JUDGMENT : ANIL S. KILOR, J. Particulars 1 FACTUAL MATRIX 2. EYEWITNESSES (i) Authority of Shri. Barve as SEO to conduct T.I. Parade (ii) Taxi Drivers who took A.3 and A.13 to Churchgate Station on 11/07/2006 (PW-63 and PW-77) (iii) The witnesses who saw the accused planting bomb in the trains (PW-57, PW-60, PW-62 and PW-74) (iv) Witness to Assembling of Bombs (PW-75) (v) Witness to Conspiracy (PW-59) (vi) The injured witness who saw the suspects after they deboarded the train, but was not called for T.I. Parade, though with his help two sketches of suspects were prepared. Further, though he was examined, he was not asked to identify the accused in the Court (PW-85) (vii) The witnesses who saw the suspects, and gave their statements u/s 161 of Cr.PC within short span of incident with detailed description but neither called for T.I. Parade nor examined as witnesses (Total 6 witnesses) 3. II. RECOVERIES (1) Recovery of RDX, Granules and Detonators 4. III. CONFESSION A) PRIOR APPROVAL / INVOCATION OF MCOCA (1) Whether Shri. Jaiswal, who granted prior approval, had jurisdiction to grant prior approval to invoke MCOCA? (2) Whether relevant documents and material were available before the sanctioning authority to reach a subjective satisfaction? (3) Whether the authority has applied its mind while granting prior approval?9 (4)Whether the fact that Shri. Jaiswal did not enter into the witness box, invalidate the prior approval on the ground that the same is not proved? (5) PW-174 identified the signature of Shri. Jaiswal, whether such identification of the signature will be sufficient to prove the contents of prior approval? (6) Whether a presumption under section 114 illustration (e) of Indian Evidence Act that the official acts performed by the public servants have been regularly performed will be applicable to the prior approval in question? (7) Whether the two chargesheets against A.13, which have been relied upon for grant of prior approval, satisfy the pre-requisites to constitute ‘continuing unlawful activity’? (6) Whether a presumption under section 114 illustration (e) of Indian Evidence Act that the official acts performed by the public servants have been regularly performed will be applicable to the prior approval in question? (7) Whether the two chargesheets against A.13, which have been relied upon for grant of prior approval, satisfy the pre-requisites to constitute ‘continuing unlawful activity’? B) CONFESSIONAL STATEMENTS 332 (1) Identical Part-I and Part-II of the confessional statements (2) Variations in mentioning the names of accused A.4 and A.9 in correspondence made by DCPs and Part-I and Part-II of the confessional statements (3) Absence of certificates under Sub-rule 6 of Rule 3 of MCOC Rules at the bottom of the confessional statements of A.1, A.3 and A.10 (4) Though certificates are appended at the bottom of the confessional statements of A.2, A.4, A.5, A.6, A.7, A.9, A.11, & A.12, they do not serve the purpose as contemplated under Subrule 6 of Rule 3 of MCOC Rules (5) Not making the accused aware about the right to have legal/lawyer’s services (6) No enquiry made by the DCPs of the reason why the accused wanted to confess, (7) Sufficient cooling off period was not given to the accused (8) The concerned DCPs did not look into the medical reports of accused before recording confessional statements C) CONFESSIONAL STATEMENTS (1) The Confessional Statements Suffer From Trustworthiness And Completeness (2) The Confessional Statements Vitiate Because Of The Torture Inflicted On Accused To Extort The Same D) ROLE OF CMMs IN THE CONFESSIONAL PROCEEDINGS 6. RECOVERIES OTHER THAN RDX, GRANULES, AND DETONATORS 7. TRAVEL TO PAKISTAN 644 8. IV. CALL DETAIL RECORDS (CDRs) 9. V. ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS 10. SUMMARY 11. ORDER Punishing the actual perpetrator of a crime is a concrete and essential step toward curbing criminal activities, upholding the rule of law, and ensuring the safety and security of citizens. But creating a false appearance of having solved a case by presenting that the accused have been brought to justice gives a misleading sense of resolution. This deceptive closure undermines public trust and falsely reassures society, while in reality, the true threat remains at large. Essentially, this is what the case at hand conveys. FACTUAL MATRIX 1. On 11th July 2006, seven bomb blasts had taken place in the first class compartments of seven local trains, in Mumbai, between 18.23hrs to 18.29hrs. This deceptive closure undermines public trust and falsely reassures society, while in reality, the true threat remains at large. Essentially, this is what the case at hand conveys. FACTUAL MATRIX 1. On 11th July 2006, seven bomb blasts had taken place in the first class compartments of seven local trains, in Mumbai, between 18.23hrs to 18.29hrs. In the said blasts, 187 people had died and around 824 people got injured. Thereupon, the seven crimes in different police stations were registered, and later on, all were clubbed together and investigated by the Anti Terrorism Squad (ATS). The ATS revealed that the thirteen accused, who were tried along with fifteen wanted accused and two deceased accused, are involved in the crime. Accordingly, the chargesheet came to be filed and a trial was conducted vide MCOC SPECIAL CASE NO. 21/2006 by the Special Court No. 1 of the Special judge under Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as ‘MCOCA’) and the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as ‘NIA Act’), at Mumbai. The accused, having committed the said crime, have been convicted vide Judgment and Order dated 30/09/2015 as under: - A.1 - Kamal Ansari i. Sec. 302 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to death and pay a fine of Rs. 30000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 months) ii. Sec. 307 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced imprisonment for life. iii. Sec. 326 r/w 120-B IPC - sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) iv. Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for life on each count and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) v. Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 15,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 and half months) vi. Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 Years and fine of Rs. 10,000/-(in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) vii. Sec. 325 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 years and fine of 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) viii. Sec. 324 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and fine of Rs. 10,000/-(in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) vii. Sec. 325 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 years and fine of 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) viii. Sec. 324 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and fine of Rs. 10,000 (in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1 month) ix. Sec. 3(b) (Explosive Substances Act, 1908) - Sentenced to death and fine of Rs. 30000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 months) x. Sec. 9-B(2) Explosives Act, 1884 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 3 years xi. Sec. 16 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to death and fine of Rs. 30,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 months) xii. Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) xiii. Sec. 3(1)(i) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced to death and fine Rs. 1,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months) xiv. Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced on each count to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year) xv. Sec. 3 (4) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 year) xvi. Sec. 152 (Railways Act, 1989) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life. xvii. Sec. 151(1) and 153 (Railway Act, 1989) - Sentenced to imprisonment for 5 years on each count. xviii. Sec. 3 (2) (e) of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 5 years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) (Acquitted for the charges u/s 19 and 40 of UAPA, 1967) A.2 - Tanveer Ansari i. Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for life on each count and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) ii. Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 15,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 and half months) iii. Sec. 120-B IPC r/w 16 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer imprisonment for 2 months) iv. Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 15,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 and half months) iii. Sec. 120-B IPC r/w 16 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer imprisonment for 2 months) iv. Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 Years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) v. Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) vi. Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for 2 years and fine Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) vii. Sec. 120B of IPC r/w 3(1)(i) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine Rs. 1,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months) viii. Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) of MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced on each count to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year) ix. Sec. 3 (4) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 year) x. Sec. 9B(2) Explosives Act, 1884 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 3 years (Acquitted for charge under 124A of IPC) A.3 - Mohd. Faisal Shaikh i. Sec. 302 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to death and pay a fine of Rs. 30000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 months) ii. Sec. 307 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced imprisonment for life. iii. Sec. 326 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) iv. Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for life on each count and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) v. Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 15,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 and half months) vi. Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 Years and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) v. Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 15,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 and half months) vi. Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 Years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) vii. Sec. 201 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 years and fine of Rs. 10,000/-(in default to suffer imprisonment for one (1) month) viii. Sec. 325 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 years and fine of 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) ix. Sec. 324 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and fine of Rs. 10,000 (in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1 month) x. Sec. 3(b) (Explosive Substances Act, 1908) - Sentenced to death and fine of Rs. 30000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 months) xi. Sec. 6 r/w 4 (ii) Explosive Substances Act, 1908 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer imprisonment for 2 months) xii. Sec. 9-B(2) Explosives Act, 1884 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 3 years xiii. Sec. 16 (UAPA Act, 1967) - Sentenced to death and fine of Rs. 30,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 months) xiv. Sec. 19 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) xv. Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) xvi. Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for 2 years and fine Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) xvii. Sec. 3(1)(i) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced to death and fine Rs. 1,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months) xviii. Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA, 1999 - Sentenced on each count to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year) xix. Sec. 3(4) MCOCA, 1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 year) xx. Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA, 1999 - Sentenced on each count to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year) xix. Sec. 3(4) MCOCA, 1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 year) xx. Sec. 3(5) MCOCA, 1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 2,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 9 months) xxi. Sec. 152 (Railways Act, 1989) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life. xxii. Sec. 151 (1) and 153 (Railway Act, 1989) - Sentenced to imprisonment for 5 years on each count. xxiii. Sec. 3 (2) (e) (Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984) - Sentenced to imprisonment for 5 years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) (Acquitted for charges under 124-A IPC, Sec. 40 UAPA, 1967 and Sec. 12 (1) (c) of Passport Act, 1967) A.4 - Ehtesham Siddique i. Sec. 302 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to death and pay a fine of Rs. 30,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 months) ii. Sec. 307 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced imprisonment for life. iii. Sec. 326 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) iv. Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for life on each count and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) v. Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 15,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 and half months) vi. Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 Years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) vii. Sec. 325 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 years and fine of 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) viii. Sec. 324 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and fine of Rs. 10,000 (in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1 month) ix. Sec. 3(b) (Explosive Substances Act, 1908) - Sentenced to death and fine of Rs. Sec. 324 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and fine of Rs. 10,000 (in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1 month) ix. Sec. 3(b) (Explosive Substances Act, 1908) - Sentenced to death and fine of Rs. 30000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 months) x. Sec. 16 (UAPA Act, 1967) - Sentenced to death and fine of Rs. 30,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 months) xi. Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) xii. Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for 2 years and fine Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) xiii. Sec. 3(1)(i) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced to death and fine Rs. 1,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months) xiv. Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced on each count to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year) xv. Sec. 3(4) MCOCA, 1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 year) xvi. Sec. 152 (Railways Act, 1989) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life. xvii. Sec. 151 (1) and 153 (Railway Act, 1989) - Sentenced to imprisonment for 5 years on each count. xviii. Sec. 3 (2) (e) (Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984) - Sentenced to imprisonment for 5 years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) xix. Sec. 9-B(2) (Explosives Act, 1884) - Sentenced to imprisonment for 3 years. (Acquitted for charges under section 124-A IPC, Sec. 17 and 19 of UAPA, 1967) A.5 – Mohd. Majid i. Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for life on each count and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) ii. Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 15,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 and half months) iii. Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 Years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) iv. Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 15,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 and half months) iii. Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 Years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) iv. Sec. 120-B IPC r/w 16 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer imprisonment for 2 months) v. Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) vi. Sec. 120B of IPC r/w 3(1)(i) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine Rs. 1,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months) vii. Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced on each count to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year) viii. Sec. 3 (4) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 year) (Acquitted for charges under section 19 of UAPA , 1967) A.6 - Shaikh Mohd. Ali Alam Shaikh i. Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for life on each count and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) ii. Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 15,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 and half months) iii. Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 Years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) iv. Sec. 120-B IPC r/w 16 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer imprisonment for 2 months) v. Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) vi. Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for 2 years and fine Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) vii. Sec. 120B of IPC r/w 3(1)(i) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) vi. Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for 2 years and fine Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) vii. Sec. 120B of IPC r/w 3(1)(i) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine Rs. 1,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months) viii. Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA,1999- Sentenced on each count to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year) ix. Sec. 3 (4) MCOCA,1999- Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 year) x. Sec. 6 r/w 4 (ii) Explosive Substances Act, 1908 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer imprisonment for 2 months) xi. Sec. 9-B(2) Explosives Act, 1884 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 3 years (Acquitted for charges under section 124-A IPC, Sec. 40 UAPA, 1967 and 12 (1) (c) of Passport Act, 1967. A.7 - Sajid Ansari i. Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for life on each count and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) ii. Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 15,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 and half months) iii. Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 Years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) iv. Sec. 120-B IPC r/w 16 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer imprisonment for 2 months) v. Sec. 201 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 years and fine of Rs. 10,000/-(in default to suffer imprisonment for one (1) month) vi. Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967)- Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) vii. Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for 2 years and fine Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) viii. Sec. 120B of IPC r/w 3(1)(i) MCOCA,1999- Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) vii. Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for 2 years and fine Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) viii. Sec. 120B of IPC r/w 3(1)(i) MCOCA,1999- Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine Rs. 1,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months) ix. Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced on each count to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year) x. Sec. 3 (4) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 year) xi. Sec. 6 r/w 4(ii) Explosive Substances Act, 1908 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer imprisonment for 2 months) (Acquitted for charges under section 124-A IPC, Sec. 40 and 19 of UAPA, 1967) A.9 - Muzzammil Shaikh i. Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for life on each count and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) ii. Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 15,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 and half months) iii. Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 Years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) iv. Sec. 120-B IPC r/w 16 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer imprisonment for 2 months) v. Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) vi. Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967)- Sentenced to imprisonment for 2 years and fine Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) vii. Sec. 120B of IPC r/w 3(1)(i) MCOCA, 1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine Rs. 1,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months) viii. Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced on each count to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year) ix. Sec. 120B of IPC r/w 3(1)(i) MCOCA, 1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine Rs. 1,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months) viii. Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced on each count to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year) ix. Sec. 3(4) MCOCA, 1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 year) (Acquitted for charges under section 124-A IPC) A.10 - Suhail Shaikh i. Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for life on each count and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) ii. Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 15,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 and half months) iii. Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 Years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) iv. Sec. 120-B IPC r/w 16 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer imprisonment for 2 months) v. Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) vi. Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967)- Sentenced to imprisonment for 2 years and fine Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) vii. Sec. 120B of IPC r/w 3(1)(i) MCOCA, 1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine Rs. 1,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months) viii. Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced on each count to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year) ix. Sec. 3 (4) MCOCA, 1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 year) (Acquitted for charges under section 124-A IPC) A.11 - Zameer Shaikh i. Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for life on each count and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) ii. 5,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 year) (Acquitted for charges under section 124-A IPC) A.11 - Zameer Shaikh i. Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for life on each count and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) ii. Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 15,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 and half months) iii. Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 Years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) iv. Sec. 120-B IPC r/w 16 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer imprisonment for 2 months) v. Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) vi. Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967)- Sentenced to imprisonment for 2 years and fine Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) vii. Sec. 120B of IPC r/w 3(1)(i) MCOCA, 1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine Rs. 1,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months) viii. Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA, 1999 - Sentenced on each count to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year) ix. Sec. 3 (4) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 year) (Acquitted for charges under section 124-A IPC) A.12 - Naveed Khan i. Sec. 302 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to death and pay a fine of Rs. 30000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 months) ii. Sec. 307 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced imprisonment for life. iii. Sec. 326 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) iv. Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for life on each count and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) v. Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) iv. Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for life on each count and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) v. Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 15,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 and half months) vi. Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 Years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) vii. Sec. 325 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 years and fine of 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) viii. Sec. 324 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and fine of Rs. 10,000 (in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1 month) ix. Sec. 3(b) (Explosive Substances Act, 1908) - Sentenced to death and fine of Rs. 30000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 months) x. Sec. 9-B(2) Explosives Act, 1884 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 3 years xi. Sec. 16 (UAPA Act, 1967) - Sentenced to death and fine of Rs.30,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 months) xii. Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967)- Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) xiii. Sec. 3(1)(i) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced to death and fine Rs.1,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months) xiv. Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA, 1999 - Sentenced on each count to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year) xv. Sec. 3(4) MCOCA,1999- Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 year) xvi. Sec. 152 (Railways Act, 1989) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life. xvii. Sec. 151 (1) and 153 (Railway Act, 1989)- Sentenced to imprisonment for 5 years on each count. xviii. Sec. 3 (2) (e) (Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984)- Sentenced to imprisonment for 5 years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) A.13 - Asif Khan i. Sec. 302 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to death and pay a fine of Rs. xviii. Sec. 3 (2) (e) (Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984)- Sentenced to imprisonment for 5 years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) A.13 - Asif Khan i. Sec. 302 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to death and pay a fine of Rs. 30000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 months) ii. Sec. 307 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced imprisonment for life. iii. Sec. 326 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) iv. Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for life on each count and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) v. Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 15,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 and half months) vi. Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 Years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) vii. Sec. 201 IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 years and fine of Rs. 10,000/-(in default to suffer imprisonment for one (1) month) viii. Sec. 325 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to imprisonment for 7 years and fine of 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) ix. Sec. 324 r/w 120-B IPC - Sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and fine of Rs. 10,000 (in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1 month) x. Sec. 3(b) (Explosive Substances Act, 1908) - Sentenced to death and fine of Rs. 30000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 months) xi. Sec. 6 r/w 4 (ii) Explosive Substances Act, 1908 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer imprisonment for 2 months) xii. Sec. 9-B(2) Explosives Act, 1884 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 3 years xiii. Sec. 16 (UAPA Act, 1967) - Sentenced to death and fine of Rs. 30,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 months) xiv. Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) xv. Sec. 16 (UAPA Act, 1967) - Sentenced to death and fine of Rs. 30,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 months) xiv. Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 20,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months) xv. Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967) - Sentenced to imprisonment for 2 years and fine Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) xvi. Sec. 3(1)(i) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced to death and fine Rs.1,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months) xvii. Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA, 1999 - Sentenced on each count to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year) xviii. Sec. 3 (4) MCOCA,1999 - Sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5,00,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 year) xix. Sec. 152 (Railways Act, 1989) - Sentenced to imprisonment for life. xx. Sec. 151 (1) and 153 (Railway Act, 1989) - Sentenced to imprisonment for 5 years on each count. xxi. Sec. 3 (2) (e) (Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984) - Sentenced to imprisonment for 5 years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month) (Acquitted for charges under section 124-A IPC and 19 of UAPA, 1967) 2. It may be noted that in this case there are fifteen wanted accused. 3. During the pendency of the confirmation case, the accused no. 1 died. 4. The Special Court has granted acquittal to A.8 – Abdul Wahid Din Mohammad Shaikh. 5. It is, thus, it is evident that along with accused no. 1, A.3, 4, 12, and 13 were sentenced to death for the offences punishable u/s 302 r/w 120-B of IPC, Section 3b of Explosive Substances Act, 1908, section 16 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as “UAPA”) and under section 3(1)(i) MCOC Act, 1999. 6. Hence, the learned Special Court referred the proceeding, Confirmation Case No. 2 of 2015, in terms of Section 366(1) of Cr.PC. APPEALS 7. Except accused no. 1, who died during the pendency of this case, all other accused persons have filed respective criminal appeals. 8. The State has not filed appeal against the acquittal of A.8 Abdul Wahid 9. Hence, with the confirmation case no. APPEALS 7. Except accused no. 1, who died during the pendency of this case, all other accused persons have filed respective criminal appeals. 8. The State has not filed appeal against the acquittal of A.8 Abdul Wahid 9. Hence, with the confirmation case no. 02/2015, there are following appeals which are taken for hearing and to decide the same. The chart given hereunder is in respect of the respective appeals filed by the A.2 to 7 and 9 to 13: CHART NO. 1 Sr. No. Accused No. Name of the Accused Cri. Appeal No. 1. 2 Tanveer Ahmed Mohd. Ibrahim Ansari 1104 of 2023 2. 3 Mohd. Faisal Ataur Rahman Shaikh 554 of 2021 3. 4 Ehtesham Qutubuddin Siddique 557 of 2021 4. 5 Mohd. Majid Mohd Shafi 72 of 2019 5. 6 Shaikh Mohd. Ali Alim Shaikh 333 of 2022 6. 7 Mohammad Sajid Margub Ansari 71 of 2019 7. 9 Muzzammil Ataur Rahman Shaikh 1075 of 2023 8. 10 Suhail Mehmood Shaikh 555 of 2021 9. 11 Zameer Ahmed Latifur Rehman Shaikh 655 of 2022 10. 12 Naveed Hussain Khan Rasheed Hussain 553 of 2021 11. 13 Asif Khan Bashir Khan @ Juned @ Abdulla 556 of 2021 10. This Court, vide order dated 16/07/2024, allowed the accused to remain present during the hearing through video conferencing in view of the judgments in the cases of Kalyan Chandra Sarkar ..vs.. Rajesh Ranjan Alias Pappu Yadav & Another, reported in (2005) 3 SCC 284 and State of Maharashtra ..vs.. Dr. Praful B. Desai, reported in (2003) 4 SCC 601 . 11. Total thirteen accused along with 15 wanted accused and two deceased accused, i.e., (1)Salim, Pakistani National and (2)Abu Osama @ Abu Umed @ Mohd. Rajesh Ranjan Alias Pappu Yadav & Another, reported in (2005) 3 SCC 284 and State of Maharashtra ..vs.. Dr. Praful B. Desai, reported in (2003) 4 SCC 601 . 11. Total thirteen accused along with 15 wanted accused and two deceased accused, i.e., (1)Salim, Pakistani National and (2)Abu Osama @ Abu Umed @ Mohd. Ali @ Mohammad Chinag, Pakistani National were chargesheeted for having caused the bomb explosions and thereby having committed the murders of 187 persons, for having attempted to cause the death of some persons, for having voluntarily caused hurt, grievous hurt, mischief, mischief by fire or explosive substance, for having conspired to commit these offences, for having conspired to wage war or attempt to wage war or abet waging war against the Government of India, for having collected men, arms or ammunition or otherwise made preparations with the intention of waging war against the Government of India, for having concealed the existence of a design to wage war against the Government of India, for having committed an act of sedition, and for having caused disappearance of evidence of offence, which are the offences punishable under sections 302, 307, 324, 325, 326, 427, 436, 120-B, 121-A, 122, 123, 124-A, 201 and 212 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (the IPC). 12. They are also chargesheeted for having committed the above offences as an organised crime of promoting insurgency, for having conspired, advocated, abetted and knowingly facilitated the commission of the organised crime, for having harbored or concealed any member of the organised crime syndicate, for being members of an organised crime syndicate and for holding property derived or obtained from the commission of an organised crime or which has been acquired through the organised crime syndicate's funds, alongwith the fifteen wanted accused and two deceased accused, which are the offences punishable under sections 3(1)(i), 3(2), 3(3), 3(4) and 3(5) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (the MCOC Act). 13. 13. They are also chargesheeted for being members of an association declared as an unlawful association under section 3 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (the UA(P)A), for committing unlawful activities, for committing terrorist act, for raising funds for terrorist act, for conspiring to commit the terrorist act, for harbouring terrorists, for being members of a terrorist gang or terrorist organisation and for raising funds for terrorist organisation, alongwith the fifteen wanted accused and two deceased accused, which are the offences punishable under sections 10, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 40 of the said Act. 14. They are also chargesheeted for having possessed, transported and used explosives, alongwith the fifteen wanted accused and two deceased accused, and thereby having contravened the notification issued by the Central Government under section 6 of the Explosives Act, 1884 and having committed an offence punishable under section 9B of the said Act. 15. They are also chargesheeted for having conspired to cause explosions of a nature likely to endanger life or to cause serious injury to property by means of explosive substance, for being in possession of explosive substance for unlawful object and for having procured, counseled, aided, abetted or become accessory to the commission of offences under the Explosive Substances Act, alongwith the fifteen wanted accused and two deceased accused, which are the offences punishable under sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. They are also chargesheeted for having committed mischief and causing damage to the public property of the Western Railways, alongwith the fifteen wanted accused and two deceased accused, which are the offences punishable under sections 3, 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984. 16. They are also chargesheeted for having intended to cause damage and destruction of the public property and having caused death, having endangered the safety of persons travelling in local trains, alongwith the fifteen wanted accused and two deceased accused, which are the offences punishable under sections 151 to 154 of the Railways Act, 1989. 17. Two accused are chargesheeted for having failed to produce their passports and travel documents and thereby having committed the offences punishable under section 12(1) (c) of the Passports Act, 1967. The case of the prosecution is as follows: - 18. 17. Two accused are chargesheeted for having failed to produce their passports and travel documents and thereby having committed the offences punishable under section 12(1) (c) of the Passports Act, 1967. The case of the prosecution is as follows: - 18. Mumbai is known as the financial capital of India due to its role as the hub of commerce, banking, and industry. It is home to the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE), Reserve Bank of India (RBI), major national and international banks, financial institutions, and corporate headquarters. The city generates a significant portion of India’s GDP and attracts a large workforce from across the country. The Mumbai local trains are rightly called the lifeline of the city. They transport millions of passengers daily, connecting distant suburbs with the city center. Operating across three major lines – Western, Central, and Harbour – the local train network is vital for the daily commute of millions of Mumbaikars, supporting the city's fast-paced economic and social life. 19. As noted by the learned Trial Court in the impugned judgment, millions of commuters travel each day southwards in the morning and northwards in the evening in the western railway suburban trains between Churchgate and Virar during peak hours. These commuters comprise of executives, businessmen, students and persons in the employment at various levels in the Government as well as private establishments. Hence, the suburban trains are aptly called as essential services and the lifeline of the Mumbai metropolis. It is alleged that this lifeline came to a grinding halt on the evening of 11th July, 2006 when seven high intensity, highly sophisticated explosive devices ripped through the first-class gent's compartment of seven suburban trains that were headed towards the distant western/northern suburbs. The blasts at Mahim and Borivali took place when the trains were near the stations, while the remaining five blasts took place in moving trains and away from platforms. The explosions were so powerful that they ripped through the double layered steel roofs and sides of each of the seven compartments, throwing bodies of the injured and dead passengers out of the compartments, and, at Mahim and Borivali Railway Stations, apart from the passengers in the compartments, the explosions even killed and injured passengers waiting on the platform and those travelling from the trains proceeding to the opposite direction. The roof of the platform no.3 of Mahim station was blown off by the explosion. The roof of the platform no.3 of Mahim station was blown off by the explosion. Some passengers from the Borivali bound train that witnessed an explosion near Mahim station, jumped out of the train and got killed under a local train proceeding in the opposite direction. The prosecution states that from the record, three blasts simultaneously took place at 1823 hours near Mahim, Bandra and Mira Road stations, while the last took place at 1828 hours near Borivali station. This suggests that timer devices were used to cause the blasts simultaneously and at specific places and were aimed at large scale devastation of life and property and widespread panic and chaos with an intention to cripple the economy. The public transport was extensively damaged and disrupted with a view to overawe the government. The entire western railway, suburban as well as main line, came to a grinding halt. The commuters poured on the western express highway, thereby disrupting the north as well as south bound vehicular traffic and causing hindrance to the rescue operations. It was reported that 187 persons lost their lives in the explosions and 817 had sustained injuries of various gravity and railway property worth Rs. 85,61,039/- was reportedly damaged till the time of filing of the chargesheet. One of the unclaimed dead was identified as a Pakistani national involved in the planting of an explosive laden bag in one of the trains. 20. The individual crimes of bomb blasts were initially registered separately at the respective railway police stations as per the table below: - CHART NO. 2 (Reproduced From The Trial Court Judgment) Sr.No. Police Station C.R. No. Time of Blast (FIR) Place of Offence (Blast) Train No. Affected Coach Persons Killed Injured 1 Mumbai Central Railway 77/06 1824 hrs. Matunga 645 DN Virar Fast 864 A 28 127 2 Mumbai Central Railway 78/06 1823 hrs. Mahim 641 DN Borivali Fast 0528 A 43 096 3 Bandra Railway 86/06 1823 hrs. Bandra 637 DN Borivali 8003 A 22 107 4 Bandra Railway 87/06 1825 hrs. Khar Subway 635 DN Borivali Slow 849 A 09 102 5 Andheri Railway 41/06 1824 hrs. Jogeshwari 619 DN Borivali Slow 0634A 28 115 6 Borivali Railway156/06 1828 hrs. Borivali 621 DN Virar Fast 935A 26 153 7 Vasai Road Railway 59/06 1823 hrs. Mira Road 607 DN Virar Fast 846A 31 122 21. Khar Subway 635 DN Borivali Slow 849 A 09 102 5 Andheri Railway 41/06 1824 hrs. Jogeshwari 619 DN Borivali Slow 0634A 28 115 6 Borivali Railway156/06 1828 hrs. Borivali 621 DN Virar Fast 935A 26 153 7 Vasai Road Railway 59/06 1823 hrs. Mira Road 607 DN Virar Fast 846A 31 122 21. Initially, the investigation was being handled by different investigating officers from seven different police stations where the crimes were registered. Later, Considering the sensitivity of the matter, the DGP Maharashtra State, deemed it fit to transfer the investigation of all the cases to the ATS, Maharashtra on 12th July, 2006 itself. As the investigation was already in progress by the respective railway police, they were directed to make compilation of the statements and documents and handover the charge of all the papers to ATS, and the ATS effectively got all papers of investigation on 20th July, 2006. Thereafter, different police officers were entrusted with the investigation of seven different crimes except PW-176 PI Rathod, who continued with the investigation of Cr. No. 77 of 2006. Although, all the 7 cases were transferred to ATS, the investigation in respect of each case was independently conducted by each of the aforementioned investigating officer and till 12th of August 2006, following accused were arrested, namely Dr. Tanveer (A-2) on 23rd July, 2006, Zameer Ahmed Latifur Rehman (A-11) on 25th July, 2006, Suhail Mohammad Sheikh (A-10) on 25th July, 2006, Faisal Ataur Rehman Sheikh (A-3) on 27th July, 2006, Muzzamil Ataur Rehman Sheikh (A-9) on 27th July, 2006 and Ehtesham Qutubuddin Siddique (A-4) on 12th August, 2006. 22. During the course of their investigation, it occurred to PW-174 PI Khandekar, who was analyzing the evidence collected and proceeding with investigating CR. No. 156 of 2006, that the then arrested accused (A2 and A4) and one wanted accused have been associated with the banned organization SIMI and that the present bomb blast appears to be a work of a banned organization, namely SIMI, with the intention to promote insurgency and commit terrorist acts. No. 156 of 2006, that the then arrested accused (A2 and A4) and one wanted accused have been associated with the banned organization SIMI and that the present bomb blast appears to be a work of a banned organization, namely SIMI, with the intention to promote insurgency and commit terrorist acts. Therefore, he gathered material in respect of wanted accused Asif Khan Bashir Khan (A-13), when it transpired that there are already 2 charge sheets for the offences under 153A (1) and Explosives Act in Jalgaon (Maharashtra) and hence he came to the conclusion that the cases of Railway Bomb Blast in Mumbai were the handy work of the banned organization, SIMI. It was in these circumstances that the provisions of the UAPA came to be invoked to the said case on 17th September 2006 and also the investigating officer brought it to the notice of chief-investigating officer that the case was a fit one for also invoking the provisions of MCOCA and a proposal to that effect was submitted to the Competent Authority through the DCP. The said proposal was submitted on 18th September 2006. Further, on 24th September 2006, on receiving the prior approval from the officer of the rank of DIG, the provisions of MCOCA were invoked to CR No. 156/2006 of Borivali Railway Police Station, which was being investigated by PI Khandekar (PW-174) and after the invocation of MCOCA the investigation was transferred to the officer of the Rank of ACP i.e. PW 186 i.e. ACP Sadashiv Patil. During the course of further investigation of the said crime, further arrests were made as under; 29/09/06 Mohammed Majid Mohammed Shafi (A-5), 29/09/06 Shaikh Mohammed Alam Shaikh (A-6), 29/09/06 Mohammed Sajid Margub Ansari (A-7), 29/09/06 Abdul Wahiuddin Mohammed Shaikh (A-8), 30/09/06 Naveed Hussain Khan (A-12), 03/10/06 Asif Khan Bashir Khan (A-13). 23. It was, thus, revealed that causing seven powerful serial bomb blasts almost within a span of 6 minutes, resulting in the death of several people and causing grievous injuries to several people, was nothing more than a single larger conspiracy of the members of the Organized Crime Syndicate, and thus all seven cases were clubbed together on 13/10/2006, by registering ATS police station Cr. No. 5/2006, to which all the sections mentioned below were applied, viz. 302, 307, 326, 325, 324, 427, 436, 120(B), 121,. No. 5/2006, to which all the sections mentioned below were applied, viz. 302, 307, 326, 325, 324, 427, 436, 120(B), 121,. 122, 123, 124A, 201, 212 of IPC r/w 3(1)(i), 3(2), 3(3), 3(4), 3(5) of MCOCA r/w section 10, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 40 of UAPA, r/w 6 and 9B of the Explosives Act r/w 3, 4, 5, 6 of Explosive Substances Act 1908 r/w 3, 4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act 1984 r/w 151, P152, 153 and 154 of the Indian Railways Act r/w 12(1)(c) of Passport Act. 24. On completion of the investigation, the investigating officer ACP Patil, PW 186, sent a proposal for obtaining sanction u/s 23(2) MCOCA, which was granted by the CP Mumbai (PW185), on 25/11/06, and finally the chargesheet came to be filed before the MCOCA Special Court on 30th November 2006, which was registered as MCOCA 21/2006. Thereafter, chargesheet was filed against 13 arrested accused persons and 15 wanted accused, most of which were Pakistani. It is the case of the prosecution that 2 of the Pakistani Nationals viz. Salim and Mohammed Ali @ Abu Umed @ Abu Osama died. One died in the explosion itself and other one was encountered at Antop Hill. INVOLVEMENT OF ACCUSED INCLUDING WANTED ACCUSED (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) 25. It is the case of the prosecution that 2 of the Pakistani Nationals viz. Salim and Mohammed Ali @ Abu Umed @ Abu Osama died. One died in the explosion itself and other one was encountered at Antop Hill. INVOLVEMENT OF ACCUSED INCLUDING WANTED ACCUSED (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) 25. It is alleged by the prosecution that it transpired during the course of investigation that wanted accused Azam Cheema @ Babaji, a Pakistani national, the arrested accused A3, A13 and others, conspired sometime in the year 1999 and thereafter, both within and outside India, to do and cause to be done illegal acts, i.e., to wage war against the Government of India, to collect men and explosives with the intention of waging war against the Government of India, to overawe by means of criminal force the Government of Maharashtra and Government of India, to terrorise the people in general and railway commuters in particular by indulging in wanton killings and destruction of property through bomb explosions in local trains, thereby disrupting public transport system in Mumbai, the economic capital of India, to create instability in the State of Maharashtra and in India by the aforesaid subversive activity, to shake and reduce the faith of the common citizen in its elected democratic government by large scale violence, destruction of lives and property and thereby destabilize the system of Government established by law, to organize the spread of secessionist and rebellious thoughts through covert and secret meetings with like minded Muslim youths, to exploit the communal sentiments of Muslims and to provoke them in the name of religion in order to resort to terrorist acts, to collect money from across the border and by sale of provocative SIMI literature in India for achieving the objective of the criminal conspiracy, to organize training camps in Pakistan in order to impart training to Indian Muslim youths in the handling and use of arms and explosives for causing the explosions, to establish training camps in India too and organise training in the handling of arms and explosives to like minded Indian Muslim youths locally, to facilitate infiltration of Pakistani militants from across the Indian border along with explosives for causing the explosions, to store and conceal such explosives at such safe places alongwith the Pakistani wanted accused for achieving the objective of criminal conspiracy, to do and commit any other illegal acts as were necessary for achieving the aforesaid objective of criminal conspiracy, to continue unlawful activities of banned organisations, i.e., SIMI and L-e-T, with an intention to promote enmity between different groups on grounds of religion prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony, incite individuals or group of individuals to cause disaffection against India or the Government of India or encourage or aid persons to undertake any unlawful activity like bomb explosions or of which the members undertake such activities and to continue activities of organised crime syndicate, singly or jointly, either as a member of an organised crime syndicate or on behalf of such syndicate, conspire, advocate, abet or knowingly facilitate the commission of an organised crime by use of violence or other unlawful means and promote insurgency by causing explosions in local trains in order to cause large scale loss to life and railway property. 26. It is alleged that in pursuance of the aforesaid conspiracy, during one such meeting held in the month of May, 2006 in the house of the A3 at Bandra (W), the plan to cause explosions in western railway local trains was finalised and the co-conspirators were assigned specific responsibilities. As a part of the conspiracy, wanted accused Azam Cheema took the responsibility of sending RDX and Pakistan based terrorists, including those who would be experts in assembling the explosive devices. As a part of the conspiracy, the A5 of Kolkata and the Al from Bihar were entrusted the responsibility of bringing Pakistani terrorists into India through Indo-Bangladesh and Indo-Nepal borders respectively. It was also decided to assemble explosive devices in the house of A6 in Govandi, Shivajinagar, Mumbai. Co-conspirator A13 was entrusted with the responsibility of procuring rexene bags, utensils, ammonium nitrate/nitrite, detonators, etc., and make arrangements to send them to the house of the A6 at Govandi, Shivajinagar, Mumbai. The A7 was entrusted with the responsibility of procuring timer electric circuitry and other relevant devices and keep it ready for the 'D' day. 27. It is alleged that in pursuance of the aforesaid conspiracy and in order to achieve the object of conspiracy, in the month of May, 2006, the A5, an Indian national and residing in Kolkata, made arrangements and ensured the infiltration of wanted accused and Pakistani nationals, viz., Sabir, Abu Bakr, Kasam Ali, Ammu Jaan, Ehsanullah and Abu Hasan into India through Bangladesh border. These accused persons traveled from Kolkata to Mumbai by train. Similarly, in the month of May, 2006, wanted accused, viz., Salim, Sohail Shaikh, Abdul Razak and Abu Umed illegally crossed over from Pakistan into India from Kutch border in Gujarat. Accused persons, viz., Salim and Abu Umed (both dead) are Pakistani nationals, while Abdul Razzak is a resident of Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh and Sohail Shaikh is a resident of Pune, but now both are learnt to be settled in Pakistan. As a part of the same conspiracy, the Al made arrangements for and illegally escorted wanted accused Pakistani nationals, viz., Aslam and Hafizullah into India through Nepal border. 28. It is alleged that in pursuance of the aforesaid conspiracy and in order to achieve the object of conspiracy, wanted accused, Pakistani national Ehsanullah brought RDX with him, which was used for causing explosions in Mumbai on 11/07/06. 29. 28. It is alleged that in pursuance of the aforesaid conspiracy and in order to achieve the object of conspiracy, wanted accused, Pakistani national Ehsanullah brought RDX with him, which was used for causing explosions in Mumbai on 11/07/06. 29. It is alleged that in pursuance of the aforesaid conspiracy, the above mentioned wanted accused illegally crossed over into India and came to Mumbai. The accused who crossed over from Bangladesh border were received by the A13 and were harbored in Flat no.304, Amrapali Apartments, Naya Nagar, Mira Road, Thane. Similarly, wanted accused, who crossed over into India from Kutch border, were provided safe house and harbored in flat no.24, Lucky Villa building, Kant Wadi, Perry Cross Road, Bandra (W), Mumbai 400 050 belonging to the A3. The two wanted accused and Pakistani nationals, who illegally infiltrated into India through Nepal border and brought to Mumbai by the Al, were housed and harbored in Flat No.101, Saba Parveen Apartment, Pooja Nagar Road, Naya Nagar, Mira Road, Thane, belonging to the A7. It has also come on record that as a part of the same conspiracy, after the bomb blasts on 11/07/06, the A4 provided shelter and harbored wanted accused Pakistani nationals and co-conspirators by name Ammu Jaan, Sabir, Abu Bakr, Kasam Ali, Ehsanullah and Abu Hasan brought by the A5, at 202, B Wing, 2nd Floor, Moonlight Apartment, Opp. Kalsekar College, Kausa, Mumbra, Thane, rented by the A8. 30. It is alleged that, in pursuance of the aforesaid conspiracy, during the said period, A3, A2, A10, A11, A9 and A4 traveled in western railway local trains between Mumbai and Virar in order to make a reconnaissance of the target. The conspirators decided to cause bomb blasts in the evening of a working day so as to cause maximum damage to the lives and to the property and also to strike against a symbolic institution of governmental authority. The same was approved by the blast master-mind wanted accused Azam Chima, top commander of L-e-T, based in Bahawalpur, Pakistan. The act of causing bomb explosions was aimed at disturbing public peace and subverting the authority of government established by law under the constitutional framework of India. The above modus confirms to the professed ideology and agenda of L-e-T. The L-e-T has repeatedly claimed through its web sites that its main aim is to destroy the Indian Republic and annihilate Hinduism. 31. The above modus confirms to the professed ideology and agenda of L-e-T. The L-e-T has repeatedly claimed through its web sites that its main aim is to destroy the Indian Republic and annihilate Hinduism. 31. It is alleged that in pursuance of the said conspiracy, sometime in the month of April, 2006, A4, A2, A3 and A12 went to the house of the A6 and surveyed the surroundings. 