- 6 months ago
The Malegaon blast case verdict saw all accused acquitted, 17 years after the incident which resulted in six deaths and over 100 injuries. This follows similar acquittals in the Mumbai train blast case. These outcomes raise serious questions about the criminal prosecution system in the country. Concerns are highlighted regarding the conduct of investigative agencies, including allegations of biased probes influenced by political power shifts. Lawyers pointed to investigations that allegedly shifted direction with changes in government, and claims by a former prosecutor of being asked to weaken the case. The court noted the prosecution's failure to provide sufficient evidence and establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The difficulties in securing convictions in high-profile terror cases are evident, leaving victims without justice. As a participant stated, 'much suspected of me, nothing proven can be.'
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Okay, let's then raise once again the big questions.
00:03All acquitted in the Malegao blast.
00:04Did no one blast Malegao?
00:06Six dead, 100 injured, no one guilty.
00:08Last week it was the 7-11 Mumbai train blast, now Malegao.
00:12Why are terror cases falling apart?
00:15That's the real question to ask.
00:17Yasuo Varda Nazar, former IPS officer, joins me.
00:20Sanjay Hegde, senior advocate at the Supreme Court, joins me.
00:23And Ranjit Sangre, accused Sudhakar Tharbiwedi's lawyer, joins me.
00:29Viral Babbar, an accused for Colonel Purohit's lawyer,
00:32is someone I spoke to earlier.
00:34And I just want to play the one question I asked Viral Babbar
00:38because he was appearing for Colonel Purohit,
00:40one of the lawyers for Colonel Purohit.
00:42Viral, the court today said that mere suspicion is not enough to convict anyone.
00:47You need in a criminal case to prove beyond reasonable doubt
00:51that they were involved in the crime.
00:53How do you see the court judgment?
00:54Is it a complete exoneration really?
00:57Or was it that there was simply not enough evidence in the end
01:00and that's why your client was let off?
01:05One thing regarding the judgments,
01:07we currently don't, anybody don't have the copy of the judgment.
01:10So we don't know what are the observations made by the court
01:13and the judgment in particularly that sense.
01:16But I can strongly say two, three things is that even if as in the earlier you said
01:22that as the criminal trial prolonged, all these things certainly don't stand off.
01:27But even if this would have taken it much earlier in the initial years of trial also,
01:32the fate would have been the same.
01:34Why?
01:34Because the investigation done by both the agency was motivated on wrong purposes
01:41and it was a biased investigation carried out.
01:44Not just that, certain statements of star witnesses were taken at behest of torturing them.
01:52And when this witness, star witnesses on whom the prosecution relied the most completely failed,
02:00in fact, they informed the court how they were tortured, illegally detained
02:05and that is how statements were recorded from them.
02:08Okay, let's widen this then to the role of the prosecution in these cases.
02:13Police in particular, I want to first focus on.
02:16And Yashu Vardhan Azad, why don't you dive into that?
02:19Because the fact is, whether it was Mumbai last week
02:22where the police role was seen to be incompetent in the manner in which they handled procedures
02:27to today, where suddenly there are serious questions that many are asking also
02:32about the way the NIA handled the case, especially post-2015,
02:36once there was a new government in power.
02:39Are our top investigating agencies driven by politics?
02:43You hear lawyers calling it a biased investigation in the first instance
02:47while the UPA was in power and then a deliberate botch-up when the NDA came to power.
02:53Where does the truth lie?
02:55The truth lies in the fact that if you put the investigative agencies away
03:01from the clutches of the politicians, you will never have any problem
03:05and you will never doubt their credibility, especially in cases like terror,
03:10especially in cases which relate to any kind of a politician or any political activity.
03:16I am absolutely horrified by both these judgments for the simple reason.
03:20In this particular case, there were so many twists and turns that I can imagine
03:26why NIA or any agencies in the world cannot give you any kind of a result.
03:34It is quite obvious that in 2016 itself, the whole investigation had turned on its head.
