New Delhi: The Maharashtra government, as of now, does not intend to appeal the acquittal of the seven in the Malegaon terror blast case, in either the Bombay high court or the Supreme Court, a Right to Information (RTI) query has revealed. It has three months to move against the July 31 verdict.

Just days prior to this ruling, when the high court acquitted the accused in the 2006 Mumbai train blast case (all of whom were Muslims), the Maharashtra government promptly decided to move the Supreme Court against the verdict. Chief minister Devendra Fadnavis had even expressed his surprise – without having reviewed the entire judgment – and said that it be challenged in the Supreme Court. Immediately following the ruling, during a media interaction on July 21, Fadnavis said: "This verdict has come as a shock to us. The reason is that the lower court had given its verdict based on the thorough investigation and evidence gathered by the ATS. I have not yet reviewed the entire order, but I have already communicated with our legal team and instructed them to contest this ruling in the Supreme Court."

On the other hand, several days have passed since the verdict in the Malegaon blast case but the head of the Maharashtra government appears to be treating this judgement as though it is a victory for him.

Expressing his enthusiasm over the acquittal of the accused, Fadnavis had posted, "No such thing as saffron terrorism – never was and never will be! #MalegaonVerdict."

Notably, the government has the option to appeal this ruling within three months. It remains to be seen whether it will pursue an appeal, given that it has not shown any plans to do so thus far.

On July 31, 2025, the special National Investigation Agency (NIA) court in Mumbai acquitted all seven individuals accused in the Malegaon blast case, which includes former BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur and Lieutenant Colonel Prasad Purohit.

On September 29, 2008, a bomb explosion occurred in Malegaon, Maharashtra, killing six individuals and injuring about 100 others. The incident took place during the month of Ramadan.

What was the RTI query?

RTI activist Ajay Basudev Bose submitted an application on August 1, 2025, inquiring whether the Maharashtra government intends to appeal the acquittal of seven individuals in the Malegaon bomb blast case at the Bombay high court or the Supreme Court.

According to a document shared by Bose with The Wire Hindi, on August 5, Lakesh R. Kanade, the public information officer of the Law and Justice Department of the government of Maharashtra, replied that, based on departmental records, the Public Prosecutor's Office has not yet received any proposal to appeal in this matter.

The letter states:

‘According to the records available in this branch, no proposal has been received from the relevant Public Prosecutor's Office regarding an appeal to the Hon'ble Bombay High Court or the Hon'ble Supreme Court.’

Interestingly, just one day prior to this verdict, Union home minister Amit Shah had stated during a debate in the Rajya Sabha, "I proudly declare before the world that Hindus can never be terrorists."

The term 'saffron terrorism' caught national attention during the investigation of the 2008 Malegaon blast case conducted by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad. This was primarily due to the fact that the ATS's initial inquiry indicated involvement from certain Hindutva organisations. As the investigation advanced, the ATS began to uncover evidence that identified activists linked to the Hindutva group.

Consequently, the topic of 'saffron terror' emerged as a focal point for political and ideological debate.

Double standards of the government?

The BJP government has not yet decided to appeal in the Malegaon blast case. However, this is not the first time.

In 2007, a blast occurred on the Samjhauta Express train between India and Pakistan, resulting in the deaths of 68 people. Numerous individuals, including Swami Aseemanand, were arrested in connection with this bombing. Nevertheless, in 2019, due to insufficient evidence, the court acquitted all four accused, including Aseemanand. Similar to the Malegaon bomb blast case, the Union government opted not to contest the court's ruling in a higher court.

A similar situation arose in the historic Mecca Masjid blast case in Hyderabad. On May 18, 2007 (a Friday), an improvised explosive device was detonated within the Mecca Masjid complex, leading to the deaths of 9 individuals and injuring several dozen others. Aseemanand and 11 others were charged in this incident. However, akin to the Malegaon and Samjhauta Express blasts, in April 2018, the NIA special court acquitted the accused (Devendra Gupta, Lokesh Sharma, Bharat Mohan Lal Reteshwar, Rajendra Chaudhary, and Naba Kumar Sarkar alias Swami Aseemanand). The NIA did not appeal this ruling in a higher court.

