Supreme Court Pauses Order Acquitting 12 In Mumbai Train Blasts Case
A bench of Justices M M Sundresh and N Kotiswar Singh said the high court judgment shall not be treated as a precedent, and issued notice to all the accused in the case. The court, however, did not stay the release of the accused from prison.
The developments came as the top court was hearing a petition by the Maharashtra government challenging the High Court verdict.
More than 180 people were killed in the seven bomb blasts that ripped through separate Mumbai local trains within a span of 11 minutes on July 11, 2006. On Monday, the High Court had acquitted all the 12 accused, saying the prosecution had utterly failed to prove the case and it was "hard to believe the accused committed the crime".
Appearing for the Maharashtra government in the top court, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta sought a stay on the verdict but did not press for a stay on the release of the acquitted persons.
"I am seeking stay, not to bring them back to jail. Certain findings of laws will affect the MCOCA (Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act) trial. May consider saying they may not be required in jail," he said.
The court said since all the accused were released, there was no question of sending them back to the prison. "However, on submissions of learned SG, the impugned judgment will not be treated as precedent," it said.
Justice Sundresh said he read the case files and learnt that some of the accused are Pakistani nationals.
In its order earlier this week, the High Court bench of Justice Anil Kilor and Justice Shyam Chandak set aside a September 2015 judgment of the MCOCA court that had imposed the death penalty on five of the 12 accused persons and had sentenced the remaining seven to life.
"The prosecution has utterly failed to prove the case against the accused. It is hard to believe that the accused committed the crime. Hence, their conviction is quashed and set aside," it said.
The court also said the explosives, arms and maps recovered during the investigation appeared to be unrelated to the blasts. The prosecution, it said, could not even prove what kind of bombs were used in the blasts. It subsequently ordered the release of all the accused if they are not wanted in any other case.
Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis had described the acquittals as "shocking". "I have discussed with the lawyers, and the high court verdict will be challenged in the Supreme Court," he said.
Rigged pressure cookers were used for the bombings to amplify the damage caused in 2006. The first blast occurred at 6.24 pm - rush hour due to people returning from work - and the last at 6.35 pm. The bombs were placed in first-class compartments of trains from Churchgate. They exploded near the stations of Matunga Road, Mahim Junction, Bandra, Khar Road, Jogeshwari, Bhayandar and Borivali.
In 2015, the special court of Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act sentenced Faisal Sheikh, Asif Khan, Kamal Ansari, Ehtesham Sidduqui and Naveed Khan to death. Seven other convicts Mohammed Sajid Ansari, Mohammed Ali, Dr Tanveer Ansari, Majid Shafi, Muzzammil Shaikh, Sohail Shaikh and Zamir Shaikh were sentenced to life imprisonment for being a part of the conspiracy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
5 minutes ago
- India Today
Bombay High Court grants bail to teacher convicted of sexually abusing student
The Bombay High Court has granted bail to a 60-year-old tuition teacher who was convicted earlier this year by a POCSO court for sexually assaulting a minor Sarang V Kotwal suggested that the victim might have been tutored as she had admitted in her cross-examination that her mother, a police constable, had told her how to respond to questions in the trial alleged incident happened on March 15, 2017, when the victim, then studying in Class 4, was attending tuition classes along with her elder sibling. A complaint was lodged by the girl's mother on March 19 that year. The girl claimed that the teacher called her to his room, asked her to read a book, and touched her breasts inappropriately. The girl got frightened and went to an adjacent room where the teacher's wife was also taking a the court noted that the girl's claim of attending the tuition class a day after the alleged incident, despite informing her mother, seemed IMPLICATED, CLAIMS TEACHERDuring the hearing, the teacher's lawyer, Satyavrat Joshi, argued that he had been falsely implicated due to a grudge harboured by the victim after being scolded for not attending also pointed out that the teacher's wife was present in the house during the alleged incident, making it improbable that any offence could have occurred. Joshi further alleged that the child had been tutored by her teacher was convicted under Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and Sections 354 and 354A of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to five years of rigorous was taken into custody on January 9, 2025, and had previously spent a short time in jail in prosecution and the lawyer representing the victim opposed the bail, stating that a 10-year-old girl would not fabricate such allegations against her teacher. They also noted that the alleged incident occurred in a separate GRANTS BAILHowever, the court said the evasive answers by the victim and inconsistencies in her statement suggest the alleged incident might not be true."She again attending the tuition class on March 16 after informing her mother seems rather difficult to believe. She has further answered that she did not remember whether she attended the tuition class on March 17. All these evasive answers support the submission of advocate Satyavrat Joshi that the incident may not be true. All these questions will have to be decided during the final hearing stage of the appeal," the court the teacher's age, lack of antecedents, and the likelihood of delay in the appeal's disposal, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs 25,000.- EndsTrending Reel
Hindustan Times
5 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
SC refuses to stay HC order: Tardeo high-rise residents told to vacate illegal upper floors