32. It is alleged that in pursuance of the said conspiracy and in order to achieve objectives of the conspiracy, between 08/07/06 upto 10/07/06, accused persons, viz., A7, Sohail Shaikh, Pakistani national and one more unknown Pakistani national assembled seven explosive devices in the house of A.6, at Plot No.33, T. Line, Room No.2, Shivajinagar, Govandi, Mumbai 43, to plant the explosives in local trains. They were assisted, aided and abetted by various means by coconspirators, viz., A6, A2, A4, A12, A13 and A3. 33. It is alleged that in pursuance of the conspiracy referred to above, wanted accused Azam Chima, a Pakistani national, and an office bearer of banned terrorist outfit L-e-T, organised training camp in Pakistan for training of Indian Muslim youths in the handling and use of arms and explosives. For the said purpose, he sent money to India through various persons and means for funding travel of Indian Muslim youths, desirous of undergoing the said training, to Pakistan. During the course of and after the said training, Azam Cheema incited the trained youths to avenge the alleged atrocities committed on Muslims in India, by causing wide spread insurgent and terrorist activities by exploding / bombing financial nerve centers and causing mass damage to life and property thereby crippling the economy of the nation. 34. It is alleged that between 1999 and 17/07/06 wanted accused Azam Chima, through wanted accused Mohammed Rizwan Dawrey and Rahil Ataur Rehman Shaikh, sent money through various means to India to the A3 for publishing jihadi literature, promoting anti-India sentiments and bearing the expenditure for the travel of those Indian Muslim youths who were to be sent for training to Pakistan and escape of those who participated in the bombing operations with an intention to achieve the objectives of the larger conspiracy referred to above. After the A3 returned from Pakistan, after receiving training in March, 2002, he received Rs.1,80,000/-through hawala transaction from wanted accused Azam Chima. After the A3 returned from Pakistan, after receiving training in March, 2002, he received Rs.1,80,000/-through hawala transaction from wanted accused Azam Chima. In November, 2003, Mohammed Rizwan Dawrey sent Rs.50,000/- to the A9. In February, 2004, wanted accused Mohammed Rizwan Dawrey and the A3 sent Rs.1,00,000/- through hawala. There is evidence on record that this amount was received by one Smt. Khalida Iqbal Shaikh and handed over to the A9. In the same year and after about 3 to 4 months, wanted accused Rizwan Mohammed Dawrey sent Saudi Riyals 14000 to the A3. In April, 2004, Rizwan Mohammed Dawrey and the A3 sent Saudi Riyals 40000 through hawala to Smt. Khalida Iqbal Shaikh, which was in turn collected by the A9. In the same month, A3 sent Rs.10,000/- to Smt. Khalida Iqbal Shaikh, which was collected by the A9. Sometime in July or August 2004, wanted accused Rizwan Mohammed Dawrey and the A3 sent Rs.20,000/-to Smt. Khalida Iqbal Shaikh for the A9. On 02/07/06 Mohammed Rizwan Dawrey again sent Saudi Riyals 15000 through one Hidaytulla Mehboob Sundke, PW-64, for the A3. Even after the explosions, Mohammed Rizwan Dawrey sent Saudi Riyals 11200 on 14/07/06 through one Afzal of Pune for handing over to Abdul Rehman Dawrey for onward handing over to the A3. Saudi Riyals 15000 mentioned above, were seized during the house search of the A3 at Bandra (W), Mumbai on 28/07/06. Saudi Riyals 11200 sent by wanted accused Rizwan Dawrey as stated above, could not be delivered to the A3 as he was arrested prior to the delivery of the said amount. This amount was seized on 30/07/06 from Abdul Rehman Dawrey, PW-71, brother of wanted accused Mohammed Rizwan Dawrey. The amounts mentioned above and received by the conspirators, was used by the accused to send others to Pakistan for training and other purposes, to achieve the larger goal of conspiracy as well as for facilitate the escape of those who participated in the bombing operation. As a part of the conspiracy and with a view to gain respectability and status, some of the conspirators fraudulently obtained forged and fake degree/education certificates using which they got gainfully employed even in foreign countries, ostensibly for the purpose of raising funds for the organised crime syndicate and/or for the purpose of siphoning funds from foreign countries for achieving the larger goal of conspiracy. 35. 35. It is alleged that in pursuance of the aforesaid criminal conspiracy, the A3, A2, A1, A9, A10, A11 and A6 went to Pakistan and received training in the handling of arms and explosives in the training camp run by wanted accused Azam Chima. The travel plans were elaborately planned by the conspirators in order to ensure that passports of the accused did not bear the arrival and departure stamps into and out of Pakistan. During the course of investigation, the A3, A9, A10, A11 and A2 have been found in possession of maps showing travel route from Tehran to Pakistan with details, i.e., names and/or phone numbers of persons who could be contacted for making their travel arrangements. Investigation disclosed that the accused persons were trained in the handling and use of arms and explosives. The trainees were repeatedly indoctrinated by their foreign trainers to avenge the alleged atrocities committed on Indian Muslims. The feelings and sentiments of the accused trainees were exploited to the fullest and they were exhorted to cause wide spread destruction of life and property in India in order to cripple the Indian economy and attain by force and violence an object of a general public nature, i.e., cause bomb blasts, thereby striking directly against the authority of the government. That in pursuance of the aforesaid criminal conspiracy, the accused who underwent training in Pakistan were paid money and were further asked to persuade more Indian Muslim youths to go to Pakistan for undergoing the said training. 36. It is alleged that in pursuance of the aforesaid conspiracy, sometime in the year 2000, wanted accused Azam Cheema on behalf of banned organisation L-e-T alongwith wanted accused Hafiz Zuber and Abdul Rehman, recruited the A1. Accordingly Al traveled to Pakistan on a fake Nepalese passport on an assumed name Kamal Ahmed Mohd. Munshi through Wagha border. This passport was prepared for the Al by wanted accused Hafiz Zuber, an Indian national presently based in Nepal. One Khalid Saifulla asked the A1 to motivate and recruit alienated and marginalised Muslim youths. One Ibrahim Rayeen (suspected accused) of Nepal, provided money to the Al with instructions to send more Muslim youths to undergo training in Pakistan. He accordingly sent his co-brother Anwar Ul Haque to Pakistan for undergoing training in the handling and use of arms and explosives. 37. One Ibrahim Rayeen (suspected accused) of Nepal, provided money to the Al with instructions to send more Muslim youths to undergo training in Pakistan. He accordingly sent his co-brother Anwar Ul Haque to Pakistan for undergoing training in the handling and use of arms and explosives. 37. It is alleged that in pursuance of the aforesaid criminal conspiracy, the A3 went to Pakistan for undergoing training in the handling and use of arms and explosives, firstly, on 01/10/01 and returned to India on 29/11/01 through Wagha border using Indian passport bearing No. B-5403385 issued on 06/06/01 by RPO, Pune. During his second visit and in order to avoid detection, the A3 left Mumbai for Jeddah on 08/11/03 using the above passport. From Jeddah, he illegally entered Pakistan via Kisham Island, Iran, where he allegedly destroyed his Indian passport. During return, his mentors in Pakistan gave him a fake Pakistani passport on an assumed name Mohammed Akram, using which he returned to Jeddah. While in Saudi Arabia, he was arrested for not possessing a travel document and on 01/12/04 he was deported to New Delhi on an Emergency Certificate. During his both visits, the A3 received training in the handling and use of arms and explosives in a training camp of wanted accused Azam Chima. He also asked A3 to recruit Muslim youths for arms training in Pakistan and also to survey targets for terrorists attacks. 38. It is alleged that in pursuance of the aforesaid conspiracy, on return to India and using the money that he had received from wanted accused Azam Chima, the A3 incited A10 and sent him to Pakistan for undergoing training as stated above. The A10 traveled to Pakistan on 01/11/02 on Indian passport bearing No.E-1185233. In order to avoid detection of his Pakistan visit, the A10 traveled from Mumbai to Tehran on a ziyarat visa and from there infiltrated into Pakistan. A10 too underwent training in the training camp of wanted accused Azam Chima. 39. It is alleged that in pursuance of the aforesaid criminal conspiracy, A6 traveled to Pakistan on 01/02/03 using his Indian passport bearing No.E-1560453 issued by RPO, Mumbai on 13/02/02. He left Chatrapati Shivaji International Airport, Mumbai and went to Dubai from where he traveled to Karachi and underwent training in the handling and use of arms and explosives. 40. 39. It is alleged that in pursuance of the aforesaid criminal conspiracy, A6 traveled to Pakistan on 01/02/03 using his Indian passport bearing No.E-1560453 issued by RPO, Mumbai on 13/02/02. He left Chatrapati Shivaji International Airport, Mumbai and went to Dubai from where he traveled to Karachi and underwent training in the handling and use of arms and explosives. 40. It is alleged that in pursuance of the aforesaid conspiracy and while the A3 was still in Pakistan, he instructed his brother, i.e., the A9 to send some more Muslim youths to Pakistan for undergoing training. Accordingly, the A9 paid and arranged for the travel and training of the A2 in Pakistan. In order to avoid detection, the A2 went illegally to Pakistan via Iran from Chatrapati Shivaji International Airport, Mumbai. The A2 traveled on Indian passport bearing No. B-0099830 issued by RPO, Mumbai on 21/05/04 and underwent training in the training camp of wanted accused Azam Chima. 41. It is alleged that, as a part of the same conspiracy and as instructed by the A3, the A9 illegally traveled to Pakistan via Iran on 09/08/04. But. First he traveled from Mumbai to Tehran and then illegally crossed Iran border into Pakistan. He too underwent training in the militant training camp of wanted accused Azam Chima. 42. It is alleged that on return from training, the A2 induced the All to undergo training in Pakistan to achieve the larger objective of conspiracy. Accordingly, the A2 collected All's passport bearing no. A1886227 issued by RPO, Mumbai on 12/09/96 and handed it over to the A9 who in turn got the same stamped with ziyarat visa for Iran.The A11 left Mumbai for Tehran on 04/04/05, from where he illegally crossed into Pakistan and received training in the training camp of wanted accused Azam 43. It is submitted by the investigating officer ACP Patil, PW-186, that members of Shiya sect of Muslim community visit Iran on ziyarat visa. This tour is necessarily for pilgrimage and for the visit of a holy place by name Mashad, where there is a tomb of the 8th religious leader, Imam Raza of Shiya sect. The persons who undertake this pilgrimage usually travel in groups with a proper operator. This tour is necessarily for pilgrimage and for the visit of a holy place by name Mashad, where there is a tomb of the 8th religious leader, Imam Raza of Shiya sect. The persons who undertake this pilgrimage usually travel in groups with a proper operator. It is a known fact that members of the Sunni sect of Muslims do not believe in the teachings of Imam Raza and hence do not go to ziyarat pilgrimage to Iran. It is also a known fact that Sunnis are not granted a ziyarat visa to Iran. During visit to Mashad, all pilgrims get holy food known as 'Niyaz'. Before any pilgrim receives Niyaz, his passport is stamped accordingly on the page bearing ziyarat visa. However, A2, A9, A10 and All are all Sunnis. Though they traveled from India to Iran on a ziyarat visa, they did not visit Mashad, but instead crossed the Iran border and went to Pakistan and underwent training in the camp of wanted accused Azam Chima. Though the A2, A9, A10 and All traveled to Pakistan via Iran on a ziyarat visa, their visas are not stamped as required at Mashad. The absence of the stamps/seals on their ziyarat visa page are conclusive proof of the same. Against the regular practice, these accused persons also traveled individually instead of going in a group or with a tour operator. 44. It is submitted by the investigating officer ACP Patil, PW-186, that activities of the organisation Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) were banned in India with effect from 27/09/01 by declaring it as an unlawful association under section 3(1) of the UA(P)A. PSI Vijay Bharatrao Mandlik, (PW-145) (Ext.1591), was attached to Kurla Police Station as ASI in 2001. He went with his staff by the Pipeline Road in Kurla (W) on the orders of the Sr. PI and with the help of megaphone they promulgated the ban by the Government and also pasted copies of the notification of the official gazette, Ext.1592, containing the ban order, at conspicuous places like beat chowkis, madarsa, sewage center of BMC, tahasil office, Pipe Road masjid, etc., and also pasted a copy on the office of the SIMI that was on the Pipe Road. It is alleged by the prosecution that though the SIMI was banned in the year 2001, A13, A3, A2, A4, A10, A11, A7, A8, A6, A9, wanted accused Rizwan Mohammed Dawrey and wanted accused Rahil Ataur Rehman Shaikh, continued to remain members of the said banned organisation and took part in the activities of 'Students Islamic Movement of India', which is a declared terrorist organisation under sections 2(1)(m) and 35 of the UA(P)A and thereby advocated, abetted, advised and incited the Indian Muslim youths against the policies of the Government of India, promoted enmity between different groups on grounds of religion by printing, publishing and circulating seditious, inflammatory and derogatory material and collected funds and subscriptions from others for the achievement of the larger goal of conspiracy. The A4 even distributed receipt books to others and by using the said receipt books, personally collected subscriptions for and on behalf of SIMI under assumed names. Similarly, wanted accused Azam Cheema and the other Pakistani nationals continued to remain members of the banned terrorist organisation 'Lashkar-e-Taiba' and continued to take part in the activities of L-e-T. They thereby advocated, abetted, advised and incited the Indian Muslim. youths against the policies of the Government of India. For achieving their objectives, they funded the travel of selected Muslim youths to Pakistan, bore the expenditure for their training in the handling and use of arms and explosives, indoctrinated them in the name of religion and also supplied explosives like RDX. All this was done in order to prepare a group of youths, Indian as well as Pakistani, to conspire against the Government or civil authorities and wage war by striking terror in the minds of the people or section of people by use of violence or force by causing large scale destruction of life and property in order to cripple the national economy through the disruption of the public transport system, which tantamounts to insurgency. The objective of the conspiracy was to continue unlawful activities within the State of Maharashtra and to overawe the Government by causing disruption of the mass public transport system and thereby undermine the authority of the Government. Mumbai, the economic capital and a soft target was apparently chosen for executing the conspiracy. 