7/11 blasts: SC to hear Maharashtra’s appeal against acquittal on Thursday
The Supreme Court will hear Maharashtra’s urgent appeal on 24 July against the Bombay High Court’s acquittal of all 12 accused in the 2006 Mumbai train blasts case
PTI
-
Photo | Wikimedia Commons
NEW DELHI, 22 JULY
The Supreme Court will hear the Maharashtra government's plea against the Bombay High Court verdict acquitting all 12 accused in the 2006 Mumbai train bomb blasts case on 24 July.
A bench of Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria on Tuesday took note of the urgent mentioning of the state’s appeal against the High Court’s 21 July verdict by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and said it will be listed for Thursday.
"It is a serious matter. The SLP (special leave petition) is ready. Please list it tomorrow. There is urgency... Still, there are some important issues to be looked at," the law officer said.
The CJI referred to newspaper reports of eight persons being released from prison following the high court judgment.
On Monday, a special high court bench of Justices Anil Kilor and Shyam Chandak acquitted all 12 accused, saying the prosecution utterly failed to prove the case and it was "hard to believe the accused committed the crime".
Of the 12, five had been sentenced to death and seven to life imprisonment by the special court. One of the death row convicts died in 2021.
More than 180 people were killed when seven blasts ripped through Mumbai local trains at various locations on the western line on 11 July, 2006.
The high court allowed the appeals filed by the accused challenging their conviction and sentences imposed on them by a special court in 2015.
The high court verdict came as a major embarrassment to the Maharashtra ATS, which probed the case. The agency claimed that the accused were members of the banned outfit Students' Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) and hatched the conspiracy with Pakistani members of the terror group Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT).
In its damning indictment of the prosecution's case, the high court declared all confessional statements of the accused as inadmissible and suggested "copying”.
Further eroding the credibility of the confessions, the court said the accused had established that torture was inflicted upon them to extort these confessional statements.
Leave a Reply
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *