Ignored RDX, dismissed confessions: Why Maharashtra is fighting to overturn 2006 blasts acquittals in SC

The Maharashtra government has approached the Supreme Court challenging the Bombay High Court’s decision to acquit all 12 convicts in the 2006 Mumbai train bombings case. The appeal comes just a day after the high court ruled that the prosecution had “utterly failed” to prove its case and termed it “hard to believe” that the accused were involved in the deadly attack.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta mentioned the matter before Chief Justice B R Gavai on Tuesday morning, seeking urgent listing. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the matter on July 24.

What the state is arguing

The state’s appeal has sharply criticised the high court’s reasoning, describing it as excessively technical and legally unsound. Among its main objections:

• RDX recovery disbelieved:

The high court had refused to accept the recovery of 500 grams of RDX from one accused because the explosive was not sealed with a lac seal. The state argues this is a 'hyper-technical ground' and notes that RDX is highly inflammable, which is why a lac seal was avoided for safety reasons.

• Sanction and procedure were followed:

The plea asserts that the seizure of RDX was carried out under due sanction, with the sanctioning authority, Prosecution Witness (PW) 26, duly examined in court. Yet, the high court chose to disbelieve the evidence without finding any legal infirmity.

• Confession dismissed for lacking 'minute details':

The appeal disputes the high court’s rejection of a key confessional statement on grounds that it lacked details like the exact date of arrival or full physical descriptions of alleged Pakistani co-conspirators. The government argues that such omissions do not invalidate the overall confession.

‘Explosive Evidence’ shouldn’t be ignored, state says

The appeal further challenges the high court’s dismissal of other key recoveries, including detonators and explosive granules found with another accused. The government says these are not items that can be easily planted and hold significant evidentiary value — which the high court allegedly overlooked.

MCOCA and UAPA charges also contested

The state has also questioned the high court’s interpretation of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) and the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA):

• MCOCA definition met, says Maha govt:

The defence had argued that earlier offences by the accused did not qualify as a “continuing unlawful activity” under MCOCA. But the state cites Supreme Court precedents to assert that the conspiracy and scale of the attack clearly fall within MCOCA’s scope.

• Ignored explosive substances act provisions:

The plea claims that the high court ignored relevant sections of the Explosive Substances Act and missed applying key legal interpretations from earlier landmark rulings.

Background: The 2006 Mumbai train blasts

On July 11, 2006, seven coordinated blasts tore through first-class compartments of Mumbai’s Western Railway local trains, killing over 180 people and injuring more than 800.

Of the 12 accused: Five were sentenced to death, seven were given life imprisonment by a special court under MCOCA. One death-row convict died in 2021.

The high court, however, ruled on July 22, 2025, that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted all 12.