Pragya Thakur, Col. Purohit Acquitted in 2008 Malegaon Blast Case

Incident & Charges: September 2008, Malegaon Blast

On September 29, 2008, in Malegaon (Nashik district, Maharashtra), an explosive device affixed to a motorcycle detonated near a mosque during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. The blast killed six people and injured nearly 100 others.

Investigating agencies, primarily the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) and later the National Investigation Agency (NIA), named seven individuals including: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/

• Pragya Singh Thakur (then under her monastic name Sadhvi Pragya / Poornachetananand Giri), accused of owning the motorcycle used,
• Lt Col Prasad Shrikant Purohit, alleged to have procured RDX and been involved in planning,
• Other accused: Maj (Retd) Ramesh Upadhyay, Sameer Kulkarni, Ajay Rahirkar, Sudhakar Chaturvedi, and Sudhakar Dwivedi.

Charges included murder, criminal conspiracy (IPC), and terrorism offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), with initial invocation of the MCOCA (Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act), later dropped for most accused.

Investigation & Legal Timeline

Early Investigation & ATS Charges

• October 2008: Pragya Thakur and Col Purohit arrested.
• January 2009: Maharashtra ATS filed a detailed (4,000‑page) chargesheet claiming the motorcycle registered in Pragya’s name was used; alleged Purohit handled explosives and attended conspiratorial meetings.

Bail & Witness Turn

• 2010: Bombay High Court rejected Thakur’s bail; later, in April 2017, bail granted when key witnesses retracted statements; forensic links to bike ownership deemed unreliable.

NIA Takes Over

• December 2010 – 2011: The NIA took over the case.
• May 2016: NIA filed supplementary chargesheet dropping several charges—including MCOCA and many UAPA counts—against Thakur, recommending trial under limited UAPA sections (IPCs remained).

Trial Proceedings

• October 2018: Trial commenced in a special NIA court.
• Over 323 prosecution witnesses were examined; 37 turned hostile over the course of proceedings.
• Final arguments concluded in April 2025, with verdict reserved shortly thereafter.

Verdict: Acquittal on July 31, 2025

A special NIA court in Mumbai acquitted all seven accused, including Pragya Thakur and Lt Col Purohit, on July 31, 2025, after nearly 17 years of legal battle.

Key Legal Findings by the Court

• Insufficient Evidence: No cogent or reliable material to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt for any accused.
• Investigation Flaws:
  • No spot sketch, no dump data, no reliable fingerprints.
  • Contaminated samples; chassis number of the bike obliterated—no proof Pragya Thakur owned or used it before the blast.
• UAPA Sanction Defects: Both sanction orders under UAPA found defective, making invocation invalid.
• No Evidence on Explosives: Prosecution failed to show Purohit procured or assembled RDX or that Abhinav Bharat funds were used for terror acts.
• On suspicion vs. proof: Special Judge A. K. Lahoti stressed, “terrorism has no religion … convictions cannot be based on moral or political considerations”.

Compensation Orders

• Government ordered to pay victims’ families ₹2 lakh each.
• Injured victims to receive ₹50,000 each.

Reactions & Aftermath

Pragya Thakur

After the verdict, Pragya Thakur, now an MP from Bhopal, described the acquittal as a victory for “Hindutva”, stating that the case had destroyed her life over the past 17 years. She expressed faith in the judiciary and claimed vindication against “saffron terror” allegations.

Lt Col Purohit

Col Purohit said his conviction in innocence never wavered and thanked the court for a fair opportunity during the proceedings.

Political & Community Voices

• Asaduddin Owaisi (AIMIM) voiced deep disappointment, calling the investigation “deliberately shoddy” and asking who ultimately paid for the deaths. He emphasized that victims had been targeted for their religion.
• The verdict reignited debates over communal bias, judicial process integrity, and political influence in terrorism prosecutions.

Broader Significance & Analysis

Legal & Institutional Lessons

• The case underscores the primacy of proof beyond reasonable doubt in criminal jurisprudence.
• It raises critical questions about evidentiary standards, procedural rigor, scene preservation, and forensic integrity.
• Use of confessional statements under MCOCA/UAPA without corroborating evidence was found to be unreliable.

Political Overtones

• The trial marked one of the most prominent instances labeled under “saffron terror”.
• The acquittal raises issues about politicization of terror narratives, especially involving right-wing figures.

Human Impact

• 17 years in legal limbo affected the personal and professional lives of accused—particularly Pragya Thakur, who enters public life with polarized identity.
• Victims’ families remain affected; compensation mandated but justice’s emotional and communal scars persist.
• The real perpetrators remain untraced, leaving unresolved trauma and unanswered questions.

Summary Table of Key Phases

Final Thoughts

The acquittal of Pragya Singh Thakur and Lt Col Prasad Shrikant Purohit, alongside other accused, caps a nearly 17‑year legal saga originating from a devastating blast in September 2008. The ruling reaffirms foundational legal principles—especially that guilt must be established with reliable and credible evidence, not moral panic or ideological suspicion.

While the judiciary has closed this chapter with acquittal, lingering questions remain about those responsible for the Malegaon blast, the treatment of victims and witnesses, and the broader role of political narratives in terrorism prosecutions. This case will likely continue to shape debates around communal politics, legal safeguards, and the fine line between counter‑terror enforcement and fair trial rights in India’s democracy.