03:40But it turned when the government turned, Mr. Yazad.
03:44So are you telling me that the police will tailor an investigation depending on who is in power?
03:49That when the UPA was in power, they went in a particular direction.
03:53NDA comes to power, they go in a completely different direction.
03:56That's exactly the whole problem, Rajdeep, and that's exactly what I was trying to convince you
04:02and convince your viewers that today the NIA, it went one way during a particular year
04:10because the ATS which was investigating went in a different direction from the earlier,
04:15which was Hemant Karkare.
04:16And after that, the NIA did not even want to oppose the bail plea of Pragya Sadhvi
04:23and wanted in a supplementary charge sheet to take her name away.
04:28And in fact, it was the court which insisted and that's how the name was still there.
04:33Ask Sanjay Hegde, he will tell you the details.
04:35Let me take that to Sanjay Hegde.
04:38Sanjay Hegde, is this therefore a miscarriage of justice?
04:41You've got those who are today adherents of the government of the day saying,
04:47look, the Hindu terror bogey has been punctured of the Congress government.
04:51On the other hand, you've got those who've said,
04:53the moment the BJP has come into power, all the right-wing Hindu groups are being let off.
04:59What does it say about our criminal prosecution?
05:04No, both our systems of prosecution, as well as our systems of bringing people to justice,
05:09prosecutors are failing, to put it mildly.
05:15Prosecutors are often led by the politicians of the day,
05:20you go and investigate this particular direction or go and investigate the other particular direction.
05:26Thereafter, they file a charge sheet and leave it to the courts.
05:32By the time the court process is over, you have a decade or two passing by.
05:36Delay is part of the defense tactics.
05:40And then ultimately the court comes to the conclusion that,
05:44no, there is not enough evidence to convict.
05:47This is not the only case, nor was 2611 the other case.
05:51Please look at what happened in the 2G case, a civil case,
05:55where the judge says,
05:57I sat in my court day after day waiting for evidence.
06:00The evidence never came.
06:01Please look at the Babri Masjid demolition case,
06:06which dragged on for 30 years and ended in an acquittal for everyone.
06:11Our system seems to revel in dragging in as many people as possible,
06:17filing a catch-all charge sheet,
06:19and then flying blind by the seat of your pants in court for a very extended trial.
06:25But this is where the problem lies.
06:27But this case goes well beyond that, Ranjit Sanghle,
06:31because you will recall Rohini Salian.
06:33She was the prosecutor for the NIA in this case.
06:37And she claimed that she was being asked to go soft on the accused,
06:41including weaken the case against Pragya Thakur.
06:44This was after the NDA came to power.
06:46And then you had a complete new team which was prosecuting the case.
06:52Did your client get off simply because governments changed
06:56or because there was no evidence?
06:57Because now I am asking,
06:59did no one blast Malegaon?
07:01Did no one do these blasts?
07:07No, no.
07:08Rajdeep, that is not correct.
07:11Can you hear me?
07:13Yes, I can.
07:14Rajdeep, can you hear me?
07:15Yes, I can.
07:15Please go ahead.
07:17Yes.
07:18So, when Rohini Salian made that allegation,
07:21it might have been investigated in a different manner.
07:24We don't know what happened to that allegation.
07:27But the fact remains this.
07:28When you ask a question,
07:30whether nobody blasted Malegaon,
07:31you are absolutely correct in asking that question.
07:34But the thing is this.
07:35Let us not assume that the people who have been acquitted
07:38must have committed it,
07:40yet due to lack of evidence,
07:41they are getting scot-free.
07:42No, that is not the case.
07:44For a sake of argument,
07:45let us assume,
07:47and we did this.
07:47Somebody really wise once said on camera,
07:50and I shared the screen,
07:52same screen,
07:53that the job of the defense
07:54is to pin holes of the size of the lunar crater,
07:58right,
07:58in the case of the prosecution.
