Blast not official duty: Bombay HC rejects Purohit’s plea in 2008 Malegaon case | India News

MUMBAI: A bomb explosion and the deaths of six people is not an act of “offer duty”, Bombay high court observed on Monday, rejecting Lt Col Prasad’s appeal for discharge from the army. Purohit, a defendant in the 2008 case Malegaon explosion.
Purohit “is the main mastermind of the current crime,” said the HC committee of Judge Ajay Gadkari and PD Naik. It holds that there is no connection to the explosion and Purohit’s official mission and therefore no prior sanction is required for his criminal prosecution. The explosion on September 29, 2008 killed six people and injured 100 after an explosive device on a motorbike exploded in the town of handloom.
“A minute’s review of the records makes it clear that the appellant was never allowed to float by the government Abhinav Bharat despite being a serving officer of the armed forces,” HC said, adding that he “also is not authorized to collect money for the organization and use that money to purchase weapons and explosives for operations.” illegal activities … (he) has actively engaged with other accomplices and has organized and conducted many meetings with them in order to achieve the common goal of being an accomplice to carrying out illegal activities. .”
Purohit, affiliated with the “military intelligence department,” said he was gathering intelligence as part of his official activities in the Army. He applied for discharge on the grounds that there was no prior prosecution under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which requires the Center’s prior consent when armed force members charged with any crime while on duty.
Purohit is facing trial before the National Special Investigation Agency (NIA) went to court for allegedly committing a criminal conspiracy with murder under the Indian Penal Code and an offense under the strict anti-terrorism law — the Unlawful Acts (UAPA) Act (Prevention). The maximum penalty attracted is the death sentence.
Purohit sought discharge – dropping the NIA case against him – and appealed in 2018 after a special trial court passed a denial order in December 2017.
Attorney Neela Gokhale argued that he was gathering information regarding Abhinav Bharat and that his superiors were closely following his actions.
If Purohit’s argument that he was directed to collect information “is accepted then the question remains… why didn’t he stop it?” bomb explosion in the civil locality Malegaon has caused the deaths of six innocent people and serious to serious injuries to about 100 people,” the HC bench said, finding no basis in its appeal. . “Even indulging in (sic) a bombing operation that caused the deaths of six people is not an act done by (Purohit) on his official duty.”
HC agreed with the submission of Sandesh Patil, an attorney for the NIA, who sought to dismiss Purohit’s appeal and said that the trial court was not at fault in becoming aware of the alleged offense against Purohit. and denied his request for discharge on that basis. Patil has argued that the acts attributed to Purohit are completely unrelated to his official duties and therefore no prior sanction is required to prosecute him.
In December 2022, BJP MP Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, one of seven accomplices in the case, withdrew his plea before HC Bombay to be discharged in the 2008 Malegaon explosion, as did an accomplice. , Sameer Kulkarni. The two appealed in January 2018 against the December 2017 denial of their pleas to be discharged in the case.


News7F: Update the world's latest breaking news online of the day, breaking news, politics, society today, international mainstream news .Updated news 24/7: Entertainment, the World everyday world. Hot news, images, video clips that are updated quickly and reliably

Related Articles

Back to top button