Malegaon Blast Verdict: Questions on Justice and Institutional Consistency

Mumbai: Jamaat-e-Islami Hind (JIH) expresses serious concern over the outcome of the 2008 Malegaon blast case, particularly in light of long-standing questions surrounding the investigation and prosecution, following the acquittal of all accused including former BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur and Lt. Col. Prasad Purohit by the special NIA court on July 31, 2025.

The blast, which targeted a Muslim-majority area during the month of Ramadan, killed six innocent worshippers and left nearly 100 others injured. Seventeen years later, despite initial investigative leads and confessional statements, the court has ruled that the prosecution failed to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt.

The judgment has left larger questions of justice, consistency, and accountability unanswered.The initial findings by the Maharashtra ATS under the late Hemant Karkare—a respected officer who lost his life in the 26/11 attacks, uncovered serious evidence suggesting an organized terror conspiracy. However, the later handling of the case by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), particularly after 2014, has been a subject of public concern.

In 2015, former special public prosecutor Rohini Salian publicly stated that she was pressured to “go soft” on the accused after a change in the central government. Such disclosures, if left unaddressed, risk undermining the public’s trust in the impartiality of the criminal justice system.

Moreover, the political elevation of one of the accused as a Member of Parliament while the trial was still ongoing—regardless of eventual acquittal—sends a confusing signal in a country committed to a strong and even-handed approach to terrorism.

This verdict raises legitimate questions about differential standards in prosecuting terror cases, especially when viewed alongside the aggressive pursuit of cases involving minority accused, many of whom were later acquitted after years of incarceration. The questions arise as to why have the investigative agencies been unable to build a watertight case in such a grave matter over 17 years? Will the state government appeal this verdict with the same urgency seen in other recent cases involving Muslim accused? And shouldn’t the integrity of the investigation itself now be independently reviewed?

JIH emphasizes that this issue is not about targeting individuals who have been acquitted, but about ensuring public confidence in the neutrality and competence of our law enforcement and prosecutorial institutions.

We therefore call for an independent judicial review of the investigative process in this case and accountability for investigative failures and examination of whether political or ideological biases influenced the trajectory of the case.