2006 Mumbai train blasts: Bombay HC acquits all 12 accused; says prosecution utterly failed to prove case against them

Time of India

2 days ago

MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Monday refused to confirm the death sentence for five convicted in the 2006 July 11 synchronised
and acquitted all 12 accused who had been convicted in September 2015 by a special MCOCA trial court.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
The HC set aside the September 30, 2015 judgment of the special MCOCA court, finding no evidence to uphold the guilty verdict.
The HC held that the prosecution failed to establish its case against all the accused. The prosecution failed to say what kind of explosive was used, its confession statements failed the test of validity, accepted defence arguments of torture before alleged confessions and the HC also discarded the identification parade, for want of proper authority, as well as deposition of witnesses who identified the accused during trial as lacking credibility.
The trial court had sentenced seven to life.
On Jan 31 this year, after almost seven months of hearing appeals and confirmation references, a special HC bench of Justices Anil Kilor and S.M. Chandak had reserved judgment on the fate of five individuals sentenced to death by a special trial court in 2015 for the synchronised train bombings of July 11, 2006, in Mumbai, along with seven other convicts.
In criminal law, a death sentence given by a trial court needs to be first confirmed by the higher court to be an executable sentence.
The trial court verdict, while granting the death penalty to five of the convicts, stated, "It was mindless, cold-blooded, and wanton killings of innocent, defenceless, and unsuspecting persons. The SPP has rightly described the accused as 'Merchants of death.'"
Raja Thakare, the Special Public Prosecutor, had argued that the case stands strong, the trial court verdict cannot be dislodged, and death sentences should be confirmed.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
The prosecution stated that bombs were planted in pairs of one local man and one Pakistani accused.
The conviction relied primarily on the confessions of the accused to nail them. The defence counsel before the High Court argued at length, stating the data and confessions of 11—recorded only after the stringent MCOCA Act was invoked to enable the use of such confessions—were "inadmissible evidence," being "products of torture, fabrication, violation of due process, and falsehood."
Chaudhri argued that "within a few days of the recording of their confessions, all the accused complained of coercion and torture.
"
The defence had argued that confessions were 'not genuine'' and their contention was backed by the fact that accused Mohd Faisal Shaikh, the alleged mastermind of the offence, and four planters given the capital punishment by the trial court were silent on who planted the bomb in the Mahim and Bandra blasts.
The HC found merit in the defence contentions.
The case is better known as the 7/11 train blasts case. The RDX explosives killed 189 and injured 827 others, according to the trial court verdict.
Bombs planted on trains exploded during the peak evening office rush hour at seven locations between Khar Road and Santacruz, Bandra and Khar Road, Jogeshwari and Mahim Junction, Mira Road and Bhayander, Matunga and Mahim Junction, and Borivli.
The convicts joined via videoconferencing from prisons across the state, including Pune's Yerwada and prisons in Nashik, Amravati, and Nagpur.
One of them, Naved Hussain Khan, sentenced to death by the special trial court for being a bomb planter, had during the HC hearings spoken for himself from the Nagpur Central Prison when the bench gave them an opportunity.
He said that he was "not involved in this case" and "did not even know these other people except" one prior to the arrests.
He said he suffered for 19 years needlessly and, while people lost their lives, innocents can't be hanged either.
The special MCOCA trial court Judge Y.D. Shinde had found all 11 confession statements voluntary and none exculpatory.
Thakare, who conducted the trial as SPP and had sought the noose for eight of the 12 finally convicted, also argued the confirmation case for the state before the HC.
Assisted by advocate Siddharth Jagushte, Thakare had argued that the prosecution evidence presented before the court was cogent then and now.
For the 12 men, the defence team included advocate Yug Chaudhri, Payoshi Roy, and senior advocates S. Nagamuthu, Nitya Ramakrishnan, S. Muralidharan, apart from advocates Gaurav Bhawnani, Hetali Sheth, Khan Ishrat, and Aditya Mehta.
The lawyers representing the convicts argued that their 'extra-judicial confessional statements' obtained by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) through 'torture' were inadmissible under the law.
They also argued that the accused were falsely implicated, innocent and were languishing in jail for 18 years without substantial evidence, and their prime years were gone in incarceration.
The appellants said that the trial court erred in convicting them and therefore the said order be set aside.
The convicts Kamal Ansari from Bihar, Mohammad Faisal Ataur Rahman Shaikh from Mumbai, Ehtesham Qutubuddin Siddiqui from Thane, Naveed Hussain Khan from Secunderabad, and Asif Khan from Jalgaon in Maharashtra were found guilty of planting the bombs and sentenced to death by the trial court.
Ansari, one of the convicts on death row, died due to Covid-19 in Nagpur prison in 2021.
Those awarded life term were Tanveer Ahmed Mohammed Ibrahim Ansari, Mohammed Majid Mohammed Shafi, Shaikh Mohammed Ali Alam Shaikh, Mohammed Sajid Margub Ansari, Muzammil Ataur Rahman Shaikh, Suhail Mehmood Shaikh, and Zameer Ahmed Latiur Rehman Shaikh. One of the accused, Wahid Shaikh, was acquitted by the trial court after nine years in jail.
The Maharashtra government in 2015 approached the HC with pleas seeking confirmation of the death penalty granted to five convicts. On the other hand, the convicts filed appeals challenging the special court order.
In July 2024, the HC had constituted the special bench in the matter after convicts sought an expedited hearing.
After the pronouncement, Yug Chaudhry, Nitya Ramakrishnan, lawyers for the accused—This judgment will go a long way in restoring the faith of people in the judiciary, as it shows that 11 persons can be held to be innocent and acquitted in face of strongest opposition by the prosecution.
On videoconference, Sr advocates S. Nagamuthu, S. Muralidhar for the accused: We express our gratitude for patient hearing.
Special Public Prosecutor Raja Thakare: We are grateful for ample opportunity. We have learnt a lot. This judgment will be landmark and a guiding torch for all.