SC rejects bail plea of Purohit, Sadhvi Pragya in Malegaon blast case
The Supreme Court refused to grant interim bail to all the accused in the case.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court today refused to grant interim bail to ex-Army officer Shrikant Prasad Purohit, Sadhvi Pragya Thakur and other accused in the 2008 Malegaon blast case.
A bench of justices HL Dattu and CK Prasad refused to grant any interim relief after senior advocate UR Lalit appearing for the accused contended they have been behind bars for four years and their petitions are not being heard by the apex court.
"We will not give interim bail at this stage," the bench said.
The bench further said that "it's not our fault" that the petitions are not being heard on a regular basis, after the state government sought adjournment of the case.The court adjourned the case for three weeks. The bench also extended its interim order restraining the
the National Investigation Agency from interrogating the accused.
On 4 January this year, the apex court had extended its stay of the Bombay High Court order allowing the agency to interrogate him and had also impleaded the NIA on the bail plea of Purohit.
On 16 December last year, the bench had stayed the operation of the high court's order.
Purohit had approached the apex court challenging the High Court's 20 October, 2011 order allowing NIA to take him from judicial custody to interrogate him. Purohit was arrested and issued a charge sheet in
connection with the Malegaon bomb blast that took place on 29 September, 2008 leaving seven persons dead.
According to the prosecution, the accused had formed an organisation Abhinav Bharat Trust at Pune in 2006 with headquarters at the address of co-accused Ajay Rahirkar. It was registered on 9 February, 2007. They had allegedly taken an oath to strive to turn India into a Hindu rashtra called Aryawart.
It was alleged that the members met from time to time to discuss various aspects for achieving their goal. Accused Shankaracharya is stated to have recorded conversations at the meetings and these recordings are the foundation of the case against the blast accused.
Approval for applying provisions of MCOCA in this case was granted on 20 November, 2008, and the applicants were booked for offences under this stringent act.
Purohit and Rahirkar along with others were issued charge sheet for offences under various enactments including MCOCA. On 31 July, 2009, the special judge had held that charges against them under MCOCA did not survive and discharged them.
He had directed that the case be placed before a regular sessions court to try them for other offences and therefore rejected their applications for bail. The state had challenged the order discharging the
accused from offences under MCOCA before the high court.
Subscribe to Moneycontrol Pro at ₹499 for the first year. Use code PRO499. Limited period offer. *T&C apply
Disagreeing with govt can't be seditious, says SC; dismisses PIL demanding action against Farooq Abdullah
The top court was hearing a plea which referred to Abdullah's statement on restoring Article 370, which gave special status to Jammu and Kashmir, and contended it clearly amounts to a seditious act and therefore he is liable to be punished under Section 124-A of the IPC
The nation's highest court delivered a blow to the ex-president, who has been waging a protracted legal battle to prevent his tax records from being handed over to Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance
The apex court said the proceedings before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) will go on and but will not culminate into any final order on an amalgamation of FRL with Reliance