45. The objective of the conspiracy was to continue unlawful activities within the State of Maharashtra and to overawe the Government by causing disruption of the mass public transport system and thereby undermine the authority of the Government. Mumbai, the economic capital and a soft target was apparently chosen for executing the conspiracy. 45. It is alleged that in pursuance of the aforesaid conspiracy, the said accused persons advocated, abetted, advised and incited the Indian Muslim youths and knowingly facilitated the commission of terrorist act, to wit, to cause bomb explosions in seven first-class compartments of western railway trains in Mumbai on 11/07/06. Accused persons, viz., A13, A3, A2, A4, A10, A11, A7, A8, A6, A9 and Rizwan Mohammed Dawrey and Rahil Ataur Rehman Shaikh continued to be members of 'Students Islamic Movement of India' and remained in contact with wanted accused Azam Chima, commander of L-e-T, both banned terrorist outfits, as declared by the Government of India in the schedule as laid down under section 2(1)(m) and 35 of UA(P)A. 46. It is alleged that the A13 is one of the key conspirators continuously indulging in committing terrorist acts and unlawful activities for and on behalf of SIMI, an organisation banned by the Government of India since 27/09/01. A case under section 153(1) (A) read with 34 of the IPC was registered at M.I.D.C. Police Station, Jalgaon, Maharashtra vide C. R. No. 178 of 1999 against him in 1999. The Court had taken cognizance of the said case vide C. C. No. 219 of 2001. The A13 was declared as proclaimed offender on 08/03/02. While he was so absconding, another case was registered against him by the M. I. D. C. Police Station, Jalgaon, Maharashtra vide C. R. No. 103 of 2001 under sections 153A, 121, 121-A, 122, 123, 201, 506(II), 120B, 34 of the IPC read with sections 4(a) and 4(b) and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act. In the said case too, A13 evaded arrest and remained absconding till his arrest in this case. The six co-accused in the said case have since been convicted for various terms ranging from 3 years to 10 years vide S. C. No. 126 of 2002. 47. In the said case too, A13 evaded arrest and remained absconding till his arrest in this case. The six co-accused in the said case have since been convicted for various terms ranging from 3 years to 10 years vide S. C. No. 126 of 2002. 47. It is alleged that in pursuance of the aforesaid conspiracy, between February and May, 2006, arrested accused persons held several conspiratorial meetings in the house of the A3 at Bandra (W), Mumbai, near Shams Masjid, Mira Road, Dist. Thane and at 101, Saba Parveen Apartment, Pooja Nagar Road, Naya Nagar, Mira Road (E), Thane, i.e., house of the A7. The said meetings were attended by A13, A10, A3, A4, A2, A9, A11, A12, A6 and A7. In the said meetings it was decided to survey and select targets for causing large scale explosions. 48. It is alleged that in pursuance of the aforesaid conspiracy and in order to achieve the object of the conspiracy, wanted accused Azam Cheema asked the A3 during May, 2006 to identify likely targets to cause large scale damage and fear in the minds of general citizens. Accordingly the A3, A11 and A10 surveyed places like World Trade Centre, Mumbai Stock Exchange, Mahalaxmi Temple, Siddhi Vinayak Temple, local trains and some large shopping complexes. Except for the local trains, the conspirators avoided the other targets as all the said places had tight security arrangements. The A3 informed the wanted accused Azam Cheema that local trains were crowded and soft targets and hence, suitable for causing explosions. 49. It is alleged that in pursuance of the said conspiracy and in order to achieve objectives of the conspiracy, on the evening of 10/07/06, accused persons, viz., A6, A3, A12 and Sohail Shaikh, Pakistani national and one unknown Pakistani national, transported seven rexene bags containing explosive devices from the house of the arrested accused A6, i.e., Plot No.33, T. Line, Room No.2, Shivajinagar, Govandi, Mumbai-43 to Flat No.24, Lucky Villa, Perry Cross Road, Kant Wadi, Bandra (W), Mumbai-50, i.e., the house of the A3 in his Maruti car bearing no.MH-01-V-9568 and one taxi. 50. 50. It is alleged that in pursuance of the said conspiracy and in order to achieve the objectives of the conspiracy, on 11/07/06 between 1500 hours and 1630 hours arrested accused persons, viz., A4, A12, A13, A3 and Al and wanted accused Hafizullah, Aslam, Salim, Ammu Jaan, Abu Umed @ Abu Osama, Sabir and Abu Bakr traveled with the seven bags containing explosives devices from Flat No.24, Lucky Villa, Perry Cross Road, Kant Wadi, Bandra (W), Mumbai-50, i.e., the house of the A3, in different taxies to Churchgate Railway Station on western railways. 51. It is alleged that the Al alongwith wanted Pakistani accused Salim, Hafizullah and Aslam planted explosive device in bogie no. 864A, which blasted at Matunga Railway Station, for which C. R. No. 77 of 2006 was registered at Mumbai Central Railway Police Station. It is alleged that the A12 alongwith wanted Pakistani accused Abu Umed @ Abu Osama planted explosive device in bogie no. 849A, which blasted in between Santacruz and Khar Railway Stations, for which C. R. No. 87 of 2006 was registered at Bandra Railway Police Station. It is alleged that the A3 alongwith wanted Pakistani accused Abu Bakr planted explosive device in bogie no. 0634A, which blasted at Jogeshwari Railway Station, for which C. R. No. 41 of 2006 was registered at Andheri Railway Police Station. It is alleged that the A13 alongwith wanted Pakistani accused Sabir planted explosive device in bogie no. 935A, which blasted at Borivali Railway Station, for which C. R. No. 156 of 2006 was registered at Borivali Railway Police Station. It is alleged that the A4 alongwith wanted Pakistani accused Ammu Jaan planted explosive device in bogie no. 846A, which blasted at Mira Road Railway Station, for which C. R. No. 59 of 2006 was registered at Vasai Road Railway Police Station. It is alleged that unidentified Indian and Pakistani accused planted explosive devices in bogies no. 528A and 8003A, which exploded at Mahim and Bandra Railway Stations, for which C. R. No. 78 of 2006 and 86 of 2006 were registered at Mumbai Central Railway Police Station and Bandra Railway Police Station respectively. 52. It is alleged that unidentified Indian and Pakistani accused planted explosive devices in bogies no. 528A and 8003A, which exploded at Mahim and Bandra Railway Stations, for which C. R. No. 78 of 2006 and 86 of 2006 were registered at Mumbai Central Railway Police Station and Bandra Railway Police Station respectively. 52. It is alleged that in pursuance of the said conspiracy, the arrested and wanted accused persons planted explosive devices in the first-class compartments of local trains with intent to cause or knowing that it is likely to cause damage or destruction to railway property, i.e., compartments of western railway local trains, station platforms, overbridges, overhead wires, electric poles, etc. The accused persons by causing explosions in running local trains, caused the deaths of 187 passengers and injuries of various gravity to 817 passengers and generally endangered the safety of passengers traveling by local trains on 11/07/06. 53. It is alleged that in pursuance of the said conspiracy and in order to achieve the objectives of the conspiracy, the arrested and wanted accused procured explosives, detonators, electric circuits and other logistics for achieving the larger goal of conspiracy. During the course of investigation, the Al came to be arrested on 20/07/06. At the time of his arrest about 500 grams of RDX, which is an explosive, was seized from his house in village Basopatti, Dist. Madhubani, Bihar. Also traces of RDX were recovered from Plot No. 33, T Line, Room No.2, Govandi, Shivajinagar, Mumbai-43 on 29/09/06, i.e., residential premises of the A6. It is alleged that between 08/07/06 to 10/07/06 the conspirators used this very place for assembling the explosive devices. Traces of RDX were also recovered from Maruti car No.MH01-V-9568 belonging to the A3 on 22/10/06 recovered from the compound of Al Hatim building, Millat Nagar, Andheri (W), Mumbai. This very vehicle was used by the accused to transport the explosive stacked bags from the house of A6 at Govandi, Shivajinagar to the house of A3 at Bandra (W), Mumbai.Traces of RDX were also recovered from Bldg. No.1, 25/B, Kant Wadi, Lucky Villa, Perry Cross Road, Bandra(W), Mumbai-50, on 28/07/06, i.e., the house of the A3. It is alleged that on 10/07/06 after the explosive devices were assembled and kept in black rexene bags, this very place was used by the conspirators to store the explosive devices before they were taken to Churchgate Railway Station on 11/07/06. No.1, 25/B, Kant Wadi, Lucky Villa, Perry Cross Road, Bandra(W), Mumbai-50, on 28/07/06, i.e., the house of the A3. It is alleged that on 10/07/06 after the explosive devices were assembled and kept in black rexene bags, this very place was used by the conspirators to store the explosive devices before they were taken to Churchgate Railway Station on 11/07/06. At the instance of the A13, 2.7 kg. of Ammonium Nitrite powder and 10 detonators were recovered from his house at Poonam Park, 'A' Wing, Flat No.101, Near Lodha Complex, Mira Road, Dist. Thane. Similarly, corrosive materials namely Sulphuric Acid, Acetone and Hydrogen Peroxide were recovered from the possession of A2. The same, according to expert's opinion, could when mixed in the right proportions, be turned into a deadly mixture called TATP, capable of causing high intensity blasts. Experts have opined that RDX, Ammonium Nitrate, Nitrite and Petroleum Hydrocarbon oil was used in the explosions that took place in the seven first-class compartments of western suburban trains of Mumbai on 11/07/06. 54. It is alleged that in pursuance of the said conspiracy and in order to achieve the objectives of the conspiracy, the arrested and wanted accused, singly or jointly, either as member of an organised crime syndicate or on behalf of such syndicate, conspired, advocated, abetted or knowingly facilitated the commission of an organised crime by use of violence, promoted insurgency by causing explosions on 11/07/06 in seven different compartments of western railway local trains causing damage to property worth Rs. 85,61,039/- and deaths of 187 persons and injuries to 817 others. 55. It is alleged that all the arrested, wanted and two dead accused persons did commit murders by intentionally and knowingly causing the deaths of 187 persons and also did cause injuries of various gravity to 817 persons, with such intention and knowledge and under such circumstances that if by that act all accused had caused the death of such persons, they would have been guilty of murder and that all the accused had done the said illegal acts in furtherance of the common objective of the criminal conspiracy referred to above and also caused damage to public property, to wit, Western Railway local trains, platforms, overbridges, electric poles, overhead electrical wires, etc. 56. 56. It is alleged that all the accused persons mentioned in the report were parties to a criminal conspiracy hatched by holding meetings in Maharashtra and outside India between 1999 and October, 2006, the object of which was to do and cause to be done such illegal acts for achieving the aforesaid objectives of the criminal conspiracy and such illegal acts were done intentionally and knowingly by participating in furtherance of the common objectives of the criminal conspiracy. 57. It is alleged that as a part of the larger conspiracy, while committing various illegal acts, the members of the organised crime syndicate also resorted to obtaining forged documents, to wit, degree certificates and using them as genuine to reflect false educational qualifications, with a view to gain false status and respectability and also for employment and did gain employment on the strength of these forged documents. 58. It is alleged that as a part of the larger conspiracy, while committing various illegal acts, the A3 and the A6 obtained Indian passports from the office of the Regional Passport office, Pune and Mumbai respectively. Both these accused traveled to Pakistan using the said passports. However, in order to obliterate all evidence relating to their visit to Pakistan, they destroyed/disposed off their Indian passports and failed to produce the said passports before police, when directed to do so for the purpose of investigation. 