The ‘Gaping Holes’ in the Prosecution Case

Judge Singh identified a number of flaws in the prosecution case that led to the acquittals, including the withholding of crucial evidence which was not brought on record, the failure to examine certain witnesses, and cross-examine hostile witnesses. Some specific examples include: Covers of the suitcases used for two unexploded bombs were bought from the same tailor in Kothari market, Indore, who stitched them. Despite finding this out, the NIA never conducted a ‘Test Identification Parade’ (TIP) of the suspects for the tailor or other people from the market to identify them. Call records of one of the accused, Sunil Joshi, showed he was in the Kothari market area on 14 February 2007. Call records of the suspects show links between them during February and March 2007. None of these call details were brought on record during the trial. 51 witnesses turned hostile, changing their testimony from what they’d told the police previously. One such hostile witness was Dr Ram Pratap Singh, the only witness from a meeting in Bhopal in 2008 where Aseemanand spoke of revenge by Hindus against other communities. The NIA did not cross-examine him or confront him with his old statement. The NIA claimed the accused had stayed at railway dormitories in Delhi; one of the prosecution witnesses claimed that the records of the dormitories were available. Despite this, the NIA never brought the entries from these records as evidence in the court. CCTV footage from the Old Delhi Ralway Station was not investigated or entered as evidence.

What the Judge Could Have Done to Plug the Holes

The powers of the trial court under Section 165 of the Evidence Act and Section 311 of the CrPC are not silver bullets, and we cannot say for sure that using them would have meant that all these serious flaws in the prosecution case could have been overcome and convictions ensured.

Samjhauta Blast Case: NIA Judge Could Have Used Section 165 Powers to Ensure Justice

Finance Minister Arun Jaitley on Friday, 29 March, attacked the Congress party for its failure to catch the “real culprits” behind the Samjhauta Express blast case of 2007, and blamed the investigation conducted during the UPA’s tenure for the recent acquittal of all four accused.

“During the tenure of the UPA and the Congress, when there was no evidence, the theory of Hindu terror was floated for the first time in the history of the country to tarnish the Hindu community. Three-four similar cases were made but none of them could stand in the court.”

Arun Jaitley at a press conference on 29 March

BECOME A MEMBER

Samjhauta Blast Judge Could Have Done Much More to Ensure Justice

Judge Jagdeep Singh blames NIA’s prosecution, but why didn’t he use special powers to call and examine witnesses?

Read Latest News and Breaking News at The Quint, browse for more from opinion

Topics: Arun Jaitley Samjhauta Blasts Swami Aseemanand