PIL In Delhi High Court Seeks Court Monitored Committee To Supervise Red Fort Blast Trial

A PIL has been filed in the Delhi High Court seeking a direction for a Court monitored Committee to supervise all stages of the trial in the recent red fort blast case.

The matter will be heard tomorrow by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela.

The plea, filed by Dr. Pankaj Pushkar, seeks a day-to-day trial in the case which is being probed by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) and that the prosecution must file monthly status reports before the judicial committee.

The blast took place on November 10. As many as 13 people were killed in the explosion which happened outside the Red Fort.

Moved by Advocate Raja Chaudhary, the PIL terms the blast as an attack upon India's sovereignty, national security and psychological integrity of the people of Delhi.

The plea states that the victims' families remain in complete darkness as they do not know why their loved ones were killed or which “forces” orchestrated the attack.

“Despite official assurances, only judicial supervision can guarantee that evidence is preserved, agencies cooperate, witnesses are protected, and the investigation aims not only at identifying the perpetrators but also at uncovering the purpose and intent behind the attack—information the victims are constitutionally entitled to,” the plea states.

Citing various UAPA cases, the plea adds that practical realities of terrorism trials over the last three decades demonstrate that without direct constitutional court supervision, the NIA cases “routinely collapse” under the weight of delay.

The petitioner contends that terrorism prosecutions under TADA, POTA and UAPA take 12 to 27 years to conclude, leading to evidentiary disintegration, loss of witness memory, repeated adjournments, hostile witnesses, fractured chain of custody, and ultimately, retrials or large-scale acquittals.

The plea further states that a day-to- day trial under the supervision of the High Court not only “fulfils statutory obligations” but also ensures that “truth is established swiftly, credibly, and without scope for external interference.”

“Court-Monitored Special Regime (CMSR)—ensuring day-to-day proceedings, continuous oversight, and time-bound compliance—is not an extraordinary measure but a practical constitutional necessity to prevent the present case from becoming another entry in the long list of delayed or derailed terrorism trials that have eroded public confidence in the justice system,” the plea submits.

Title: DR. PANKAJ PUSHKAR v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS