Like a bolt from the blue, the Bombay High Court on Monday acquitted all 12 men found guilty of the heinous 2006 Mumbai terror attack, which led to the deaths of 189 people.
On July 11, 2006, a series of bomb blasts ripped through coaches of seven Western Railway local trains, killing 189 and injuring 824. Even the infamous 2008 Mumbai terror attacks had fewer overall casualties. The bombs were placed inside pressure cookers and the coordinated blasts occurred around 6:30pm during the evening rush hour.
Even for a city and a country that is frequently the victim of terror, such an attack was horrifying – ordinary people returning home after an ordinary day’s work had their lives snuffed out or upturned forever by unseen murderers. The attack led to a persistent fear and distrust in the hearts and minds of Mumbaikers for years afterwards.
The case was investigated by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad and seven were convicted and sentenced by the original trial court to death, while six others received life imprisonment. One of the convicted persons was subsequently acquitted in 2015 and now the other 12 will walk free.
A two-judge bench of the Bombay High Court overturned the earlier order, ruling that the prosecution had utterly failed to establish that the accused had committed the offences for which they had been convicted.
Although the prosecution can appeal in a higher court, let us for a moment consider that any such appeal fails. Then, we as a people and as a nation must wring our hands at the slow pace of justice in this country. These men have lost nearly 20 years of their lives to this case and some have also had to live with the torture of a death sentence hanging over their heads.
Sadly, it appears that most people in the social media arena are disappointed by the acquittals because they want someone convicted for the crime and these 12 men will do just fine, their implied innocence be damned.
Thankfully that is not the way justice functions. Unless a higher court sees differently, we must accept that the High Court judges had sound reasons to acquit the men. The court noted that the defence had questioned the credibility of the witnesses produced by the prosecution as well as the confessional statements made by the accused. There may have been a technicality aspect as well, as the defence had argued that the recovered evidence had not been maintained in a sealed condition since the crime.
However much it hurts the public that no one has been found guilty (without the conviction subsequently overturned) for this awful crime nearly two decades on, we must never compromise on justice – it would be a travesty for an innocent person to spend even one day in prison for a crime he/she never committed, much less the better part of 20 years.
