Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur

NEW DELHI: The Bombay High Court on Tuesday granted bail to Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur , accused of plotting the September 2008 blasts in Maharashtra's Malegaon, in which six people were killed. However, the court rejected the bail of another prime accused Lt Col Prasad Purohit .

"The appeal filed by Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur is allowed. The applicant (Sadhvi) is directed to be released on bail on a surety of Rs 5 lakh. The appeal filed by Prasad Purohit stands dismissed," said a division bench of Justices Ranjit More and Shalini Phansalkar Joshi.

The court directed Sadhvi Pragya to surrender her passport to the National Investigation Agency (NIA). It also directed her not to tamper with the evidence and to report to NIA court as and when required.

"We have said in our order that prima facie there is no case made out against Sadhvi," Justice More said while refusing to stay today's order.

The HC bench of Justices Ranjit More and Shalini Phansalkar Joshi had in February concluded a lengthy hearing and had reserved their appeals for pronouncement of judgment. Both Sadhvi and Purohit had filed separate appeals. The hearing in Purohit’s plea concluded on February 17 while Sadhvi’s on February 20.

The 2008 Malegaon blast had killed six and injured 100. The blast occurred on September 29, 2008 at about 9.35 pm when a bomb exploded opposite Shakil Goods Transport Company, Malegaon. It was caused by an explosive device fitted to LML motorcycle bearing licence number MH-15 P–4572.

The state ATS had chargesheeted 12 alleged 'Hindu extremists', including Purohit and Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur in 2009. Initially, the stringent provisions of Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 (MCOCA) were also invoked against them. However, after the decision of the Supreme Court, the NIA dropped charges under MCOCA against Sadhvi and Purohit.

The chargesheet filed last year by NIA said that Purohit flouted Army service rules by forming an outfit called Abhinav Bharat in 2006. Purohit, however, claimed he was only discharging his duties to gather more intelligence.

The ATS chargesheet stated that Sadhvi’s scooter was used for the blast by prime accused Ram Kalsangra (absconding). Kalsangra’s brother Shivnarayan, who is accused number 2, has been telling the trial court that his brother was “eliminated by police officers’’ his lawyer said.

Meanwhile, various other witnesses and even an accused had complained of “illegal detention and torture’’ by ATS members and alleged violation of human rights.

In Sadhvi’s appeal, the HC had also heard intervention applications to oppose her bail. Her counsel had earlier submitted that the bike in which the bomb was planted did not belong to her and that even the NIA had said that ATS had no case against her.

Purohit’s counsel Shrikant Shivade, relying on military records, said the records show no explosives, including RDX which were missing from seizures made during his tenure in Kashmir in 2002-04. An important charge against Purohit is that he used the RDX retained from that seizure for the 2008 Malegaon blast despite he being an intelligence officer.

In Sadhvi’s case, the NIA which had in its supplementary chargesheet exonerated her of all charges, did not object to her being granted bail and released from jail. Both Sadhvi and Purohit have been in continuous custody since 2008, for almost nine years, ever since their arrest.

Appearing for the intervenor - family of blast victim Nisar Bilal — counsel B A Desai who questioned the legality of the fresh probe of NIA which had taken over from the Maharashtra Anti Terror Squad (ATS) pointed to what he said was "incriminating evidence against the accused."

Desai said, "There are reasonable grounds to believe that accusations are prima facie true and that Sadhvi was part of several conspiracy meetings prior to the blast. There is voluminous evidence as well as witness statements to prove this."

The HC had heard the audio and video recordings of the conspiracy meetings held prior to the blasts after Desai pointed out discrepancies in the evidence submitted. Desai challenged the NIA recommendation to exonerate Thakur in its supplementary chargesheet. "Prosecutor has not acted as the agent of Justice in this case. The onus is now on the intervenor to place facts as the NIA has refused to do it before the court, " Desai had argued in his concluding submissions.

The bench had called for written submissions from Desai, Sadhvi's counsel and NIA counsel Sandesh Patil.

In Purohit’s case, Shivade had relied on Army records and documents to argue that the main charge against the suspended Army Intelligence officer of retaining RDX was bogus. Military records show that Purohit could not have removed any RDX even after a raid because of elaborate operations and procedures, besides he never conducted the actual raid, Shivade had argued and cited commendations Purohit had received from superior officers for his good work throughout his career. Recently one of Purohit’s superior went public in his support and said “Purohit is innocent.”

While rejecting Purohit’s bail plea, the NIA court had observed that all military documents and any other evidence in his support would be considered during the trial and not at pre-trial stage. The case is at a stage where the charges are yet to be framed to enable the start of trial.

Purohit has been detained for more than eight years without trial and ATS “framed’’ him by “planting RDX’’ and once the charge of him planting explosives lacked evidence, bail cannot be denied, Shivade argued. Shivade also said that the NIA now handling the case differed with the ATS.

The special trial court judge also had wrongly invoked provisions of an amended Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) retrospectively, to deny him bail, Purohit said.

Read this story in Marathi

Read this story in Kannada



In Video: Malegaon blast case: Bail for Sadhvi Pragya Thakur, Lt Col Purohit stays in jail