Friday, Dec 03, 2021 | Last Update : 07:34 AM IST

  Metros   Mumbai  31 Dec 2017  Can’t accept that bike doesn’t belong to Thakur: Bombay HC

Can’t accept that bike doesn’t belong to Thakur: Bombay HC

THE ASIAN AGE. | SHAHAB ANSARI
Published : Dec 31, 2017, 3:55 am IST
Updated : Dec 31, 2017, 3:55 am IST

However, while deciding her discharge application on Wednesday, the special NIA court held that Thakur cannot be discharged from the case.

The Malegaon blast case
 The Malegaon blast case

Mumbai: While granting bail to Pragya Singh Thakur in April, the Bombay high court had observed that there was enough doubt on whether she was the owner of the explosives-laden motorcycle that was found at the spot of the incident.

 However, while deciding her discharge application on Wednesday, the special NIA court held that  Thakur cannot be discharged from the case.

 

While dealing with subject of use of Sadhvi’s motorcycle in the blast special judge Shripad Tekale noted that though  the HC had raised doubt on it but the court has specifically clarified that said order was only in relation with appeal before the high court and the trial court should not be influenced by said observations in any way.

The judge in his order has reproduced ATS theory about how the motorcycle used in the blast had a fake registration number and its engine and chassis numbers were also erased. The ATS sent it to FSL Nashik, which could not retrieve exact engine number but gave three probable numbers. These three numbers were sent to manufacturer of the motorcycle and in turn they said none of the three numbers given by FSL were manufactured by them however, manufacturer gave two numbers resembling the numbers provided by FSL and one of which turned out to be Thakur’s motorcycle’s number. “Hence at this prima facie stage submission of accused that vehicle which was found on the spot is not belonging to Pragya Singh Thakur cannot be accepted,” said the judge.

 

Observation of Observation of
The judge did not considered the defence’s allegation that RDX was planted in accused Sudhakar Chaturvedi’s house observing that lock of his house was found intact and the ATS had to break lock to enter his house. According to the judge anybody planting RDX could not have entered the house without breaking the lock.

Tags: pragya singh thakur, nia court, malegaon blast case