08:00And you know who said that,
08:01right?
08:02Whilst that,
08:03we did just our job
08:04and understand this,
08:06that the bike that was planted there,
08:09right,
08:10was,
08:10the case of the prosecution,
08:12was,
08:12the RDX was kept inside the tank
08:15and that the bike blasted.
08:17The tank was intact.
08:18The fuel on the oil was on the ground
08:21and it was burnt.
08:22So the case of the prosecution
08:23that the bike blasted
08:25is absolutely ridiculous.
08:27Okay.
08:28In fact,
08:28Judge Lahoti Sahib
08:29came to a conclusion
08:31that the probability
08:32of the blast
08:33having occurred
08:33outside the blast
08:35at the place
08:36which is surrounding
08:36the bike
08:38is much more
08:39in probability
08:40than the bike
08:41having blasted itself.
08:43Now,
08:43that is not a lacuna
08:44in the case
08:45of the investigation.
08:46It is a gross negligence
08:48and lacuna.
08:49And the benefit of that
08:51has to go to the accused.
08:52And if the law
08:53is taking its course,
08:54why to blame the accused
08:56when the prosecution
08:56I am not blaming you
08:58as a lawyer, sir.
08:59You have to bring
09:00for credit and evidence.
09:01Mr. Sangre,
09:02you have every right
09:03to puncture holes
09:04in the case
09:05that has been made out
09:06by the prosecution.
09:07I only wonder
09:08that what kind of a
09:09legal system
09:10do we work in
09:11that the case
09:12moves from one,
09:13from putting the accused
09:16in jail
09:16under UAPA
09:17to now today
09:18saying even UAPA
09:19charges are not
09:20made out
09:21and suddenly
09:21every proof
09:23whether who planted
09:24the bike bomb,
09:25who brought in
09:26the RDX,
09:27all of that
09:28is now being
09:28discounted completely
09:30and then
09:30so as I said
09:32no one blasted Malegao.
09:34I will give you
09:35one more example.
09:36Yeah, yeah,
09:36okay.
09:37Yeah, go ahead.
09:37Go ahead.
09:38Go ahead, Mr. Sangre.
09:40Okay.
09:41If you know
09:42the MCOCA invocation
09:43in this matter
09:44was done
09:45after registration
09:46of the case
09:47of the Malegao bomb blast.
09:48Thereafter
09:49within 24 hours
09:50the Mumbai ATS
09:52gives instructions
09:52to Jalna,
09:54Jalgao
09:54and Parbhani ATS
09:55officers
09:55gets Rakesh
09:56Dawde's name
09:57added in the FIRs
09:58there
09:59gets charge sheet
10:00filed within 24 hours
10:02from addition
10:04of that name
10:05without any
10:05investigation
10:06whatsoever.
10:07Simplicitly
10:08those charge sheets
10:08are filed
10:09the legal requirement
10:10for invocation
10:11of MCOCA
10:12is complied there
10:14and MCOCA
10:15is invoked
10:15in this matter.
10:16I mean
10:16that is also ridiculous.
10:18This is clearly
10:19a place of cause
10:19in Klikism Rajdeep
10:20which is a very fair year.
10:23Okay.
10:24Correct.
10:24Yashu Vardhan
10:25Yashu Vardhan
10:26Azad
10:26at the end of the day
10:27all of these
10:27points to policing
10:28all of these points
10:30I take your point
10:31all of these points
10:32to policing
10:32if we had a truly
10:33independent police force
10:35investigating force
10:36like the FBI
10:37we could then
10:39nail people
10:40in India
10:41in India
10:41we are simply
10:42playing politics
10:42with the lives
10:43think about
10:43the victims
10:44of Malaga
10:45or the victims
10:45of Mumbai
10:46what will they
10:46be feeling today?