However, just 10 days prior to the verdict in the Malegaon bomb blast case, on July 21, the Bombay high court acquitted all 12 defendants in the 2006 Mumbai serial train blast case. Within 72 hours (on July 23), the Maharashtra government appealed to the Supreme Court against this ruling, and the Supreme Court subsequently stayed the Bombay high court's decision. However, the government also expressed that it did not wish to see the accused incarcerated again.

It is important to note that all the individuals acquitted in this case were Muslims. In contrast, all the accused in the Malegaon blast, Samjhauta Express blast, and Mecca Masjid blast cases were not only Hindus but most of them had links to radical Hindu organisations.

What led to the acquittal of the accused in the Malegaon blast case?

While acquitting Sadhvi Pragya, Colonel Purohit, and retired Major Ramesh Upadhyay, along with Ajay Rahirkar, Sudhakar Chaturvedi, Sameer Kulkarni, and Sudhakar Dwivedi from all charges in the Malegaon blast case, special judge A.K. Lahoti stated that 'the prosecution failed to present conclusive evidence to prove the charges.'

In 2008, when the explosion occurred, the Union government was led by the United Progressive Alliance, while Maharashtra was governed by a coalition of the Congress and Nationalist Congress Party. The state administration handed over the investigation to the ATS. In its final chargesheet submitted on January 20, 2009, which implicated a total of 14 individuals, the ATS invoked the MCOCA along with other legal provisions.

MCOCA, or Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 is a stringent law designed to combat organised crime and the underworld. This law grants the police special powers, such as the ability to detain suspects for up to 180 days without formally charging them and the denial of bail to those accused. Additionally, statements taken by the police may be admissible as evidence in court under specific circumstances.

Before transferring the case to the NIA in 2011, the ATS had submitted two chargesheets.

In 2014, a shift in power occurred both at the Union and state governments. The central command, led by Narendra Modi, shifted to the Bharatiya Janata Party-led National Democratic Alliance, and a Shiv Sena-Bharatiya Janata Party government was formed in the state.

Merely a few months later, in 2015, the Indian Express released an interview with public prosecutor Rohini Salian, in which she claimed, "Last year I received a call from an NIA officer. He expressed a desire to meet in person, as he preferred not to discuss matters over the phone. Upon meeting, he conveyed that a directive had come from higher authorities for me to adopt a softer stance." Salian's remarks were interpreted to suggest that the government, via the NIA, encouraged her to take a 'gentler' approach towards the accused.

Although Salian did not disclose the officer's name at that time, she mentioned that "he was upset because the case was retained under MCOCA."

Three months following this interview, Salian disclosed that the individual who had requested her to ‘go soft’ against the accused in the 2008 Malegaon blast case was NIA's (then) superintendent Suhas Warke, and this occurred after the NDA assumed power.

Also read: Malegaon Terror Blast Judgment: How the Crucial Witnesses Prosecution Dropped Impacted the Case

In May 2016, the NIA submitted a supplementary chargesheet and completely dismissed the charges under the MCOCA law. Furthermore, the investigating agency said that there was insufficient evidence against Pragya Thakur and five others, stating that 'it is not appropriate to prosecute them.'

Following the chargesheet, the court dropped the MCOCA charges but did not acquit Pragya Thakur and the other six individuals. After this chargesheet, Salian remarked that the NIA had acted as a shield for the accused in the Malegaon blast case.

Responding to the acquittal of all the defendants in this case, Salian said: “It was anticipated that this would happen. If solid evidence is not presented, what can one expect? I am not the prosecutor who provided evidence in court until the end. I had distanced myself from the case since 2017, and prior to that, I had submitted substantial evidence that the Supreme Court had upheld. Where did all that [evidence] disappear?”

Speaking to Mid-Day, Salian said that when the case was handed over to the NIA, the agency chose to conduct a re-investigation instead of proceeding with the already filed chargesheet. The agency claimed that the previous evidence was fabricated. She alleged that this decision resulted in delays and created discrepancies.

Translated from the Hindi original – which first appeared on The Wire Hindi – by Naushin Rehman.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.