Nasheman

India's largest selling Urdu weekly, now also in English

You are here: Home / Archives for Malegaon Blast

2006 Malegaon terror attack: All 9 Muslims discharged by Mumbai court

by

Malegaon

Mumbai: In a major development all nine Muslim men, falsely accused in 2006 Malegaon bomb blast case, were acquitted by a court here on Monday.

Noorul Huda, Shabbir Ahmed, Raees Ahmed, Salman Farsi, Farogh Magdumi, Shaikh Mohammed Ali, Asif Khan, Mohammed Zahid and Abrar Ahmed, who languished in the jail for years, had filed a discharge application earlier.

One accused in the case has died, while six were released earlier in 2011 on bail. Two other accused have been convicted in the 2006 train blasts case.

The Monday’s order was passed by Sessions Judge V V Patil.

The National Investigation Agency on Thursday told a Mumbai court it has found no evidence to link nine Muslims arrested in the 2006 Malegaon blasts case to the terror attack, a move that could see them walk free.

The NIA did not object to the discharge applications filed by the arrested accused, saying evidence collected by it were “not in consonance” with those obtained earlier by Maharashtra Anti-terrorism Squad and the Central Bureau of Invgestigation, which had recommended their prosecution.

“It is submitted that evidence collected by NIA in further investigation is not in consonance with evidence collected by the Anti-Terrorism Squad and the CBI. The court may kindly pass appropriate orders in the matter,” the anti-terror agency told a special NIA court in response to discharge applications filed by the nine accused.

It said no evidence was found in support of the conclusion drawn in final reports filed by ATS and CBI, which had probed the case earlier, and recommended prosecution of the accused arrested in connection with the September 8, 2006 explosions that killed 37 people and wounded 125.

Judge Y D Shinde adjourned hearing till next month. The 2006 bombings were part of a series of explosions that had rocked Malegaon, a communally sensitive power-loom town in Nashik district of Maharashtra, located about 300 km from Mumbai. The blasts had occurred in a Muslim cemetery, adjacent to a mosque, after Friday prayers on Shab-e-Barat.

The Maharashtra ATS, which first probed the case, had arrested Noorul Huda Samsudoha, Shabbir Ahmed Masiullah, Raees Ahmed Rajab Ali Mansuri, Salman Farsi Abdul Latif Aimi, Farogh Iqbal Ahmed Magdumi, Mohammad Ali Alam Sheikh, Asif Khan Bashir Khan alias Junaid, Mohammad Zahid Abdul Majid Ansari and Abrar Ahmed Gulam Ahmed.

The case was later handed over to the CBI, which endorsed the findings of Maharashtra ATS, before it was transfered to NIA after it came into existence in 2009. After the confessions made by Swami Aseemanand, an accused in the 2007 Mecca Masjid blast, the role of Hindu right wing organisation ‘Abhinav Bharat’ in the blasts came to light.

Following Aseemanand’s confession, the accused moved the court with discharge applications. In May this year, NIA filed its charge sheet in the case against four accused– Lokesh Sharma, Dhan Singh, Manohar Singh and Rajendra Choudhary, contradicting the findings of the ATS and the CBI.

Malegaon had seen another terror attack on September 29,  2008, also allegedly masterminded by ‘Abhinav Bharat’ in which seven persons were killed.

(Agencies)

2008 Malegaon blasts case: SC seeks Centre, NIA reply on PIL

by

Supreme Court

New Delhi: The Supreme Court today sought response from Centre and National Investigating Agency (NIA) on a plea challenging removal of Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) in the 2008 Malegaon blasts case and alleging that Government was exerting pressure on her to “go soft” on the accused.

A bench comprising Justices J Chelameswar and A M Sapre asked Centre and NIA to file their responses within one week.

The bench, however, did not allow the submission of senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Indira Jaising that hearing on the bail applications of the accused persons be stayed for the time being.

The bench has also issued notice to Maharashtra government in the case. Earlier, a Supreme Court Judge had recused from hearing the plea, saying that he had represented certain accused in the matter.

