Her bike was used to cause blasts in Malegaon in 2008. He was considered a kingpin who actively planned the bomb blast. Both Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur and Lt Col Prasad Purohit were considered co-conspirators by the Maharashtra ATS in the 2008 Malegaon blasts which killed six and injured 101 persons.
But this week, Sadhvi Pragya Singh secured bail from the Bombay High Court on a bail bond of Rs 5 lakh. The court, however, refused to grant bail to Purohit. The primary reason behind the difference is the stand taken by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in both the cases. The NIA took over the probe in the matter from the Maharashtra ATS in 2011. It based its charge-sheet primarily on the findings of the Maharashtra ATS. But, for Sadhvi, it gave her a clean chit last year, saying her bike was used by another co-accused at the time of the blast. For Purohit, it told the court that it still considered him the main conspirator. This key difference in stand led to one being granted bail, and the other being refused it.
Any evidence found in his favour should be considered only at the trial stage, the investigating agency told the division bench of Justices Shalini Phansalkar Joshi and Ranjit More.
“For proving the prima facie case against the Appellant, the prosecution has relied upon four circumstances, viz. (i) the transcriptions of the conversations in the meetings, obtained from the laptop of Accused No.10-Swami Amrutanand; (ii) statements of PW-55, PW-79 and PW-112, recorded under Section 161 as well as 164(5) of the Code; (iii) intercepted telephonic conversations between the Appellant and the co-accused; and (iv) finding of traces of RDX in the house of co-accused No.11-Sudhakar Chaturvedi,” the Bombay High Court stated in its order passed this week. It also observed that the trial court, which had earlier denied bail to Lt. Col. Purohit, had considered all the arguments he had made before the court.
“According to learned Special P.P., though NIA has given ‘clean-chit’ to Accused No.1-Pragya Singh Thakur and some other co-accused, it has not exonerated the Appellant (Purohit) from the charges levelled against him. It clearly reflects that NIA has also found sufficient material to implicate the Appellant. It is submitted that all the contentions raised by the Appellant as to the non-applicability of Section 43-D(5) of UAP Act or want of valid sanction for the prosecution can be definitely considered at the time of trial and not at this stage. Presently, the conclusions about involvement of the Appellant in the offences alleged against him, as drawn by ATS officers, are supplemented and supported by NIA officers also in its detailed investigation. Thus, it is urged that, having regard to the gravity and seriousness of the offences, which were in the nature of waging a war against the unity and integrity of the nation, and, that too, by violent means, Bail application of the Appellant could not have been allowed and it is rightly rejected by the Special Court,” the Bombay High Court said.
Lt. Col. Prasad Purohit’s lawyer Shrikant Shivade told The Sunday Guardian that the Court of Inquiry conducted by the Indian Army had exonerated him of all the charges.
“The Court of Inquiry has found that he is innocent. It has stated that no RDX was found to be stolen during his tenure. It has also said that he discharged his duties well as part of the Military Intelligence. We had argued that he was a part of the Abhinav Bharat group to discharge his duties regarding gathering internal intelligence.”
Sadhvi’s brother-in-law Bhagwan Jha said they always knew she was innocent and that she would be granted bail.