Whether the explosive device used in the 2008 Malegaon blast was kept in the boot of the LML Freedom motorcycle cannot be left to “guesswork”, the special court said in its detailed order, while acquitting seven persons on Thursday. Special Judge A K Lahoti said that the forensic expert who examined the motorcycle had said that it was his “guesswork” that the explosive was kept in the boot (dikki) and no scientific test was conducted to determine the placement of the bomb.

“…there is nothing on record except the guesswork carried out by PW-261 (Dr Suhas Bakre). He himself or his team members had not collected any exhibits from the spot as mentioned in the crime scene report. The present matter is a serious case of bomb blast. In such a case, mere guesswork is not enough,” special judge Lahoti said in the detailed order made available on Friday.

The witness was the Assistant Chemical analyser in the Directorate Forensic Science Laboratory (DFSL), Nashik, in 2008 and had reached the spot with his analysis kit for forensic analysis. He had told the court during his deposition that the golden-coloured LML Freedom found at the spot was in a seriously damaged condition and was half-burnt. The court said that during cross-examination he had said that he would be unable to state that an explosive device was kept beneath the seat of the motorcycle and that the report is based on his observation.

Story continues below this ad

“As per his observation, the explosive material might be put up below the seat of LML Freedom motorcycle. It was his guesswork that the explosive might be kept beneath the seat. He did not find any proof that the explosive was kept beneath the seat of that bike,” the court said, referring to the testimony of the witness. The court said that in the absence of any primary test, the expert’s testimony does not inspire confidence.

The Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) had claimed that the two absconding accused Ramji Kalsangra and Sandeep Dange along with other co-accused had fitted the bomb in the boot of the motorcycle and that the bike belonged to accused Pragya Singh Thakur. Thakur was acquitted of all charges with the court observing that there was no proper identification done of the motorcycle found at the spot to match the one claimed to be owned by her. The court had also said that there was a possibility that the explosive was not kept inside the motorcycle but placed on it. It observed that the petrol tank of the motorcycle and the one parked next to it had not caught fire, whereas when the explosives RDX and ammonium nitrate are used, a high temperature is generated.

‘No eyewitnesses in crowded area who saw anyone roaming on golden-coloured motorcycle’

The court also said that while it was claimed that the two absconding accused along with accused Sudhakar Chaturvedi had assembled the bomb on the motorcycle, at his residence in Deolali (over 100 km away), no person had noticed the bike in the vicinity, which is improbable.

“It came on record that the house of A-11 (Chaturvedi) is situated in a crowded residential area. But, prosecution had not brought a single eyewitness who had seen them along with the said motorcycle at the house of A-11… The persons residing in the vicinity of the said house or any other eye witness has not seen any accused at any time along with the said golden-colour LML Freedom motorcycle while parking or riding / roaming on that vehicle or keeping in the vicinity of the house or taking that vehicle inside the house. Therefore, merely on the assumptions or presumptions or surmises or conjectures the charges leveled cannot be said to be proved in the absence of strict proof,” the court said.