2008 Malegaon blast case: ‘Verdict is a massive failure for us’

Rohini Salian former chief public prosecutor of Maharashtra and the special public prosecutor for the National Investigation Agency NIA has pointed to serious lapses in how the 2008 Malegaon blast case was handled from legalprocedural inconsistencies to the alleged behindthescenes pressure over time terming the outcome of the case a collective failure of the peopleAccording to Salian what began as a solid investigation by the Maharashtra AntiTerrorism Squad ATS gradually fell apart not because of the weak evidence but due to an alleged breakdown of institutionalpolitical will and integrity Asked to elaborate Salian stated the following1 Legal continuity underminedSalian pointed out that the Maharashtra ATS had originally built a strong prosecutorial foundation The ATS filed its charge sheet in the case within 90 days meeting the legal deadline to avoid bail for the accused Witness statements and confessions were recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC which are considered more reliable as they are recorded before a magistrateThe trial court Bombay High Court and even the Supreme Court upheld the evidence at preliminary stages and for a long time the accused arrested in the case had to be behind bars and their initial plea for bail was rejectedLegal concern When the case was transferred to the NIA in 2011 the agency chose to reinvestigate rather than proceed with the case on the strength of the alreadyfiled charge sheet This created a parallel evidentiary trail diluting the legal consistency of the case and introducing discrepancies Interestingly Salian had vetted the ATS charge sheet Reinvestigation unless courtordered can often appear as an attempt to reshape the case rather than pursue it claimed Salian2 Prosecutorial interferenceSalianrsquos most serious allegation is that in 2017 she was informally asked to ldquogo slowrdquo mdash a clear signal of political interference As a public prosecutor her role was to represent the state impartially not to follow political cues Legal context The independence of public prosecutors is a key part of the criminal justice system Their job is not to secure convictions at all costs but to present the case fairly and in the interest of justiceAsking a prosecutor to ldquogo slowrdquo without any judicial order violates Article 21 right to fair trial and Article 14 equality before law of the Constitution pointed out Salian ldquoThe Supreme Court has warned in multiple judgments such as Sheonandan Paswan v State of Bihar 1987 against undue influence over prosecutorial discretionrdquo said Salian3 Legal framingAccording to Salian the original case was registered by ATS and the accused were arrested under the stringent Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act MCOCA and not the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act UAPA The NIA after taking over the investigation seems to have filed a subsequent charge sheet in the case under UAPAAsked to elaborate Salian said MCOCA requires specific evidence of organised crime and continuity of criminal acts UAPA allows more latitude for the state viz extended detention reversal of burden of proof and stricter bail provisionsLegal Issue Changing the legal framework midway without clear justification raises suspicion of motivated legal engineering potentially to alter the narrative or dilute prosecutorial intensity said Salian4 Impact on justice deliverySalian further added ldquoWhen law enforcement works with ulterior motives to please people in power derailment of justice is no surpriserdquo raising concerns about institutional accountabilityAsked to elaborate Salian raised multiple red flags mdashSeparation of powers When the political executive interferes in judicial processesMisuse of prosecutorial discretion When prosecutors are removed slowed or replaced due to nonalignment with political interestsErosion of public trust Especially in sensitive communal or terror cases where both victims and accused belong to vulnerable communitiesThis is not merely a procedural lapse mdash it is a constitutional failure according to her5 Collective responsibilitySalian invokes the Preamble of the Constitution ldquoWe the Peoplerdquo mdash suggesting that public apathy institutional silence and political expediency have contributed to ldquothe miscarriage of justicerdquo ldquoIt is a call to democratic conscience accountability is not only judicial but the public at large ndash we the people ndash and the Malegaon judgment is the collective failure of the people to get justice to the victims of crime and terrorrdquo she said