Nine men were booked under charges including UAPA. The accused face allegations including an attempt to murder, and conspiracy under the Indian Penal Code(IPC) and relevant sections of UAPA and Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act.
Two of the special courts in Mumbai designated to hear cases under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) have said they are “overburdened”, reported Indian Express.
One court, in a recent order, said it had 72 cases with 255 accused in jail. The pending cases before these courts include multiple cases where the trial is yet to begin even after over 10 years.
The accused in these cases have filed bail applications citing delay in the trial. In some cases, they have sought to plead guilty citing among grounds the long time it may take for trials to begin and eventually conclude, adding to their years in incarceration even before they are found guilty.
In one of the cases related to the 2011 Mumbai triple blasts, not just the accused, even the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS), the investigating agency, filed an application in August, seeking a day-to-day hearing as the trial against the 11 accused is yet to begin after more than a decade of the terror attacks.
On July 13, 2011, 27 people were killed and over 100 were injured in three serial blasts at Dadar, Zaveri Bazaar, and Opera House. The prosecution has cited over 700 witnesses, according to an Indian Express report.
Also Read: “Satyendar Jain Getting Massage In Jail”: ED
Charges were framed against the accused in separate proceedings from 2019-2021 but the trial is yet to begin.
On the plea by both the ATS and accused Nadeem Akhtar, seeking a daily hearing in the case, the judge said his predecessor had passed an order on a similar plea that it is “difficult” to conduct a day-to-day hearing as the court is “already obliged with hearing other time-bound and old matters”. The court pulled up Akhtar stating that he had been filing applications on every date of the case and that he had “some hidden intention”. It also rejected the ATS plea.
“From the present application filed by the prosecution, it reveals that each one (is) trying to save their own skin. No substantive steps taken to proceed with the trial,” the court said.
In 2019, the Bombay High Court (HC) rejected the bail application of accused Haroon Naik, observing that there was prima facie evidence against him while directing the trial to be concluded expeditiously. The bail applications of the accused, including Akhtar, are pending before the court.
In another case dating back nearly 10 years, the trial is also yet to commence. On August 1, 2012, five low-intensity blasts occurred at J M Road in Pune.
Nine men were booked under charges including UAPA. The accused face allegations including an attempt to murder, and conspiracy under the Indian Penal Code(IPC) and relevant sections of UAPA and Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act.
Earlier, last month, one of the accused, Munib Memon, filed for bail before the HC, citing among grounds the delay in the commencement of the trial. The HC said that considering the gravity of the offense and the role of the accused, his plea for bail on grounds of delay cannot be considered.
“However, at the same time, we cannot be oblivious to the right of the appellant to an expeditious trial guaranteed to him under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Charges, in this case, were framed on 25th May 2022.
Accordingly, we expedite the trial of the appellant and direct the learned Special Judge to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, and in any event by December 2023,” the HC further said.
Memon challenged that the prosecution had cited 107 witnesses and the trial would take time to conclude. In July, one of the accused, Sayyed Firoz, wrote to the court that he was repenting his action and wanted to plead guilty.
The letter also cites that his family has suffered due to his incarceration. He claimed his father passed away during the pandemic and his mother suffers from various ailments.
His wife and children continue to face hardships as he has been in jail since 2012. The court is yet to hear his plea.
Similarly, 23 accused have been booked in a case related to emails sent to media houses before the Delhi, Hyderabad, and Ahmedabad blasts in 2008 allegedly carried out by the Indian Mujahideen (IM). Six of the accused are out on bail while the others remain in custody for 14 years. Here too, the trial is yet to commence.
“Facing allegations of terror, the accused are not considered for bail, and with the trials yet to commence even 10 years after their arrest, their custody amounts to pre-trial detention,” said Tahera Qureshi, defense lawyer of Mohammed Zakir Abdul Haque Shaikh.
Shaikh was acquitted after 14 years in the Ahmedabad blasts case. In February, a court in Ahmedabad convicted 49 people and acquitted 28, including Shaikh. His bail plea in the Mumbai court on the basis of this acquittal was rejected in August.
The trial has similarly not begun in the Malegaon 2006 blast case, 15 years after the blast. The accused in the case were granted bail by the Bombay High Court in 2019 after six years in jail.
Last week, Sharad Kelaskar, an accused in the Nallasopara arms haul case, also sought trial on a day-to-day basis.
Kalaskar’s co-accused Avinash Pawar was granted bail in August by the top court. The SC observed that he was in jail for over four years and the trial was not likely to conclude soon. The accused in the case were arrested in 2018.
So far, three witnesses have been examined. The court said that the prosecution was proceeding with the evidence. “In view of the heavy pendency of under-trial cases, it would not be appropriate to proceed with this matter on a day-to-day basis,” the court said.
As an independent media platform, we do not take advertisements from governments and corporate houses. It is you, our readers, who have supported us on our journey to do honest and unbiased journalism. Please contribute, so that we can continue to do the same in future.
