Multifarious Proceedings Cannot Be Permitted: Bombay HC To Lt Col Prasad Purohit In Malegaon Blast Case

The Bombay High Court on Monday asked Lt. Col. Prasad Purohit, accused in the Malegaon Blasts case, to decide whether he wants to pursue the pending appeal against rejection of his discharge application or the writ petition against special court's order taking cognizance of ATS chargesheet filed against him in 2009. A division bench of Justice A. S. Gadkari and Justice Milind Jadhav granted one week's time to Purohit to decide, file necessary amendments and place additional material on record. The court was hearing a writ petition in which Purohit is challenging the special court's order taking cognizance of offences registered against him without previous sanction of the Central Government under section 197(2) of the Cr. P. C. The Supreme Court in August 2022 had requested the Bombay High Court to expedite the hearing in the present petition. Thereafter the petition was listed for circulation on 14 November, 2022. The writ petition has been filed under section 482 of Cr. P. C. and Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. "Writ petition under 482 for discharge is not maintainable," the bench said. Prasad has also filed an appeal before the High Court assailing the order refusing to grant him discharge from the case. Prasad had filed another petition in 2019 which also challenges the special court's order as well as the Maharashtra Home department's Additional Chief Secretary's order granting sanction to apply UAPA in Malegaon blast case. The issue of cognizance of the ATS chargesheet without sanction of the Central Government under section 197(2) of the Cr. P. C is common in all three petitions. "Can you file multiple petitions agitating the same issue? We are seeking your assistance on this.….How is petition challenging judicial order maintainable under 226 (of the Indian Constitution)", Justice Gadkari asked. Advocate Neela Gokhale for the petitioner informed the court that the present writ petition was filed as the pending appeal was not being heard. "Multifarious proceedings cannot be permitted," the bench responded. The bench asked Gokhale to seek instructions from the petitioner and decide which case to proceed with. "Make up your mind for one comprehensive appeal", the bench suggested. If the petitioner decides to proceed with the current writ petition, the bench said then he will have to satisfy the court that a petition challenging judicial order is maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution. Six persons were killed and around 100 injured when an explosive device strapped to a golden LML Freedom motorcycle went off near a mosque in Malegaon, a town in north Maharashtra, on September 29, 2008. While the case was initially investigated by the ATS, the NIA took over investigations and considerably watered down the charges against the accused. Thakur and Purohit have been charged with murder, voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons, promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc, and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony on him, relevant sections under The Arms Act, The Indian Explosive Substance Act, and Unlawful Activities Prevention Act. Case no. – Writ Petition no. 871 of 2021 Case title – Lt. Col. Prasad Purohit v. Union of India

Multifarious Proceedings Cannot Be Permitted: Bombay HC To Lt Col Prasad Purohit In Malegaon Blast Case

Amisha Shrivastava

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Amisha Shrivastava

Multifarious Proceedings Cannot Be Permitted: Bombay HC To Lt Col Prasad Purohit In Malegaon Blast Case

Amisha Shrivastava

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Amisha Shrivastava

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers