Malegaon Blast Verdict: 17 Years, 7 Accused, Zero Convictions – What Went Wrong?

Seventeen years after a deadly bomb blast shook Malegaon, Maharashtra, a special NIA court has delivered a landmark verdict, acquitting all seven accused, including BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur and Lt Col Prasad Shrikant Purohit. The court's decision, based on a glaring lack of evidence and procedural discrepancies, has sparked nationwide discussion on terrorism, justice, and the intersection of politics and law enforcement in India.

The Blast and Its Aftermath

On the night of September 29, 2008, an explosive strapped to a motorcycle detonated near Bhikku Chowk in the communally sensitive town of Malegaon. The attack, which took place during the holy month of Ramzan and just before Navratri, claimed six lives and injured over 100. The motorcycle was initially linked to Pragya Singh Thakur, and the case was handed to the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS), then headed by the late IPS officer Hemant Karkare.

Over time, the narrative evolved dramatically. The initial arrests and charges drew nationwide attention due to the accused’s ideological affiliations and political connections. In 2011, the investigation was transferred to the National Investigation Agency (NIA), which continued the prosecution under stringent anti-terror laws.

The Trial: Evidence vs. Doubt

The trial formally began in 2018 and lasted for seven years, presided over by five different judges. The court examined 323 prosecution witnesses and eight for the defense. However, approximately 40 witnesses turned hostile, casting doubt on the integrity of the testimonies.

Key observations from the final verdict delivered by Judge A.K. Lahoti include:

• No Conclusive Forensics: The court highlighted that the forensic trail was deeply flawed. Investigators failed to collect fingerprints, dump data, or preserve samples at the blast site. The panchnama (scene documentation) lacked sketches, and the samples collected were contaminated—rendering the reports unreliable.

• Motorcycle Ownership Unproven: The prosecution could not establish that the motorcycle involved in the blast belonged to Pragya Thakur. The chassis number was never recovered, and the engine number was unclear.

• No Evidence Against Purohit: There was no proof that Lt Col Purohit stored, supplied, or assembled explosives. His defense argued that he was an undercover intelligence operative within Abhinav Bharat, the group allegedly linked to the conspiracy.

• Discrepancies in Medical Records: The court found manipulation in several medical certificates, reducing the confirmed number of injured from 101 to 95.

• Flawed UAPA Procedure: The application of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) was deemed invalid due to procedural defects, specifically the lack of proper sanctioning as mandated by law.

Ultimately, the court concluded that the prosecution had only established that a blast had occurred — not who executed it, how it was executed, or with what materials. "Suspicion cannot take the place of proof," the judgment emphasized, granting the benefit of doubt to all accused.

The Acquitted: Who They Are

The seven individuals acquitted were:

1. Pragya Singh Thakur – Current BJP MP from Bhopal, earlier associated with the ABVP, known for controversial public statements.

2. Lt Col Prasad Shrikant Purohit – Then a serving officer in Military Intelligence, claimed he had infiltrated radical groups.

3. Maj (Retd) Ramesh Upadhyay

4. Ajay Rahirkar

5. Sudhakar Dwivedi alias Dayanand Pandey

6. Sudhakar Chaturvedi

7. Sameer Kulkarni

All faced charges under UAPA, IPC sections relating to murder, conspiracy, and promoting enmity, and were out on bail during the trial.

Court's Message: Terrorism Has No Religion

In a sharp rebuke to communal narratives, the court remarked, "Terrorism has no religion, and conviction cannot be based on mere perception or public discourse." This assertion reflects the judiciary’s intent to distance legal interpretations from ideological or political motives.

Political Reverberations

The verdict has prompted strong political responses, with the ruling BJP portraying it as a validation of its long-standing criticism of the investigation. BJP leader Pragya Thakur, reacting to her acquittal, said the case "ruined her life" and was part of a broader conspiracy to defame "Bhagwa" and Hindutva.

Adding to the chorus, Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma on Thursday asserted that “the court’s decision once again proves that a Hindu can never be a terrorist.” He accused the Congress of trying to malign Hindus in order to “appease a particular community” and said that such a political narrative had no basis in truth. His remarks reflect a growing effort from the BJP to reframe the Malegaon case as an example of politically driven injustice against the majority community.

Lt Col Purohit’s legal team reiterated his claims of infiltration and intelligence gathering, while the other co-accused pointed to custodial torture and coerced statements during the ATS probe.

NIA Under Scrutiny

The verdict exposes significant fault lines in both the ATS and NIA investigations. The NIA, which had initially sought severe punishment for the accused, was criticized for inconsistent charge sheets, lack of credible forensic backing, and procedural lapses. The court explicitly mentioned the contradiction between ATS and NIA narratives, raising concerns over investigative integrity.

Compensation for Victims

While acquitting the accused, the court acknowledged the human cost of the tragedy. It ordered the Maharashtra government to provide ₹2 lakh to the families of the deceased and ₹50,000 to each of the injured — a gesture, albeit symbolic, of state responsibility.

Conclusion: A Judicial Turning Point

The Malegaon blast verdict is more than just a legal outcome; it is a profound reflection on the state of India’s criminal justice system. It lays bare systemic lapses in terror investigations, the dangers of politicizing national security, and the fragility of due process when pitted against public sentiment.

With over 10,000 documents, hundreds of testimonies, and a trial spanning nearly two decades, the case underscores that justice delayed may not always be justice denied — but it certainly comes at a cost: to victims, to the wrongly accused, and to the credibility of institutions.

This verdict does not merely acquit seven individuals; it indicts an entire ecosystem that let suspicion stand in for proof — and calls for urgent reform.

Also Read: Slap On The Face Of Anti Nationals: Pragya Thakur