The PIL, filed by social activist Harsh Mander, has accused NDA government of trying to interfere with the functioning of the prosecutor in the case by exerting “pressure” on her to “go soft” on the accused. It alleged that the executive was attempting to influence the judicial system.

It has alleged that NIA officials had pressured erstwhile Special Public Prosecutor in case, Rohini Salian, “presumably” under instructions from their “political masters”.

Salian, who was SPP in the case, had alleged that an NIA officer had told her to go soft on the accused. She also claimed the same officer had told her that she would be replaced. Salian is no longer on NIA’s panel of lawyers.

The petition has sought the apex court’s intervention to ensure a fair trial as there were reasons to “credibly fear” that “executive is attempting to influence the judicial system to cave in to the pressure exerted by it in all matters, including affording protection to right-wing extremists who sympathize with its ideology”.

The PIL also sought direction to the Centre to appoint an SPP to conduct “fair” trial and constitute a Special Investigating Team of CBI to probe alleged actions of NIA officials who allegedly pressured Salian.

The high-profile accused in the case include Lt Col S P Purohit and Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur.

The 4,000-page charge sheet had alleged that Malegaon was selected for the blasts because of its sizeable Muslim population. It named Pragya Singh Thakur, Purohit and another accused, Swami Dayanand Pandey, as the key conspirators.

The charge sheet had alleged it was Pandey who had instructed Purohit to arrange for RDX, while Pragya owned the motorcycle which was used in the blast.

Ajay Rahirkar, another accused, allegedly organised funds for the terror act, while conspiracy meetings were held at Bhonsala Military School in Nasik, according to charge sheet.

Rakesh Dhawde, Ramesh Upadhyay, Shyamlal Sahu, Shivnarain Kalsangra, Sudhakar Chaturvedi, Jagdish Mhatre and Sameer Kulkarni were the other accused. The blast on September 29, 2008 had left four dead and nearly 80 injured.

(PTI)

SC judge recuses from hearing PIL on Malegaon blast probe

by

Supreme Court

New Delhi: The hearing on the PIL seeking to bring back Rohini Salian as special prosecutor to lead the CBI’s case in Malegaon bomb blast case and seeking probe into allegations that she was pressurised to go slow in the case was put off as Justice Uday Umesh Lalit recused himself from hearing the matter.

As the matter was called for hearing before the bench of Justice Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla and Justice Lalit, the latter recused himself from hearing the matter saying that he had appeared for some of the accused earlier as a lawyer before he was elevated as a judge.

Former bureaucrat-turned-social activist Harsh Mander has moved the apex court seeking that Salian who had stepped down as special prosecutor in Malegaon case involving right wing Hindu groups be brought back to lead the Central Bureau of Investigation’s case.

He has also sought probe into the allegations that Salian was asked by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to go slow in the case, an allegation denied by the agency.

Mander, in his PIL, referring to an interview by Salian wherein she had alleged that she was pressured by the NIA to go soft in the Malegaon case, has sought the court’s intervention for a fair trial.

The PIL has alleged that NIA was acting under the instructions of its political masters.

Malegaon in 2008 was rocked by blasts which claimed six lives and left more than 100 injured.

(Agencies)

Malegaon terror attack: PIL in SC accuses Modi govt of influencing trial

by

Supreme Court

New Delhi: Accusing the NDA government of trying to interfere with the functioning of the prosecutor in the 2008 Malegaon blasts case by exerting “pressure” on her to “go soft” on the accused, an activist today moved the Supreme Court seeking a fair trial “as the executive is attempting to influence the judicial system”.

The PIL filed by Harsh Mander alleged that National Investigation Agency (NIA) officials had pressured erstwhile Special Public Prosecutor in the case Rohini Salian to “go soft” on the accused “presumably” under instructions from their “political masters”.

The petition, filed through senior counsel Indira Jaising, has alleged that Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), which is the controlling Ministry of NIA, “have been allegedly trying to influence/pressurize an honest Public Prosecutor to go soft on the accused persons”.

