The Bombay High Court on Friday admitted a petition filed by the 2008 Malegaon blast case accused lieutenant Colonel Prasad Shrikant Purohit, challenging earlier court verdicts rejecting his pleas for discharge from the case.
After a special National Investigating Agency (NIA) court on December 27 last year rejected his application seeking his discharge from the 2008 Malegaon blast case, lt Col
Purohit had earlier this year moved the Supreme Court and based on the direction from the apex’s court, he approached the Bombay High Court challenging the earlier verdicts and seeking his discharge from the case.
Purohit’s contention is that the sanction granted by the government to prosecute him in the case, “was wrong in law”. He had also questioned the manner in which a prior sanction was granted for his prosecution, a pre-requisite for his trial in view of the fact that he was a serving Army officer at the time.
On January 17, 2009, this sanction was issued by the Additional Chief Secretary of the Maharashtra Home Department.
Purohit’s lawyer Shrikant Shivde has contended that under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), the state law and judiciary department, which is the sanctioning authority, had to constitute an appropriate authority and seek its report first.
Shivde, in the plea field on behalf of his client, has argued that the sanction for Purohit was granted in January 2009 but the authority was appointed only in October 2010, he has argued. Hence, the sanction in Purohit’s case thus, was not valid under the provisions of the UAPA and hence, the courts couldn’t have taken cognisance of the charges against him.
At Friday’s hearing, a HC bench of Justices Ranjit More and Anuja Prabhudesai, admitted Purohit's petition and noted that arguments over the sanction granted for the latter’s prosecution would be heard from July 16.
Advocate Sandesh Patil, counsel for the NIA that had earlier had earlier opposed Purohit’s plea, argued that as per procedure, Purohit must file a fresh plea before the special court seeking discharge on the point of sanction.
On its part, the HC bench also suggested that the NIA refrain from proceeding with the trial in the special court until the issue of sanction vide Purohit’s plea was decided by the high court.
Patil, however, told the court that while the special NIA court was to frame charges against Purohit in the case on Friday, it was unlikely that the Special court would go ahead with the task as it wasn’t “ready yet”.
On December 27, 2017, a Special NIA court had dropped charges under the stringent Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) against Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, lt Col Prasad Purohit and five other key accused in the much-discussed case.
However, Additional Sessions Judge SD Tekale rejected the applications of key accused Sadhvi Pragya, Purohit, Sameer Kulkarni, Ramesh Upadhyay and Sudhakar Dwivedi for discharge from the case.
The seven accused against whom MOCCA charges were dropped, but continue to face charges under Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) are: Sadhvi Pragya, Purohit, Dwivedi, Major (Retd) Ramesh Upadhyay, Sameer Kulkarni, Sudhakar Chaturvedi and Ajay Rahirkar.
Two other accused Rakesh Dhawde and Jagdish Mhatre will be tried under only under the Arms Act. The Judge, however, discharged three accused Pravin Takalki, Shyamlal Sahu and Shivnarayan Kalsangra from the 2008 Malegaon blasts case.
Sadhvi Pragya and Purohit were among the 11 persons charge-sheeted by the ATS on January 20, 2009, in connection with 2008 Malegaon blasts.
It may be recalled that an improvised explosive kept under the seat of a lMl Freedom motor-bicycle had exploded between Bhikku Chowk and Anjuman Chowk, near Noorani Masjid, at Malegaon in north Maharashtra, on the night of September 29, 2008, leaving six persons dead and injuring 101 others.