MUMBAI: In a setback to dozens of families living in South Mumbai's upscale Tardeo neighbourhood, the Supreme Court on Friday refused to stay a Bombay High Court order directing residents of the upper floors of Willingdon View Co-operative Housing Society, constructed by Satellite Holdings, to vacate their homes for lack of an occupancy certificate (OC). Mumbai, India. July 02, 2025: View of Willingdon Heights at Tardeo area in south Mumbai. Mumbai, India. July 02, 2025. (Photo by Raju Shinde/ HT Photo) (Raju Shinde) The residents, who have been living in flats from the 17th to 34th floor of the 34-storey building for over a decade, were earlier ordered by the Bombay High Court to vacate within two weeks. The court found the occupation illegal, citing grave violations of municipal and fire safety regulations. Rejecting the housing society's plea, the Supreme Court bench of justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan upheld the High Court's ruling. 'At the end of the day, the rule of law must prevail,' the judges said, calling the High Court's order 'very well considered, bold and lucid.' They also praised the court's 'courage and conviction' in tackling unauthorised constructions. Construction of the building commenced in 1990, and flat owners started occupying their respective premises from 2008. As of now, 50 of the 62 flats in the high-rise are occupied. The apex court observed that showing sympathy to such illegal occupants would be 'thoroughly misplaced' and stressed that legal norms must be respected to ensure public safety. The court dismissed the society's special leave petition and directed that the High Court's instructions be strictly followed. It also said appropriate legal action must be taken against any erring officials or wrongdoers. The Bombay High Court's order, passed on July 21 by justices G S Kulkarni and Arif S Doctor, stemmed from a petition filed by Sunil B Zaveri, a resident of the same building. Zaveri flagged multiple irregularities in the construction, including the absence of a fire safety NOC and an OC for the upper floors. The court noted that the illegal flats pose a risk to human life and violate both the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act and the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966. While some residents filed intervention pleas opposing the petition, the High Court held that such occupation was a 'brazen illegality'. 'Accepting such submissions would render the entire statutory regime meaningless,' the court said, warning that it would amount to legalising lawlessness in urban construction. The housing society had argued that it was taking steps to regularise not just the lower 16 floors — for which approvals are reportedly being pursued — but also the upper 18 floors. It urged the court to let the families continue staying on humanitarian grounds while applications for regularisation were processed. However, the High Court dismissed this plea, observing that residential occupancy without a valid OC cannot be justified, regardless of the number of years the flats have been in use. The court directed the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to initiate legal action if the residents failed to vacate within the stipulated time. The Supreme Court has allowed the society to approach the High Court to seek more time for vacating the flats. The High Court has scheduled the next hearing in the matter for August 6.
Hans India
5 minutes ago
- Hans India
Trump's conflicting South Asia policies strain US-India ties
Toronto: US President Donald Trump's South Asian policy has been marked with strategic contradictions, straining its relationship with India. Though the US considers India a vital player in the Indo-Pacific and seeks its partnership in the region, several of Trump's policy decisions have clashed with India's core strategic interests, a report cited on Saturday. Such contradictions became apparent in several recent decisions, including hosting Pakistan's army chief, General Asim Munir, at the White House, supporting an IMF bailout to Pakistan during Operation Sindoor, and recurring gestures of praise towards Pakistani leadership, Imran Khurshid, an Associate Research Fellow at the International Centre for Peace Studies (ICPS) in New Delhi, wrote in the Eurasian Times. He highlighted that the US support for Pakistan has emboldened Islamabad's strategic confidence, providing it with a leeway to act aggressively against India — politically, militarily, and diplomatically — "especially at sensitive geopolitical moments". "If the US wants India to be a serious and independent partner in the Indo-Pacific, it must stop undermining India in South Asia and respect its sensitivities. It must abandon binary, fragmented regional frameworks and instead pursue an integrated strategy that strengthens India's position — not weakens it," Khurshid mentioned. "If these contradictions continue, America may not just lose India — it may lose the very global leadership it once proudly commanded. Trump claims to want to 'Make America Great Again', but his actions might just ensure America becomes isolated, distrusted, and strategically irrelevant," he added. The relationship between India and the US was once described as the "defining partnership of the 21st century". Previous US Presidents, including Bill Clinton in his second term, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama, made considerable efforts to establish mutual trust and followed the policy of de-hyphenation with India and Pakistan, "treating each country on its own merits". "They largely respected India's red lines, particularly on sensitive issues like Kashmir and strategic autonomy, and avoided viewing India through a Pakistan-centric lens..." Trump's transactional approach to foreign policy, he wrote, is driven by personal ego, unpredictable behaviour, fragmented thinking, and an obsession with trade deficits and tariffs which has made India uneasy. The recent actions by Trump, reckoned the author, have eroded the trust and warmth that once existed in the India–US relationship. "This disregard recently escalated with Trump's unilateral decision to impose a 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods starting August 1, 2025, coupled with vague but punitive secondary sanctions linked to India's continued purchases of Russian oil and defence equipment," he stated.