The petitioner has sought the apex court’s intervention to ensure a fair trial as there were reasons to “credibly fear” that “executive is attempting to influence the judicial system to cave in to the pressure exerted by it in all matters, including affording protection to right wing extremists who sympathize with its ideology”.

Salian, who was SPP in the case, had recently stirred a controversy when she alleged an NIA officer had told her to “go soft” on the accused, a charge denied by the anti-terror agency. She also claimed the same officer had told her that she would be replaced. Salian is no longer on NIA’s panel of lawyers.

“That the factual conspectus afore-stated goes a long way in showing that the government of the day has tried to interfere with the functioning of special public prosecutor, treating the post as if it is under the Government in utter disregard to the principle laid down by this Court…,” the PIL said.

It sought a direction to the Centre to appoint a SPP to conduct “fair” trial and constitute a Special Investigating Team of CBI to probe alleged actions of NIA officials who allegedly pressured Salian. The PIL said pressure exerted on Salian by NIA officials seriously compromised a fair and transparent trial in the case.

“If there is credible reason to fear that public prosecutors are made to succumb to the wishes of their political masters, it is submitted that public faith in the entire edifice on which the free, fair and transparent trial is based would crumble,” it said.

Referring to Salian’s interview to media, the plea alleged that she had made “startling revelations” regarding “hidden hands allegedly nudging the judicial system to free the accused in the 2008 Malegaon case.”

The petition said the case involves people from “right wing extremist fringes of the society whom the present day Government is allegedly seeking to shield by diluting their stance in the prosecution of the case.”

It claimed the government was trying to soften their stance “which inevitablely would result in favouring of the accused, who belong to the majority community and thus strike a blow to the secular ethos of the Constitution and its mandate of protecting the interests of vulnerable minority.”

“This is a case where the systematic victimization based on pre-existing prejudices is writ large and ultimately the fair conduct of the trial would be a very important factor in order to restore the confidence of the minority who have been demoralized to a great extent,” the PIL said.

It said that SPP’s hallmark of being independent from government influence has been “severely compromised” in the case as was obvious from Salian’s statement.

“This is also supported by the fact the NIA since it has taken over the investigation from the Maharashtra ATS has not added any new evidence in the present matter despite strong evidence being available to it,” it claimed.

It said unless the apex court steps in, the victims of the Malegaon blasts cannot expect justice in the current scenario due to the “brazen illegalities” allegedly committed by the government.

The high-profile accused in the case include Lt Col S P Purohit and Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur. The 4,000-page charge sheet had alleged that Malegaon was selected for the blasts because of its sizeable Muslim population. It named Pragya Singh Thakur, Purohit and another accused, Swami Dayanand Pandey, as the key conspirators.

The charge sheet had alleged it was Pandey who had instructed Purohit to arrange for RDX, while Pragya owned the motorcycle which was used in the blast.

Ajay Rahirkar, another accused, allegedly organised funds for the terror act, while conspiracy meetings were held at Bhonsala Military School in Nasik, according to the charge sheet. Rakesh Dhawde, Ramesh Upadhyay, Shyamlal Sahu, Shivnarain Kalsangra, Sudhakar Chaturvedi, Jagdish Mhatre and Sameer Kulkarni were the other accused. The blast on September 29, 2008 had left four dead and nearly 80 injured.

(PTI)

Modi government pressurizing me to go 'soft' on Hindutva terrorists: Rohini Salian

by

Rohini Salian

Mumbai: In a shocking revelation, Rohini Salian, Special Public Prosecutor in the case related to the 2008 Malegaon terror attack carried out by Hindutva extremists during Ramadan, has said that over the past one year, since “the new government came to power,” she has been under pressure from the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to go “soft” saffron terrorists involved in this case.

Ms Salian, who hails from Mangaluru, told a reputed Indian English daily that immediately after Narendra Modi-led government came to power she received a call from one of the officers of the NIA — the agency investigating all the alleged Hindu extremist cases — asking to come over to speak with her.

