Mumbai, July 31 (NationPress) Since 2011, when the National Investigation Agency (NIA) assumed control of the Malegaon blast case, numerous serious deficiencies were identified in the earlier investigations. On Thursday, the court acquitted all seven accused, including Sadhvi Pragya Thakur and Lieutenant Colonel Shrikant Purohit, concluding a prolonged trial that has spanned nearly 15 years.

The 2008 Malegaon blast ignited significant controversy during its investigation, leading to the introduction of terms such as 'Hindu terror' or 'Saffron terror' into the political and media narrative in India.

This incident also became a focal point of political contention, with many media outlets portraying Sadhvi Pragya and Lt. Col. Purohit as the emblematic figures of Hindu terror.

On July 31, the NIA court, while delivering its decision, emphasized that mere suspicion is not enough to justify a conviction, asserting that there was no evidence linking Purohit to the procurement of RDX or the assembly of the bomb.

The court also stated that Thakur was not the registered owner of the motorcycle involved in the blast.

Originally investigated by the Maharashtra ATS, the case was transferred to the NIA in 2011, which uncovered substantial lapses in the ATS's inquiry. As the NIA’s investigation unfolded, charges under MCOCA were dropped, highlighting that confessions obtained under this legislation are inadmissible.

The NIA's findings revealed that the motorcycle registered in Pragya's name had been in the possession of another suspect well before the blast. The turning point occurred when the Bombay High Court granted Pragya bail due to insufficient evidence.

In the same year, the Supreme Court also released Lt. Col. Purohit. By 2018, the NIA court had framed new charges, but as the trial progressed, 300 witnesses were examined, many of whom turned hostile, further undermining the prosecution's case.

Following the blast, the Maharashtra ATS, spearheaded by Hemant Karkare, claimed that the motorcycle used in the attack belonged to Pragya Thakur. However, the motorcycle’s registration number was found to be fraudulent, with the engine and chassis numbers erased.

Forensic analysis restored the bike's identity, linking it back to Pragya. Subsequently, the ATS associated Lt. Col. Purohit with a lesser-known organization called Abhinav Bharat.

The ATS accused this group of conspiring to attack Muslims, charging the suspects under various sections of the IPC, UAPA, and MCOCA.

In a comprehensive charge sheet exceeding 4,000 pages, the ATS described Abhinav Bharat as an organized crime syndicate. This marked a significant moment as investigators first identified right-wing Hindus as potential terrorists, sparking further debate regarding other attacks, such as the Mecca Masjid and Samjhauta blasts.

Some narratives suggested that this group might have also been involved in the Mumbai 26/11 attacks.

In August 2010, then Home Minister P. Chidambaram informed intelligence officials that saffron terror was a serious issue implicated in various bombings. Three years later, his successor, Sushil Kumar Shinde, claimed that the RSS and BJP operated terror training camps.

This topic gained international attention. In 2010, WikiLeaks disclosed a confidential communication to Washington from then-Ambassador to India, Timothy Roemer, regarding a conversation with Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. Gandhi indicated that radicalized Hindu factions posed a greater threat than Islamist groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba.

Even then National Security Advisor M.K. Narayanan discussed Hindu extremist groups with FBI Director Robert Mueller.

Earlier on Wednesday, Union Home Minister Amit Shah stated in the Rajya Sabha that he is proud to assert to the world and the Indian populace that a Hindu can never be a terrorist. Ultimately, the NIA court challenged the Congress narrative of Hindu terror on Thursday, underscoring that this case has been controversial from its inception.

One of the initial advocates of the term Hindu terror was Congress leader Digvijaya Singh, who labeled the RSS as a bomb-making factory. These assertions sparked political disputes and altered the narrative surrounding terrorism in India.