Back
Bombay HC Slams NIA's ' ,' Discharges Four in 2006 Malegaon Blasts
In a stinging rebuke to the , the has discharged four men accused in the deadly 2006 Malegaon bomb blasts that killed 31 and injured over 300. A division bench led by Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Shyam C. Chandak ruled on , that there was " " to proceed to trial, overturning charges framed under serious provisions like murder ( ), terrorism ( ), and explosives laws.
The appellants— Manohar Ramsingh Narwaria , Rajendra Vikramsingh Chaudhari , Dhan Singh Shiv Singh , and Lokesh Sharma —had challenged the 's order under
Blasts on Shab-e-Barat: A Tale of Shifting Probes
The blasts targeted a Muslim-majority area in Malegaon, Nashik district, during Shab-e-Barat prayers, ripping through Hamidiya Masjid, Bada Kabrastan, and Mushawarat Chowk. Initial probes by (Crimes 95/96/2006) pointed to Islamist militants linked to .
The took over (Crime 07/2006), charging 13 suspects including Dr. Farogh Iqbal Ahmed Magdumi and Shaikh Mohd. Ali Alam , alleging Pakistan-trained operatives assembled RDX bombs in a godown. supplemented this in 2010. But in 2011, post-swami Assemanand 's confession in another blast case implicating Hindu groups, NIA re-investigated (RC-03/2011/NIA-DLI), filing a 2013 supplementary chargesheet naming the appellants as part of a Hindu conspiracy led by deceased Sunil Joshi .
As news reports noted, the HC criticized NIA for
"projected an
"
ignoring
/
evidence like RDX traces and voice samples.
Appellants Cry Foul: 'No Fresh, Admissible Proof'
Counsel (for Narwaria/Sharma) and (for Chaudhari/Dhan Singh) argued NIA's case rested on inadmissible (not under ), from prior accused, and belated six years post-blasts. They cited (fresh probes impermissible) and (TIPs lack evidentiary value alone).
No eyewitness linked appellants to blasts; bicycle purchases were hearsay, recoveries from public spots didn't qualify under . Discharge applications were earlier "not pressed," but charge framing ignored / 's narrative.
NIA Defends: Circumstantial Chain Holds
NIA, via ASG , countered with arrest panchas, disclosures leading to training sites in Bagli (MP), TIPs, FSL reports on fingerprints/handwriting, and spot verifications (e.g., bomb-planting spots, bus stands). They claimed Assemanand's statement and retracted prior confessions supported a .
Judicial Sifting: Confessions, TIPs, and Probe U-Turns Don't Cut It
Applying standards (sift evidence for " " offence, not ), the bench dissected NIA's evidence. inadmissible ( ); TIPs worthless after years ( ; delays in , ). Recoveries post-six years from open areas? No s.27 link ( ).
HC lambasted NIA's
contradicting
/
's RDX/voice evidence:
"The diagonally opposite stories... cannot be reconciled."
Retracted statements unreliable; no independent eyewitnesses. Per
, mere suspicion insufficient—
needed, absent here (
).
Special Judge erred acting as "post office," ignoring discharges (2016) of original accused.
"Theof the appellants and other materials collected by the NIA cannot be relied upon to frame charges against them."(Para 12)
"The Test Identification Parade conducted by the NIA about six years after the occurrence would have no probative value."(Para 13)
"The NIA projected anthat the appellants... entered into a criminal conspiracy."(Para 16)
"There ison record to proceed against the appellants."(Para 21)
Relief Granted: Case Hits Dead End, Accused Walk Free
Appeals allowed; September 2025 charge order quashed. Appellants discharged, bail bonds discharged. Implications? Reinforces scrutiny in sequential probes—agencies can't "wipe out" prior findings. Future NIA cases may face stricter charge-framing tests, especially with retracted evidence. As media highlighted, HC flagged "gaps in the probe," urging integrity over narratives.
This ruling closes a 20-year saga, but NIA's ongoing probe ( ) leaves room for twists.
