9 accused in ’06 Malegaon blast case get bail | mumbai | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Apr 28, 2017-Friday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

9 accused in ’06 Malegaon blast case get bail

A special Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) court granted bail to all nine accused in the case of 2006 Malegaon blasts that left 37 people dead.

mumbai Updated: Nov 06, 2011 01:39 IST
HT Correspondent

A special Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) court granted bail to all nine accused in the case of 2006 Malegaon blasts that left 37 people dead.

The bail was granted after the National Investigation Agency (NIA), which is currently probing the case, gave no objection to their bail pleas.

While granting bail, designated Judge YD Shinde directed all the nine accused — Salman Farsi, Shabir Ahmed, Noorulhuda Doha, Rais Ahmed, Mohammed Ali, Asif Khan, Javed Sheikh, Faroogue Ansari and Abrar Ahmed — to furnish surety of Rs 50,000 and visit the local police station once a month.

However, Ali and Khan will continue to remain in jail as they are also accused in the 2006 Mumbai serial train blasts case.http://www.hindustantimes.com/images/HTPopups/061111/06-11-11-metro08b.jpg

Earlier this week, Union home minister P Chidambaram said the NIA would not oppose bail applications of those arrested in the Malegaon case.

The NIA was asked to probe the case after a confession by Swami Aseemanand, who had been arrested for his alleged role in the 2007 Mecca Masjid blasts in Hyderabad. Aseemanand claimed the Malegaon blasts were carried out by members of a right-wing group.

Thirty-seven people were killed and more than 100 injured in the three blasts near a mosque.

In the wake of Aseemanand's confession, the nine accused had sought bail.

“From the confession, it is clear that those responsible for the 2006 Malegaon blasts are persons far removed from the current accused,” said Jalil Ahmed, the lawyer of the accused.

The nine accused further pleaded that they had been in jail for the past four years and “there is no direct evidence of their involvement in the said offence and it was only based on forcibly-taken confession statements”.