'Terror has no religion but ...': What court said while acquitting Sadhvi Pragya, 6 others in Malegaon blast case

Former BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur and Lt Col Prasad Purohit were acquitted in the 2008 Malegaon blasts case.

A special National Investigation Agency (NIA)  court in Mumbai on Thursday acquitted seven accused, including Pragya Singh Thakur who became a BJP MP from Bhopal in 2019 and Lt Col Prasad Purohit in the 2008 Malegaon blast case.

On September 29, 2008, six people were killed and several others injured when an explosive device strapped to a motorcycle detonated near a mosque in Malegaon City, Nashik.

'The families of all six victims of the blast will be given Rs 2 lakh each, and all injured victims will be given Rs 50,000 as compensation," said the court.

The judgment in this case was reserved on April 19, 2025, after the trial was commenced in the year 2018.

•Terrorism has no religion because no religion can advocate violence. The Court cannot convict anyone merely on perception and moral evidence; there has to be cogent evidence

• No proof of bomb being planted on bike. There is no evidence of storing or assembling the explosives in Shrikant Prasad Purohit's residence

• The motorbike's chassis number was wiped out and engine number is in doubt. There is no evidence to show Sadhvi (Pragya Thakur) is the owner and no evidence to show she was in possession of the vehicle. Prosecution could not prove that it was in Sadhvi Pragya’s possession immediately before the blast.

• There is no evidence of storing or assembling the explosives in Shrikant Prasad Purohit's residence.. No sketch of the spot was done by the investigation officer while doing the panchnama. No fingerprint, dump data or anything else was collected for the spot. The samples were contaminated, so the reports can’t be conclusive and are not reliable.

• UAPA will not be invoked in this case as sanction was not taken as per rules. Both the sanction orders of the UAPA in the case are defective

• Abhinav Bharat organisation was used as a common reference by the prosecution. There is no evidence that Abhinav Bharat was used for terror activity. Material witnesses have not supported the prosecution case. The prosecution has been unsuccessful in proving meetings took place (for conspiracy)

While the court accepted the prosecution's arguments that six persons were killed in the blast, it refused to accept prosecutions averments that there were 101 injured. It accepted only injury to 95 persons as few of the the medical certificates submitted to the court were  manipulated.