SATURDAY, APRIL 20, 2024
Team Herald
PANJIM: The High Court of Bombay at Goa on Saturday acquitted all accused in the 2009 Margao bomb blast case, which killed two persons. In doing so the court upheld the Special Court order acquitting the accused.
The order passed Justice M S Jawalkae and Justice M S Sonak, said that the prosecution failed to provide evidence against the accused in the court. The court observed that the proved circumstances, however, are not at all sufficient to convict the accused persons.
The court said that based upon the fact that the explosion with IED (improvised explosive device) did take place on October 16, 2009 at the spot hardly 400 metres away from the venue of the narkasur effigy competition and the fact that the prosecution has proved the first three circumstances, the observations made by the Special Judge doubting the veracity of FIR or suggesting any malafides in the launch of the prosecution or suggesting that certain sanstha was undoubtedly roped in, cannot be sustained and are required to be set aside as being contrary to the weight of evidence on record.
“Such observations or remarks cannot, according to us, be regarded as legitimate inferences which could be drawn from the evidence on record. There was no warrant for such observations or remarks,” the court said.
Accordingly, the court said it does not sustain or approve such observations. “The circumstance that we quite agree with the other findings or inferences recorded by the learned Special Court may therefore not be taken as approval or endorsement to the observations relating to any doubt on the veracity of FIR or any malafides launching or directing the investigation in this matter,” it said.
“Having said this, we quite agree with the learned Special Court that the prosecution in this case has failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt, the circumstances listed at numbers 4 to 12 in paragraph 75 of the impugned judgment and order. This is admittedly a 34 CRIA8-14 case not based on the direct evidence,” it said, adding this was a case based on circumstantial evidence as pointed out at the very outset by Faldessai, Additional Public Prosecutor and Assistant Solicitor General of India.
The court said that at the highest, some sort of suspicion can be said to have been raised particularly since the prosecution has succeeded in proving that the incident of did take place and the prosecution has also succeeded in proving some of the circumstances concerning the same.
“Suspicion, howsoever grave, can never take place of proof which is required in such matters. Even the proved circumstances in the present case, are certainly not sufficient to disturb the acquittal recorded by the learned Special Court in this matter,” it says.
The court says that though it set aside the remarks and observations in the impugned judgment and order on the doubts expressed about veracity of the FIR and remarks and observations about the lack of bonafides in the launching of this prosecution or direction of the investigations, it sustained the acquittals recorded in the impugned judgment and order.
“This appeal, to the extent it seeks reversal of the acquittal recorded by the learned Special Court, is therefore hereby dismissed. In the facts of the present case and having regard to our findings, there is no case made out for award of any costs in favour of the respondents. However, pending this appeal, if any of the respondents have executed any bail bonds, the same are hereby ordered to be discharged,” it said.