59. It is alleged that as a part of the larger conspiracy and while committing various illegal acts, between May, 2006 and July, 2006, the arrested Indian conspirators, knowing fully well that their Pakistani counterparts had conspired and had illegally infiltrated into India with explosives for causing bomb explosions, with the intention of screening them from legal punishment, made arrangements for and harboured them. Accordingly, in the month of May, 2006, wanted Pakistani accused, viz., Sabir, Abu Bakr, Kasam Ali, Ammu Jaan, Ehsanullah and Abu Hasan entered India through Bangladesh border and were housed in 304, Amrapali Building, Sector-XI, Shanti Nagar 'A', Mira Road(E), Dist. Thane, office/house in the control of A7, A4 and A13. Similarly in the same month accused, viz., Salim (deceased), wanted accused Sohail Shaikh, Abdul Razzak and Abu Umed (deceased) illegally crossed over from Pakistan into India from Kutch border in Gujarat and were harbored in Flat No.24, Lucky Villa, Kant Wadi, Perry Cross Road, Bandra (W), Mumbai-50, house belonging to the A3. 60. Similarly in the same month accused, viz., Salim (deceased), wanted accused Sohail Shaikh, Abdul Razzak and Abu Umed (deceased) illegally crossed over from Pakistan into India from Kutch border in Gujarat and were harbored in Flat No.24, Lucky Villa, Kant Wadi, Perry Cross Road, Bandra (W), Mumbai-50, house belonging to the A3. 60. As a part of the same conspiracy, wanted Pakistani accused Aslam and Hafizullah entered India through Indo-Nepal border and were harboured in 101, Saba Parveen Apartment, Naya Nagar, Mira Road (E), Thane, house belonging to the A7. Prior to the blasts, two of the wanted accused, who were staying in Flat No.24, Lucky Villa, Kant Wadi, Perry Cross Road, Bandra (W), Mumbai-50, shifted their hide out to a flat in Millat Nagar. After the commission of the bomb blasts, the A4 escorted wanted Pakistani accused, viz., Ammu Jaan and brought him to stay in 202, B Wing, Moonlight Apartment, Opp. Kalsekar College, Kausa, Mumbra, Dist. Thane, which was rented by the A8. Five other Pakistani nationals were also provided shelter in this flat after the bomb blasts. After staying for a while, these accused were provided a safe passage out of Mumbai, by the A.5. GIST OF THE PROSECUTION STORY AS EVIDENT FROM THE DIRECT AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE FOR INDIVIDUAL ACCUSED PERSONS A.1 - Kamal Ansari Fir/Arrest/Crime No. 61. To get insights regarding the arrests of the A.1 in relation to his involvement in different blasts, a chart is produced herein below: - CHART NO. 3 Sr. No. Cr. No. Police Station Place of Blast Date of Arrest 1. 77/06 Mumbai Central Railway Police Station Matunga Railway Station (Between Dadar to Matunga - while entering into Matunga Railway jurisdiction) 20/07/2006 2. 41/06 Andheri Railway Police Station Jogeshwari Railway Station (Train had just departed from the platform no.1) 31/07/2006 3. 86/06 Bandra Railway Police Station Bandra Railway Station (Between Km Pole No.15/1 C and 15/6 A) 14/08/2006 4. 59/06 Vasai Road Railway Police Station Mira Road (The train had just departed Mira Road Station - It was between KM Pole no. 40/8 & 41/4) 11/09/2006 5. 156/06 Borivali Railway Police Station Borivali Railway Station (Platform no. 4 of Borivali Railway Station) 25/09/2006 Investigation-Recovery From A.1 62. PW-176 PI Rathod was assigned CR 77/06 (Matunga blast) on 12/07/06. PW-161 PI Tajne who was an assistant I.O in Cr. 40/8 & 41/4) 11/09/2006 5. 156/06 Borivali Railway Police Station Borivali Railway Station (Platform no. 4 of Borivali Railway Station) 25/09/2006 Investigation-Recovery From A.1 62. PW-176 PI Rathod was assigned CR 77/06 (Matunga blast) on 12/07/06. PW-161 PI Tajne who was an assistant I.O in Cr. No. 77/06, on July 19, 2006, received information from a reliable source implicating Kamal Ansari, a suspect from Basopatti, Bihar. PI Tajne along with API Kolhatkar and PSI Sachin Kadam led to Basopatti and reached Basopatti on 20/07/06 around 2:00 A.M, where they arrested Kamal and Khalid Ansari with the help of PSI Rajan Singh of Basopatti Police Station. During a house search of A.1, they discovered 500 grams of black powder, out of which they took 10 gms of powder as sample in a small plastic bag and sent it to the FSL. Forensic analysis (FSL report Ext. 469) confirmed the powder contained RDX (85%) and charcoal (15%). After Kamal's arrest, PI Tajne conducted further investigations and received confirmation from a cybercafe owner in Madhubani that Kamal frequently used the internet to send emails. The investigation linked Kamal to multiple bomb blasts, including those at Borivali and Bandra stations. The case was eventually consolidated under the MCOC Act due to the larger conspiracy behind the bombings. Conspiracy 63. Prosecution alleges conspiracy against the nation in which A.1 is involved. Passenger Of The Train Who Identified A.1 64. PW-57, Subhash Kamlakar Nagarsekar, was a train traveler during the 2006 bomb blast. On July 11, 2006, he boarded a local train at Charni Road for Churchgate travelling in the opposite direction of his intended direction. After reaching Churchgate, instead of getting down, he continued to Virar (Virar Fast Local 5:57), intending to switch at Dadar. According to him, two men with a large black rexine bag boarded the train at Churchgate and placed it on the luggage rack. When PW-57 got off at Dadar, the two men also got down from the train. He later got to know about the blast on the Western Railway and, in October 2006, saw news reports about the bomb blast and the arrest of suspects. Reports indicated that the bomb was planted on the 5:57 Virar Fast Local. Recognizing the connection to his train journey, he visited the ATS on October 18, 2006, there he met ACP patil and shared his recollection of the events. Reports indicated that the bomb was planted on the 5:57 Virar Fast Local. Recognizing the connection to his train journey, he visited the ATS on October 18, 2006, there he met ACP patil and shared his recollection of the events. On 07/11/06, he was called into the ATS office for T.I.Parade. During the TIP held on 07/11/2006, PW-57 identified A.1 - Kamal as one of the men who had placed the black coloured rexine bag on the luggage rack of the train. A.2 – Tanveer Ansari Fir/Arrest/Cr. No 65. To get insights regarding the arrests of the A.2 in relation to his involvement in different blasts, a chart is produced herein below: - CHART NO. 4 Sr. No. Cr. No. Police Station Place of Blast Date of Arrest 1. 77/06 Mumbai Central Railway Police Station Matunga Railway Station (Between Dadar to Matunga - while entering into Matunga Railway jurisdiction) 23/07/2006 2. 41/06 Andheri Railway Police Station Jogeshwari Railway Station (Train had just departed from the platform no.1) 03/08/2006 3. 86/06 Bandra Railway Police Station Bandra Railway Station (Between Km Pole No.15/1 C and 15/6 A) 17/08/2006 4. 59/06 Vasai Road Railway Police Station Mira Road (The train had just departed Mira Road Station - It was between KM Pole no. 40/8 & 41/4) 14/09/2006 5. 156/06 Borivali Railway Police Station Borivali Railway Station (Platform no. 4 of Borivali Railway Station) 25/09/2006 House Search - Seizure Of Passport 66. On 26/07/06, PW-176 PI Rathod (I.O of CR. No. 77/06) searched the residence of A.2 – Tanveer. Post search, which yielded no findings, PW-176 inquired with A.2 about his passport. A.2 disclosed that his passport was with a travel agency in Fort for a visa. PW-176, along with the panchas, visited International Trade Links, where the manager recognized Tanveer and confirmed the passport was submitted for an Iranian visa. PW-176 seized the passport under panchnama Exh. 450, passport contains the stamps of departure and arrival and visa of Iran is pasted on it. 67. On 08/08/06, PW-176 directed API Bavdhankar to take statements from travel agents involved with A.2 – Tanveer and others who traveled to Pakistan via Tehran, gathering pertinent documentation. These were recorded and deposited properly. PW-43, Hafzal Herzi, indicated that A.2’s passport processing was through AL Mehndi Tours in 2005, though the ticket was not issued by them. Recovery from A.2 Brother’s House 68. These were recorded and deposited properly. PW-43, Hafzal Herzi, indicated that A.2’s passport processing was through AL Mehndi Tours in 2005, though the ticket was not issued by them. Recovery from A.2 Brother’s House 68. On 01/08/06, A.2 -Tanveer was taken for inquiry where he expressed a desire to show the maps and books that he has hidden in his brother's house, accordingly the memorandum of his statement Ext.484 was written. 69. PW-176 with his staff and panchas followed Tanveer's directions to Momin Pura and arrived at 31, 2nd Floor, BIT Chawl No.4, where he called his mother to obtain the key to his brother's house. A.2 informed them that the building is known Pila Mahal and the house of his brother is on the 2nd floor, which was room no. 35. He opened the lock with the key and entered the house, inside the room, they found a sewing machine table and a Panasonic TV. Tanveer lifted the TV and kept it aside, took out some books and maps from the cardboard, the books were concerning SIMI organization titled 'Atankwad Ke Jimmedar Kaun', one map was of Mumbai and one was an international map showing India, Pakistan, Afghanisthan, Tehran, Iran, some places in the map of Mumbai were marked with green and red colour, a route from Mumbai to Muzzafarabad in Pakistan via Tehran, Zahidan, Bhawalpur was drawn on the international map. After completing the panchanama Ext. 485, the room was secured, and the key was returned to Tanveer's mother. Additionally, Panch witness PW19 R.S. Warang identified the articles in the court recovered from Tanveer's brother's house. Recovery From Saboo Siddique Hospital 70. PW-176 interrogated A.2 on 12/08/06 while he was in the custody of PI Wadhankar (I.O of Cr. No. 41/06). A.2 voluntary made a statement that he is ready to show bottles of chemicals that he has kept in the locker of the Sabu Siddhiqui Hospital. A.2's statement recorded in a memorandum (Ext. 457) written by PW-169 PSI Gaikwad (Assistant I.O in CR. No. 77/06), led to a station diary entry (Ext. 1803). 71. As per the directions given by A.2 - Tanveer PW-176 with staff and along with panchas, went to Sabu Siddiqui Hospital, A.2 led them to the ICU department on the 1st floor of the hospital. In the ICU, Dr. Atiya Sayyed and an accounts manager, Salamatullah Khan, were present. No. 77/06), led to a station diary entry (Ext. 1803). 71. As per the directions given by A.2 - Tanveer PW-176 with staff and along with panchas, went to Sabu Siddiqui Hospital, A.2 led them to the ICU department on the 1st floor of the hospital. In the ICU, Dr. Atiya Sayyed and an accounts manager, Salamatullah Khan, were present. A.2 indicated a room adjacent to the ICU, where he retrieved a key from under a mattress and opened a locker revealing three sealed bottles of chemicals: Hydrogen Peroxide, Acetone, and Sulphuric Acid. It has also come in the evidence of Dr. Atiya Sayyed that on 12/08/2006. ATS police had come to the Sabu Siddique Hospital at 4.00 pm for their investigation, an inspector, two panch, two-three other persons had come, that A.2 was with them, that they had come to check his locker, that police took the bottles Arts. 34 to 36 and the key Art.33 and the other articles with them, that the panchanama Ext. 458 bears her signature on the last page. 72. The recovered chemicals were sent for forensic analysis on August 13, 2006. Contents of the FSL report Ext.909 shows that the bottles in CR No. 77/06, contain Hydrogen Peroxide, Acetone and concentrated Sulphuric Acid, that Hydrogen Peroxide is a strong oxidizing agent, Acetone is a highly flammable liquid and as per the literature, concentrated Sulphuric Acid is used as initiator with chlorate in explosive mixture. Due to the hazardous nature of the seized chemicals, the court granted permission for disposal, which occurred on December 16, 2006. A panchanama, empty bottles, and a report were subsequently filed in court. Link Between Accused Persons - Visit To Pakistan - Connection With SIMI– Conspiracy 73. It was revealed during A.4 - Ehtesham's interrogation that A.2 - Tanveer was going to teach them how to prepare bombs with the help of chemicals. Cases under UAPA and IPC Section 353 were registered against A.2 and A.4 in Kurla; PSI Kshirsagar collected chargesheets (Exts. 462-463). Ext. 462 showed A.2 and A.4 illegally assembled at SIMI office on September 27, 2001. Ext. 463 showed them shouting anti-national and pro-SIMI slogans at Kurla court on September 28, 2001. PW-65 (Hostile witness regarding SIMI activities) named A.2 and A.4 among 24 SIMI activists. 74. 462-463). Ext. 462 showed A.2 and A.4 illegally assembled at SIMI office on September 27, 2001. Ext. 463 showed them shouting anti-national and pro-SIMI slogans at Kurla court on September 28, 2001. PW-65 (Hostile witness regarding SIMI activities) named A.2 and A.4 among 24 SIMI activists. 74. PW-176 learned A.2 - Tanveer, A.10 - Suhail, A.11 - Zameer , A.3 - Faisal, and A.9 - Muzzammil went to Pakistan for militancy training and were associated with L-e-T and SIMI. It has has come in the evidence of PW-176 that he had obtained true photocopies Regional Passport Office, Mumbai of the application and documents submitted by A.2 Ext.1993 (1 to 13) and A.11 Ext 1992 (1 to 10) alongwith the covering letter Ext. 1991. A.2, A.9, A.11 and A.10 had gone from Mumbai Airport to Tehran, Iran and from there to Pakistan. 75. A.3 - Faisal in his confessional statement before the PW-40 Arvind Singh( Assistant Director of E.D) stated that he had sent A.2 - Tanveer to get training in L-e-T camps via Iran route. Further he stated that A.2 was sent on the reference of A.4 - Ehtesham. A.2 had gone to Pakistan for training in the month of May and June 2004 after resigning his job in Prince Ali Khan Hospital, therefore he wrote a letter (Exh.2445) to the Medical Superintendent of the Prince Ali Khan hospital, Mazgaon, Mumbai-10 to furnish his service details, the hospital gave reply Ext. 2446 (1 and 2) furnishing the details of resignation. 