LawChakra

2012 Pune Blasts: Bombay High Court Grants Bail to Accused After 12 Years in Jail

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

Bombay High Court granted bail to Farooq Shaukat Bagwan, accused in the 2012 Pune serial blasts, citing over 12 years of pre-trial custody and parity with co-accused. The court stressed the fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21.

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has granted bail to Farooq Shaukat Bagwan, one of the accused in the 2012 Pune serial blasts case, after noting that he has already spent more than 12 and a half years in jail without the trial reaching its end.

The court also highlighted that the prosecution has examined only 27 out of 170 witnesses so far, and therefore, the case is not likely to conclude anytime soon.

A division bench of Justices Ajey S Gadkari and Rajesh S Patil delivered the order while hearing Bagwan’s appeal against a special court order of September 2021 that had rejected his bail plea.

While giving relief to Bagwan, the court said that his role in the case was similar to that of co-accused Munib Memon, who was granted bail in September 2023.

The court observed,

“the principle of parity with Memon squarely applies to Bagwan,”

and therefore, he too deserved to be released on bail.

The bench further explained that the long delay in the trial was a major factor in its decision. The court observed,

“It is thus clear that the possibility of trial concluding in the near future appears to be remote. It is by now a well-settled principle of law that the right to a speedy trial of an accused is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In view of the above, the Appellant is entitled to be released on bail during the pendency of the said trial.”

The blasts had taken place within minutes of each other on August 1, 2012, on Jangli Maharaj Road in Pune. One person was injured in the incident. The bomb squad also managed to defuse an unexploded bomb at the site.

The Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) had arrested eight men, including Bagwan, for their alleged involvement in the conspiracy.

They were booked under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA), Explosive Substances Act, and the Arms Act.

Bagwan’s lawyer, Advocate Mubin Solkar, argued before the High Court that his client was arrested on December 26, 2012, and has remained in jail since then.

He stressed that Bagwan has spent more than 12 and a half years behind bars without the trial reaching a conclusion. Solkar also pointed out that since another accused, Memon, had already been granted bail, Bagwan too should be released on the same grounds of parity.

The prosecution, however, strongly opposed the plea. Additional Public Prosecutor Vinod Chate, appearing for the ATS, alleged that Bagwan had created forged documents on his computer which were later used by Memon to obtain SIM cards for mobile phones.

He further claimed that Bagwan had also provided his shop to co-accused persons for planning the blasts. According to the prosecutor, considering this role, Bagwan’s bail plea should be dismissed.

The court, after going through the submissions, observed that apart from this case, Bagwan did not have any criminal history.

The bench also pointed out that in this case no charge of murder had been made against any of the accused. Some of the offences carried a punishment of five years, while the maximum punishment was imprisonment for life.

Justice Gadkari particularly took note of the fact that Bagwan had already undergone pretrial incarceration of more than 12 years.

Referring to both the ground of parity with co-accused Memon and the long delay in trial, the bench said that the special court’s order rejecting bail could not be sustained, and hence it was quashed.

The High Court allowed Bagwan’s bail on furnishing a personal bond of ₹1 lakh along with sureties of the same amount. He has also been directed to report once every month to the ATS in Mumbai till the trial ends.

Additionally, he has to surrender his passport and cannot leave the districts of Mumbai and Pune without the prior permission of the trial court.

Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Pune Blasts

Exit mobile version