2008 Malegaon Blast Case: Mismatch Between Army, Prasad Purohit’s Papers, Says Special Court

Special judge AK Lahoti said that the ministry of defence had produced records related to the court of inquiry conducted by the army after Purohit's arrest. The documents were produced for the court's record.

Charul Shah Joshi Updated: Wednesday, July 10, 2024, 12:02 AM IST
2008 Malegaon Blast Case: Mismatch Between Army, Purohit’s Papers, Says Special Court | FPJ

2008 Malegaon Blast Case: Mismatch Between Army, Purohit’s Papers, Says Special Court | FPJ

Mumbai: The special court hearing the 2008 Malegaon blast case has refused to admit the documents pertaining to army records submitted by Lt Col Prasad Purohit, stating that they didn't match with the information submitted by the army. He has been trying to prove that he was illegally detained and tortured before he was arrested by the Anti-Terrorism Squad.

Special judge AK Lahoti said that the ministry of defence had produced records related to the court of inquiry conducted by the army after Purohit's arrest. The documents were produced for the court's record. “I have gone through it (record presented by the army). Comparing the documents annexed with (those sought to be admitted) don't match with court of inquiry papers. The documents filed with reply are not complete,” said the judge.

The court further noted that these documents, even though they were identified by the witness, are undated and not certified. In his defence, Purohit had sought to admit several documents pertaining to army records, including the movement orders given to him, claiming the same have been identified by the witness.

The prosecution, however, said that the documents are all photocopies and the same is not admissible as the witness is not the author of the documents. Accepting the argument, the court also refused to accept Purohit's contention. Besides, the court said the person who has signed the documents has not been examined.

“If it would have been certified copies issued by various army headquarters then there would have been certification by them. It would be reflected on those documents. However, there are no such remarks,” the court noted.

Published on: Wednesday, July 10, 2024, 12:02 AM IST

RECENT STORIES