Malegaon: Shrikant Purohit moves SC against Bombay HC order rejecting bail2 min read . Updated: 28 Apr 2017, 03:06 PM IST
Bombay HC had on 25 April granted bail to Sadhvi Pragya in but rejected the bail plea of co-accused Shrikant Purohit saying the charges against him were of grave nature
New Delhi: Malegaon blast accused Shrikant Purohit on Friday moved the Supreme Court against the Bombay high court order rejecting his bail plea in the case.
A bench headed by chief justice J.S. Khehar said that the petition will come up in regular course while rejecting the former lieutenant colonel’s plea for an urgent hearing.
The Bombay high court had on 25 April granted bail to Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, accused of plotting the September 2008 Malegaon blast, but rejected the bail plea of co-accused Purohit saying the charges against him were of grave nature.
Six persons were killed and nearly 100 others injured when a bomb strapped to a motorcycle had exploded in Malegaon town of Nashik district on 29 September 2008.
Sadhvi Pragya and 44-year-old Purohit were arrested in 2008. While Sadhvi Pragya, 44, who is suffering from cancer, is undergoing treatment a Madhya Pradesh hospital, Purohit is lodged in Taloja jail in Maharashtra.
The high court had said that prima facie no case was made out against Pragya and asked her to furnish a cash surety of Rs5 lakh and surrender her passport to the National Investigation Agency (NIA).
The NIA, which was handed over the probe from ATS, had given a clean chit to Sadhvi Pragya but had opposed Purohit’s bail plea noting that the charges levelled against Purohit are of serious and grave nature.
Referring to the report filed by the NIA, the HC had said, “Purohit was the one who prepared a separate ‘Constitution’ for ‘Hindu Rashtra’ with a separate saffron colour flag. He also discussed about taking revenge for the atrocities committed by the Muslims on Hindus."
The HC had refused to accept Purohit’s contention that he had attended the meetings as part of a “covert military intelligence operation."
The court pointed out the statements of the witnesses that it was Purohit who said their right-wing group Abhinav Bharat should not be just a political party but should work as an organisation of extremists, having the capacity to eliminate persons opposing the same.
According to the investigating agencies, the blast was allegedly carried out by right-wing group Abhinav Bharat. The NIA had opposed Purohit’s bail plea and argued that there was evidence in the form of audio and video recordings, call data records and the statements of the witnesses which prove his involvement in the case.
According to the NIA, Purohit had allegedly taken active part in the conspiracy meetings and even agreed to arrange explosives to be used in the blast. Purohit had argued that the NIA was “selective" in exonerating some accused persons and that the agency made him a “scapegoat" in the case.