New Delhi: The Bombay high court on Monday rejected an appeal filed by Lieutenant Colonel Prasad Shrikant Purohit seeking discharge in the 2008 Malegaon blast case in which six people were killed and more than 100 were injured.
The court made the caustic remark that causing bomb blast is not official duty, according to LiveLaw.
The Indian Army officer sought discharge on the ground that the prosecution did not take sanction under relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). A bench of Justices A.S. Gadkari and Prakash Naik rejected his plea, saying that sanction from the Union government was not needed because Purohit was “not on official duty”.
Apart from Purohit, six others – including BJP MP Prgaya Singh Thakur – are facing trial in the case. All the accused are currently out on bail.
On September 29, 2008, a device strapped to a motorcycle exploded near a mosque in Malegaon. The motorbike was registered in Pragya Thakur’s name, according to the investigation. Though the probe was initially conducted by the Maharashtra Anti Terrorism Squad (ATS), it was taken over by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) later.
According to LiveLaw, the chargesheet accuses Purohit and others of wanting to form a government in exile. “They were dissatisfied with the Constitution of India and had wanted to prepare their own constitution,” the chargesheet says, adding that Purohit was responsible for procuring RDX – an explosive chemical – from Kashmir.
Neela Gokhale, representing Purohit, submitted during the hearing that the NIA had said that Purohit had informed his superiors about attending meetings of Abhinav Bharat, an organisation which worked to create a Hindu rashtra. Therefore, the lawyer claimed that he was on duty “collecting intelligence for the Indian Army” by attending the meetings, according to Indian Express.
But advocate Sandesh Patil, appearing for the NIA, said the document that Purohit’s lawyer referred to support his case was the Army officer’s own and not of the agency. Some other documents that were produced by Purohit were from the Army’s Court of Enquiry and are inadmissible in judicial courts.
The NIA’s lawyer denied that Purohit was on duty when he was attending the conspiracy meetings and cannot rely on Section 197 of the CrPC, according to Indian Express.
Patil also submitted that Purohit cannot be discharged as the trial is at an advanced stage – nearly 300 witnesses have been produced so far by NIA in the trial court – and his conviction or acquittal can be decided as per the merits of the case.
He also submitted that an Army official had recently deposed before the trial court that there was no official communication from Purohit informing his superiors about his alleged plans to infiltrate Abhinav Bharat and collect intelligence.