2008 Malegaon Blast Case: Victims’ Families Move Bombay HC Against Acquittals; Notices Issued to NIA, Pragya Thakur, Others

In the legal aftermath of the 2008 Malegaon blast, the Bombay High Court has issued notices to the National Investigation Agency (NIA) and the seven accused who were acquitted earlier this year. An appeal was filed before the high court by relatives of the victims of the blast, challenging the special court’s verdict.

The order was passed by the division bench comprising Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam A Ankhad on Thursday, September 18, 2025. The hearing on the appeal has been scheduled approximately six weeks after.

On July 31, 2025, a special court cleared seven individuals, including Pragya Singh Thakur (former BJP MP), Lieutenant Colonel Prasad Purohit, Major (Retired) Ramesh Upadhyay, Ajay Rahirkar, Sameer Kulkarni, Sudhakar Chaturvedi, and Sudhakar Dhar Dwivedi of all charges related to the Malegaon blast. These charges included criminal conspiracy and murder under the Indian Penal Code and violations under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

The 2008 incident claimed six lives and injured over a hundred. The explosion happened near a mosque in Malegaon, Nashik district, on September 29.

The special court’s findings dismantled the “Hindu terror” narrative built around the case, highlighting glaring inconsistencies in the evidence and serious lapses in the investigation. The judgment noted unreliable witness testimonies, procedural irregularities, and tampering risks in material evidence, including the motorcycle allegedly used in the blast. It also raised questions on the authenticity of the FIR and the credibility of documents signed by witnesses who did not understand Marathi. In effect, the court held that political or ideological narratives cannot be a substitute for solid, lawful proof.

A prosecution witness in the Malegaon blast case, Milind Joshirao, told the court that he was detained and coerced by ATS officers to implicate senior RSS leaders, including Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, in the conspiracy. He alleged that he was promised release if he complied, and threatened with torture when he refused. Joshirao later turned hostile, retracting his statement and refusing to support the prosecution’s version. His testimony became a key factor in the court’s assessment that the case was riddled with unreliable evidence. The claims of pressure to frame political and religious figures further fuelled doubts over the fairness of the investigation.

Former ATS officer Mehiboob Mujawar has also alleged that the 2008 Malegaon blast probe was influenced by political pressure during the UPA government. He claimed he was directed to arrest RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat to strengthen the “saffron terror” theory, despite the absence of any evidence linking him to the incident. Mujawar said his refusal to follow these instructions led to harassment, including his implication in a false extortion case. His allegations, coming in the wake of the court’s acquittal of all accused, suggest that the investigation may have been manipulated to serve political ends, casting further doubt on the integrity of the probe.

Before the high court, among the appellants are Nisar Ahmed Haji Sayyed Bilal, Shaikh Liyaqat Mohiuddin, Shaikh Ishaque Shaikh Yusuf, Usman Khan Ainullah Khan, Mushtaque Shah, Haroon Shah, and Shaikh Ibrahim Shaikh Supdo. The appellants argue that several of them were examined as witnesses in the trial, and one was an intervenor. These are the factors that make them eligible to file an appeal against the acquittal.

They contend that the July 31 decision by the special court was unsustainable in law and fact, particularly with respect to how evidence was assessed. They also allege that introduction of the NIA into the case may have undermined the prosecution’s case rather than strengthening it.

Case Title: Nisar Ahmed Sayyed Bilal and Ors vs Pragya Singh Chandrapalsingh Thakur @ Swami Purna Chentnanad Giri and Ors

Order Date: September 18, 2025

Bench: Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam A Ankhad