10:48Absolutely
10:48unless the lawmakers
10:49think about it
10:50there is not
10:51going to be
10:51any relief
10:52for example
10:53in your
10:54in your criminal
10:55justice system
10:55the three pillars
10:56are totally
10:57influenced by politics
10:58the first
10:59is the police
11:00second is the
11:01prosecution
11:01and third
11:02is the prisons
11:03in this particular
11:04case
11:04there have been
11:05so many twists
11:06and turns
11:06and let me tell you
11:08in 2011 or 12
11:10when the case
11:10was being investigated
11:11by the NIA
11:12you had some
11:13of the most
11:14brilliant officers
11:15I can vouch for them
11:17called Sanjeev
11:18Sanjeev Kumar Singh
11:20I can't believe
11:21that a person
11:22like Sanjeev
11:23would be
11:24would be doing
11:25such a shoddy
11:26investigation
11:26or ATS chief
11:28Hemant Karkare
11:29would be responsible
11:30for such shoddy
11:31investigation
11:32obviously things
11:33have happened
11:33after 2016
11:35and as you
11:36yourself
11:36pointed out
11:37what Salian
11:38said
11:38so if the
11:39investing aid
11:40agencies
11:40and the
11:41prosecutions
11:42you know
11:43play pines
11:43to the
11:44political leadership
11:45whether in this
11:46one or whether
11:47it is the other
11:48one
11:48we will have
11:49the same
11:49result
11:50again and
11:51again
11:51whether it is
11:52Mumbai train
11:52case
11:53or whether
11:53it is the
11:54Malik down
11:54blast case
11:55should we
11:56also then
11:56Sanjay
11:57look at
11:57lower courts
11:58and the way
11:59they operate
12:00particularly
12:00are they
12:01more susceptible
12:02to political
12:03pressure
12:04honest answer
12:05no
12:06they are not
12:07susceptible to
12:08political pressure
12:09per se
12:10but
12:11they have
12:13the biggest
12:13burden
12:14and they
12:15can't make
12:16up for
12:17any flaws
12:18in the
12:19prosecution
12:19evidence
12:19at least
12:20theoretically
12:20they are not
12:21supposed to
12:21they do their
12:22best to help
12:23the prosecution
12:24they may be
12:25prosecution minded
12:26and say that
12:27let things get
12:28sorted out at
12:29the higher court
12:30but I don't
12:31think that a
12:32trial court
12:33judge is any
12:34more susceptible
12:35to politics
12:36than any other
12:37judge in this
12:37country
12:38however this
12:39case reminds
12:40me just one
12:41minute this
12:41case reminds
12:42me of that
12:43famous
12:43aphorism
12:44much suspected
12:46of me
12:46nothing proven
12:48can be
12:49that was
12:50Elizabeth the
12:50Great who
12:51said it in
12:51the 1600s
12:52say it again
12:53much suspected
12:54of me
12:55nothing proven
12:56can be
12:57okay let's
12:59leave it at
12:59that I
13:00think what
13:01this case
13:02shows is
13:02the deep
13:03flaws that
13:03exist in
13:04our criminal
13:04prosecution
13:05system and
13:06the politics
13:07that has
13:07unfortunately
13:08now polluted
13:10the way
13:11high profile
13:13cases take
13:13place how
13:14long are
13:15we going to
13:15carry on in
13:16this manner
13:17where even
13:17major high
13:18profile blast
13:19cases end up
13:20saying no
13:21one is
13:22guilty it's
13:22one thing to
13:23say tragically
13:24no one killed
13:24Jessica now
13:26we are saying
13:26no one
13:27committed bomb
13:28blast thank
13:28you very much
13:29to all my
13:30guests for
13:31joining me on
13:32the show
13:32today as
13:32you can see
13:33we've stayed
13:33away from
13:34the politicians
13:35on the show
13:36because the
13:37politicians are
13:38part of the
13:39problem not
13:40the solution
13:40next time
13:42you can see
13:45you can see
13:46you can see
13:48you can see
13:49you can see
13:50how
13:50you can see
13:51whether you
13:52can see
Comments