“He didn’t want to talk over the phone. He came and said to me that there is a message that I should go soft,” she revealed.

Matters came to a head this month, on June 12, she said, when just before one of the regular hearings in the case in the Sessions Court, she was told by the same NIA officer that “higher-ups” did not want her to appear in the court for the State of Maharashtra and that another advocate would attend the proceedings.

Ms Salian, 68, a leading prosecutor who has handled important cases like the J J shootout, Borivili double murder, the Bharat Shah case and the Mulund blasts amongst others, said: “The meaning (of that message from the officer) is very clear — don’t get us favourable orders.”

She said she wants the NIA to officially denotify her from the case to which she was appointed in 2008, “so that I am free to take up other cases, against the NIA, if need be”. The Malegaon blast, on September 29, 2008, claimed four lives and injured 79 while another blast at the same time in Modasa in Gujarat killed one. Initially, Muslims were seen as suspects in the case but it was under Hemant Karkare of the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) that investigations led to Hindu extremists based in Indore.

Investigations revealed the blasts were allegedly the handiwork of extremist Hindu organisations. Twelve people were arrested in the case, including Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur and Colonel Prasad Shrikant Purohit. Of the 12, four are on bail.

That probe — later given over to the NIA that was constituted after the 26/11 terror attack in which Karkare was killed — led to a relook at other cases: Malegaon blasts of 2006 (31 killed, 312 injured); 2007 Ajmer blast (3 killed, 15 injured); 2007 Mecca Masjid blast in Hyderabad (9 killed, 58 injured); and 2007 Samjhauta Express attack (68 killed, 13 injured). The probe found many common accused in these cases.

Salian said that the Supreme Court has now decreed that the case should be tried in a special court with a specially appointed judge to see to the matter. “So in a way it’s all back to square one,” said Salian.

On April 15, the Supreme Court held that the Malegaon accused cannot be charged under MCOCA since there was no evidence as on date. Opening the doors for their release on bail, it further said that the trial court should decide their bail plea on merit and without applicability of MCOCA, preferably within one month. This, Salian said, now leaves it open for the accused to once again appeal for bail in the court under changed circumstances.

“A day before June 12, when the case came up again for regular hearing (in the trial court), the same officer who had come to my office came up to me and said there are instructions from higher-ups, someone else will appear instead of you. I said I was expecting this and, good, you have told me this, so please settle my bills…I also said that now they should now denotify me so that I can appear against the NIA in other matters — not this one — in the future. He must have conveyed it to the higher-ups and I am waiting for their action. I have not heard from anyone since then,” said Salian.

“The meaning (of the message from the government) is very clear — don’t get us favourable orders. Unfavourable orders are invited — that goes against the society,” said a perturbed Salian. When asked how she saw the case proceeding further, Salian said, “For a layman or a fresh prosecutor it’s very difficult — one cannot do anything. Maybe they want to loosen it and ultimately lose the case because they can’t withdraw it.”

(Agencies)

Puttur Hindu convention hoarding glorifies terror accused Sadhvi Pragya Thakur

by

Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur

Mangaluru: The organizers of Hindu Hridaya Sangama, a massive Hindutva convention scheduled to be held on January 16 at Puttur in Dakshina Kannada district, have raked up a controversy by using a terrorist’s image in their hoardings.

The photo of Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, a key accused in the 2008 Malegaon terror attack, which claimed at least seven human lives and injured many, on the promotional hoardings has created tension in the region.

Umar K S, a local PFI leader has lodged a complaint in jurisdictional Puttur Town Police station demanding immediate action against the supporters of the anti-national terrorists.

Meanwhile, Puttur PFI president has submitted a memorandum to the police urging them to take necessary steps to prevent the organizers of Hindutva convention from attempting disturb the peace in the society.

“Police should not allow the speakers including VHP supremo Praveen Togadia to deliver communally provocative speech,” he urged in the memorandum.

KNOW US

GET INVOLVED

PROMOTE

Archives