges against Thakur at that time.