NIA Court Says Pragya Thakur Had Taken Sanyas, No Evidence Of Conscious Possession Of Explosive-Laden Bike; But Rejects Her Torture Claim

While acquitting the seven accused from the 2008 Malegaon Blast Case, particularly former parliamentarian and BJP leader Pragya Singh Thakur, the special NIA court held that the prosecution failed to prove that she was in 'conscious' ownership of the explosive-laden LML Freedom motorcycle just before the blast. Special Judge AK Lahoti even refused to accept the theories of the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) and the National Investigation Agency (NIA) that the bomb was strapped or planted on the LML Freedom bike, which was allegedly owned by Pragya. The judge even noted that Pragya had renounced material world at least two years before the blasts took place.While referring to the testimonies of various witnesses, the judge said,"The evidence clearly shows that, Pragya was not having the possession of the said vehicle since after taking the Sanyas. It was in the exclusive possession of absconding accused Ramji Kalsangra Thus, ATS and NIA themselves claiming that, the vehicle was in possession of absconding accused Kalsangra since beginning. Pragya had renounced the material world prior to some years of the alleged bomb-blast, which clearly shows that she was not in possession of the said motorcycle."The judge added that the prosecution had not led any evidence on record to show that, she was in conscious possession of the said motorcycle even after renouncement of the material world. "Nobody has seen her with the said motorcycle or it was with her at Jabalpur Aashram even after taking the Sanyas. Even NIA exonerated her from all the charges. the prosecution has failed to establish either ownership or the conscious possession of alleged motorcycle by adducing the cogent and reliable evidence," the court held. Mere Damage To Motorcycle Not Conclusive ProofFurther the court referred to statements of some witnesses, who were present at the site during the blast and noted that none had identified the motorcycle or described that the blast took place due to that motorcycle. The judge said that the condition of the LML Freedom motorcycle and one more bike parked at least six feet from it, especially the former being half burnt in condition and the latter's petrol tank receiving some damage to the petrol tank, shows that the said damages could be because of the explosion. The judge further pointed out there there was no single eye witness or circumstantial evidence placed on record to show that the absconding accused Ramji Kalsangra along with other co-accused received the motorcycle from Pragya and then assembled the RDX and the bomb on the said motorcycle."Therefore, mere on the assumptions or presumptions or surmises or conjectures the charges leveled cannot be said to be proved in the absence of strict proof. In the absence of any positive evidence, I am not inclined to accept that the said vehicle was brought to the house of A-11 and bomb was fitted at that place by the accused. Thus, the theory of ATS about planting or assembling or fitting of bomb or IED in the house of A- 11 do not inspire the confidence of the Court," the judge opined. Forensic Evidence Was Just A Guess WorkAs regards the forensic evidence, the judge noted that the expert himself admitted that he did not find any cavity beneath the seat of LML Freedom motorcycle and by carrying out preliminary test on the spot, it would be possible to opine scientifically about the same. The judge noted that the expert did not conduct any scientific test in order to arrive at certain conclusion. "Taking into consideration the condition of the bike that its bottom portion was severely damaged except rods. It was in half burnt condition. When there is a blast of RDX and ammonium nitrate, it generates a very high temperature, waves, sound etc. But, the petrol tank having petrol neither melt or caught fire nor severely damaged. The Honda unicorn bike lying near the said motorcycle was also not severely damage. The present matter is serious case of bomb-blast. In such a case, mere guess work is not enough. Neither it is expected from expert when he is specifically called on the spot to collect the articles, to assist and to guide the Investigating Agency by carrying out some scientific tests. In such situation, there must be some scientific test to be carried out by an expert on the spot to arrive at certain conclusion," the judge explained. Bomb May Have Been Hanged Or Kept On Motorcycle From OutsideInstead, the court came up with a finding that the bomb would have been kept or hanged or placed on the motorcycle from outside or in close proximity."Mere, blast on the site and damaged condition of motorcycle, is not a conclusive proof of fitting explosive inside the dikki i.e. beneath the seat of said motorcycle. The damages caused to motorcycle is also possible, if explosives are placed or hanged or kept on the motorcycle from outside or in closed proximity to it. At the cost of repetition, considering the entire evidence coupled with admission given by the expert,...

NIA Court Says Pragya Thakur Had Taken Sanyas, No Evidence Of Conscious Possession Of Explosive-Laden Bike; But Rejects Her Torture Claim

Narsi Benwal

Tags