‘No Knowledge of Malegoan Blast’: Pragya Thakur to NIA Court Judge

It was Thakur’s first appearance before the NIA court after being elected to Lok Sabha from Bhopal last month.

2 min read

Malegoan blast accused and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP from Bhopal, Pragya Singh Thakur told the National Investigation Agency (NIA) court on Friday, 7 June, that she has no knowledge of the 2008 blast having ever taken place.

A special NIA Judge asked the BJP MP the following questions to which her reply was in the negative.

Judge: All the witnesses who have been examined till now, it has transpired that there was a blast on 29 September 2008 in which several people died. What do you have to say?

Pragya Thakur: I don’t know.

Judge: Do you know or has your lawyer told you about how many witnesses have been examined by the prosecution till now?

Pragya Thakur: I don’t know.


Thakur had finally appeared on Friday, 7 June, before the special NIA court in Mumbai, after trying several attempts to dodge the hearing.

It was her first appearance before the NIA court, which is conducting a trial in the 11-year-old case, after being elected to Lok Sabha from Bhopal last month.

Thakur failed to appear before the court on Thursday.

Pragya Thakur Briefly Hospitalised in Bhopal

She was hospitalised on Wednesday night and discharged early on Thursday morning, her close aide Upma told PTI.

Thakur's lawyer Prashant Magoo on Thursday told the court “she is suffering from high blood pressure” and was unable to travel to Mumbai from Bhopal.

The court granted her an exemption for the day and asked her to appear before it on Friday.

Background of The Case

Seven persons, including Pragya Singh Thakur and Lt Col Prasad Purohit, are facing trial in the case related to the blast at Malegaon in Maharashtra on 29 September 2008, in which six persons were killed.

Special NIA Judge VS Padalkar last month directed all the accused, including Thakur, to appear before the court at least once a week.

The judge then said an exemption from appearance would be granted only if cogent reasons were submitted.

On Monday, Justice Padalkar had rejected her application for exemption from appearance in the court this week, in which she had stated that she has to complete formalities relating to Parliament.

The court had said that her presence was necessary at this stage in the case.

(With inputs from PTI)

(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)

Speaking truth to power requires allies like you.
Become a Member
Read More