The Division Bench of the Bombay High Court comprising Justices Anil Kilor and Shyam Chandak acquitted all twelve accused in the 2006 Mumbai local train serial blasts case, overturning the conviction and death sentences awarded by the Special MCOCA Court in 2015. The judgment came nearly two decades after the blasts that killed 187 people and injured over 800 during Mumbai’s peak evening hours on July 11, 2006.
The Court found serious flaws in the prosecution’s case, observing that the evidence presented was neither trustworthy nor sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. It criticised the investigation for relying on unreliable eyewitness accounts, procedurally defective test identification parades, and confessional statements that suffered from violations of mandatory legal safeguards under the MCOCA and UAPA statutes.
The Bench noted that several witnesses were not called for identification parades despite having seen the suspects shortly after the blasts, and even those who were presented showed inconsistencies in their testimonies. It also questioned the legal validity of the confessional statements, citing absence of adequate “cooling-off” periods, failure to inform accused of their right to legal representation, and coercion. Recoveries of explosives, maps, and related materials were held to be immaterial, as the prosecution failed to link them conclusively to the accused or establish the specific type of explosives used in the attacks.
The High Court also raised doubts regarding the invocation of MCOCA, including whether the authority granting prior approval had jurisdiction and whether relevant materials were placed before the sanctioning authority. The judges expressed concern that presenting a false sense of justice by convicting the wrong persons could undermine public trust while the real perpetrators remained at large.
One of the thirteen convicted had died during the pendency of the proceedings, and another (accused no. 8) had been acquitted by the Special Court. The State had not appealed against that acquittal.
Appearances:Â
Mr.Raja Thakare, Senior Advocate, with Mr.A.M.Chimalkar, SPP, with Mr.Siddharth Jagushte, Mr.Akash Kavade, Ms.Aishwarya Sharma, Ms.Drushti Gala, Mr.Tushar C.Nirbhavane i/by Smt.M.M.Deshmukh, APP, Smt.G.P.Mulekar, APP, Smt.R.S.Tendulkar, APP, Mr.A.D.Kamkhedkar, APP, Mr.P.H.Gaikwad and Mr.A.R.Metkari, APP, for State.
Dr.Yug Mohit Chaudhari with Ms.Payoshi Roy, Mr.Hasan Nizami, Mr.Anush Shetty, Mr.Siddharth Sharma and Dashrath Gaikwad for Respondents.
Ms.Nitya Ramakrishnan, Senior Advocate, with Ms.Stuti Rai i/by Mr.Ansar Tamboli, Advocate for Respondent nos.2 and 12.
S.Nagamuthu, Senior Advocate, with Ms.Payoshi Roy, Mr.Siddhartha Sharma for Respondent nos.3 and 6.
Dr.S.Murlidhar, Senior Advocate, with Mrs.Ninni Susan Thomas, Mr.Maitreya Subramaniam for Respondent nos.9 and 11 i/by Mr.Ansar Tamboli for Respondent nos.2,8,11 and 12.
Mr.Gaurav Bhawnani for Respondent Nos. 3 and 10.
Ms.Hetali Sheth for Respondent no.4.
Mr.Khan Ishrat Azar Ali for Respondent nos.5 and 7.
Mr.Aditya Mehta for Respondent Nos.6 and 13.