76. It was alleged that PW-75-Amar Sardar Khan that he met A.2 - Tanveer, A.4 - Ehtesham and A.6 - Mohd Ali in the programs of SIMI that he attended and has identified them all in the court. There used to be aggressive and provocative speeches about jihad at the SIMl programs, that the jihad that they were talking about was in respect of atrocities committed on Muslims. That A.2 and A.4 used to give such speeches. Four or five days before the blast, PW-75 and Ajmeri Shaikh saw A.2 outside A.6’s house in Govandi, where they later saw A.2, A.6, A.4, and others with wires and powders. A.2, A.4 and A.6 were supervising the assembling. PW-76 (Vijay Ambekar -PC Crime branch) corroborated this, stating Ajmeri told him about seeing A.2, A.4, A.6, and others with wires and powders at A.6's house. 77. A.2, A.4 and A.6 were supervising the assembling. PW-76 (Vijay Ambekar -PC Crime branch) corroborated this, stating Ajmeri told him about seeing A.2, A.4, A.6, and others with wires and powders at A.6's house. 77. PW-59 saw A.2 - Tanveer, A.4 - Ehtesham, A.3 - Faisal, A.10 - Suhail, A.9 - Muzzammil and A.13 - Asif Khan at A.3’s house in February 2006, that they had gathered there for discussion on some special subject, and later in March 2006 A.3 came to meet PW-59 at Mira Road near Shams Masjid with A.3's three friends, A.13, A.2 and A.4. A.3 asked PW-59 to arrange a house for his friends. 78. It has come in evidence of PW-78-Shaikh Noman Ahmedon (hostile witness) that he knew that SIMI was banned in the year 2000. Even after the A.2 - Tanveer, A.3 - Faisal and A.4 - Ehtesham used to go to the office of SIMI. In 2004, A.2 had gone to Pakistan. 79. The acts were committed by an organized crime syndicate and the conspiracy was spread over a large period of time and wanted accused Azam Cheema had arranged for the training of A.2 - Tanveer in the camps of Lashkar-e-Talba situated in Pakistan. Identification Of The Accused 80. Witness PW-75 Amar Sardar Khan and Ajmeri Shaikh with 6 more witnesses arrived at the ATS office on 07/11/06, accompanied by police and SEOs, who would take them to Arthur Road Jail for identification of the accused persons. The parade conducted by PW-80 SEO Purandare on 07/11/06, the TIP was conducted in two groups, with witnesses PW-75 Amar Sardar Khan and Ajmeri Shaikh identifying A.2 - Tanveer in connection with its role outside and in the house of A.6 - Mohd. Ali on the day when they had gone there. A.3 - Mohd. Faisal And A.9 - Muzzammil Shaikh Fir/Arrest/Cr No. 81. To get insights regarding the arrests of the A.3 and A.9 in relation to their involvement in different blasts, a chart is produced herein below: - CHART NO. 5 Sr. No. Accused No. Cr. No. Police Station Place of Blast Date of Arrest 1. A.3 and A.9 77/06 Mumbai Central Railway Police Station Matunga Railway Station (Between Dadar to Matunga - while entering into Matunga Railway jurisdiction) 27/07/2006 2. A.3 and A.9 41/06 Andheri Railway Police Station Jogeshwari Railway Station (Train had just departed from the platform no.1) 08/08/2006 3. No. Accused No. Cr. No. Police Station Place of Blast Date of Arrest 1. A.3 and A.9 77/06 Mumbai Central Railway Police Station Matunga Railway Station (Between Dadar to Matunga - while entering into Matunga Railway jurisdiction) 27/07/2006 2. A.3 and A.9 41/06 Andheri Railway Police Station Jogeshwari Railway Station (Train had just departed from the platform no.1) 08/08/2006 3. A.3 and A.9 86/06 Bandra Railway Police Station Bandra Railway Station (Between Km Pole No.15/1 C and 15/6 A) 28/08/2006 4. A.3 and A.9 59/06 Vasai Road Railway Police Station Mira Road (The train had just departed Mira Road Station - It was between KM Pole no. 40/8 & 41/4) 18/09/2006 5. A.3 156/06 Borivali Railway Police Station Borivali Railway Station (Platform no. 4 of Borivali Railway Station) 28/09/2006 6. A.9 156/06 Borivali Railway Police Station Borivali Railway Station (Platform no. 4 of Borivali Railway Station) 30/09/2006 House Search Of A.3 And A.9 82. On 28/07/06, Sr. PI Rathod, ACP Shengal of ATS, and PSI Kshirsagar, along with staff, conducted a house search at A.3 - Faisal's residence in Bandra. They arrived at the Lucky Villa Building, where A.3 showed them his room on the third floor. Upon entering, they searched the kitchen and living room. In the living room, they found black powder in a cupboard compartment and collected it for analysis, later identified as RDX and ammonium nitrate. During the search, a red handbag was found containing railway tickets, debit cards, licenses, cash, 30 notes of 500 Saudi riyals, vehicle documents, and books of SIMI and book titled “Atankwad ka jimmedar kaun”. In the second compartment of the said bag additional items included two maps with marked routes, one was of Mumbai and on the backside Mumbai- suburbs, there were marks at some places on the map of Mumbai in green and red ink, the other map was an international. map of India, Pakistan, Iran, Muscat, Afghanistan, Tehran, etc, that a route from Mumbai to Tehran, Tehran to Zahidan and Zahidan to Muzzafarabad was drawn on the map, there was some matter in Urdu below the map, an International mobile number and e-mail address as guddu_sir @ yahoo.com, and contact information, along with a Motorola mobile phone. PW-31 Sanford Fernandes (Panch witness) have identified the articles in the court that were seized from the house of A.3. 83. PW-31 Sanford Fernandes (Panch witness) have identified the articles in the court that were seized from the house of A.3. 83. After concluding the house search of A.3 – Faisal, they proceeded to A.9 - Muzzammil's location in Mira Road, who led them to his flat. During house search they found 2 new CPUs and an Echolac company travel bag, the contents of the bag were inspected, they found a CD pouch containing CDs, the name Rahil Shaikh was written on the pouch, they also found a Maxell company hard disk, a passport in the name of A.9, his educational documents issued by Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad, Lucknow, certificates of Higher Secondary Board Examination, Data Core Technology's appointment letter in his name, identity card of Oracle company in his name, red coloured packet containing many cards like internet cards, netwala card, sifi I card, books of SIMI organization and books titled 'Atankwad Ka Jimmedar Kaun', In another compartment of the bag they found two maps, one was of Mumbai and on the backside of Mumbai suburbs, there were marks at some places on the map of Mumbai in green and red ink, the other map was an international map of India, Pakistan, Iran, Muscat, Afghanistan, Tehran, etc., a route from Mumbai to Tehran, Tehran to Zahidan and Zahidan to Muzzafarabad was drawn on the map, there was some matter in Urdu below the map, an international mobile number and e-mail address as guddu_sir@yahoo.com. PW-31 Sanford Fernandes (Panch witness) have identified the articles in the court that were seized from the house of A.9. Recovery From The Railway Track 84. On 08/10/06, during the interrogation of A.3 - Mohd. Faisal by ACP Dhawale, PI Deshmukh, and PI Tonapi, A.3 - Mohd. Faisal voluntarily gave a statement (Ext. 1108), that he could show where he discarded some items. He led the officers to a location near Dahisar; he led them from the western railway track towards Mira Road and pointed out the places where he felt that he had thrown the articles. Faisal pointed out to a spot in the marshy land from where the officers recovered a brown plastic bag in mud, containing several items including 7 rubber gaskets, 5 whistles, broken electric wires, a PCB, and plastic bags. These were seized and documented in Panchanama Ext. 1109. The items were cleaned, sealed, and labeled, and Faisal signed the panchanama. 85. Faisal pointed out to a spot in the marshy land from where the officers recovered a brown plastic bag in mud, containing several items including 7 rubber gaskets, 5 whistles, broken electric wires, a PCB, and plastic bags. These were seized and documented in Panchanama Ext. 1109. The items were cleaned, sealed, and labeled, and Faisal signed the panchanama. 85. FSL reports (Exts. 973 and 974) revealed that Cyclonite (RDX) was detected on plastic bags, indicating their use in explosives. The rubber rings and whistles could be used in cookers, but the electric wires did not match those used in the PCB (printed circuit board). The PCB could act as a triggering device, containing components like a DTMF receiver IC, commonly used in phone circuits. When connected to a mobile phone, the device could be triggered by actions such as receiving a call. FSL report Ext. 2388 further indicated that the rubber gaskets and whistles recovered from Faisal were duplicates, as they did not match the original products from the Kanchan company in terms of markings and physical characteristics. PW-62 Devendra Lahu Patil (Train Passenger Who Identified A.3) 86. PW-62 Devendra Patil testified that on 11/07/2006, after finishing work at the Custom House, he went to Churchgate station around 5:15 p.m. He boarded the 5:36 p.m. Churchgate-Borivali slow train and stood near the last row of seats in the first-class bogie. Two men boarded the train with a black bag, one of whom tried to place it on the rack but kept it below the seat near the window that was facing towards churchgate. After the train left Jogeshwari, there was a loud explosion,he was thrown down in the train and people fell on him. After some days in the news, he got to know about bomb blasts in the trains and that some persons had kept black bags containing bombs in the train. Therefore, he went to the ATS office on 20/10/2006 and gave his statement about the incident. He identified one of the men, A.3 - Faisal, in a police identification parade on 07/11/2006. In court, he again identified A.3 as the person who had kept the black bag in the train. PW-77 Rajesh Satpute (Taxi Driver Who Identified A.3) 87. PW-77 Rajesh Satpute testified that on 11/07/2006, he was driving taxi MH-01-J-4066 when two men entered in his taxi near Carter Road, Bandra. In court, he again identified A.3 as the person who had kept the black bag in the train. PW-77 Rajesh Satpute (Taxi Driver Who Identified A.3) 87. PW-77 Rajesh Satpute testified that on 11/07/2006, he was driving taxi MH-01-J-4066 when two men entered in his taxi near Carter Road, Bandra. One of the men had a black bag, which he placed on the front seat by his side. They asked him to drive to Churchgate. During the drive, there was an instance when the driver applied a brake due to which the bag moved ahead. The man sitting behind grabbed the bag and warned Satpute to drive carefully. Satpute offered to put the bag in the boot, but the other man refused, saying the bag contained valuable items. Satpute described the men, one being around 30-35 years old with a small beard and long hair, and the other about 25-28 years old The witness identified A.3 - Faisal in the TIP dated 07/11/06 conducted by SEO Barve. Further, he also identified A.3 in Court as one of the passengers in his Taxi. Handwriting Analysis 88. During the search & seizure, the IOs had obtained some maps which contained handwritten notes. Therefore, PW-176 Sr.PI Rathod collected specimen handwriting from several accused persons, including Tanveer, Muzzammil, Faisal, Zameer, and Suhail, between July 30, 2006, and August 4, 2006. These specimens, along with maps containing handwritten notes, were forwarded to the Additional CP, Crime Branch, CID, Mumbai, for onward submission to the handwriting expert for finding out the author of the writings on the maps. PW-131 Jayant Ahir (handwriting expert) confirmed that the handwriting on the maps matched Faisal's handwriting, specifically the e-mail addresses written on them. 89. The handwriting expert explained the process of analyzing the questioned documents (maps) and the specimen handwriting. He concluded that the writings on the maps (Exhibits 1486 to 1490) showed similarities with Faisal's handwriting (Exhibits 1491, Sheets 1- 9). The expert further noted that, despite the presence of Urdu script, the handwriting was similar enough to indicate that the same person wrote the markings on the maps. The Urdu phrases on the maps contained specific names, phone numbers, and references to email addresses. Recovery From The Car Of A.3 90. A.12 - Naveed voluntarily took police officers, including PW-50 Shrikrushna Pawale (Panch Witness) and PI Khanvilkar (PW-168), to several locations as part of a reconstruction. The Urdu phrases on the maps contained specific names, phone numbers, and references to email addresses. Recovery From The Car Of A.3 90. A.12 - Naveed voluntarily took police officers, including PW-50 Shrikrushna Pawale (Panch Witness) and PI Khanvilkar (PW-168), to several locations as part of a reconstruction. They traveled from Shivaji Nagar, Govandi, to Lotus Junction, then to Geeta Vikas Beat Police Chowki, where A.12 indicated he had stopped a Maruti 800 car. He claimed A.3 (Faisal), A.7 (Sajid), and two Pakistani nationals had got down from the vehicle there. 91. A.12 then led them to Bandra Perry Cross Road, pointing out Lucky Villa, A.3's residence, and noted that two Pakistanis lived with Faisal in a temporary structure on the terrace. Following his directions, they also went to Millat Nagar, where Naveed indicated a building near Ocaz Shopping Center, stating he dropped A.3 there to meet Pakistani guests. 92. Naveed identified a white Maruti 800 parked at Al Hatim Building as A.3's car. Mohd. Alam (PW-59) testified that A.3 had recently purchased this vehicle. Police found black spots inside the car and collected them with swabs for analysis. ACP Patil sent the swabs and the car to FSL on 26/10/06. The FSL report revealed the presence of RDX, petroleum hydrocarbons, charcoal, and ammonium compounds in the swabs and the vehicle. Conspiracy - Link Between The Accused - Visit To Pakistan - Connection With SIMI 93. The prosecution alleges A.3 – Faisal and A.9 – Muzzammil, along with other accused, conspired against the nation and participated in train bomb blasts, citing the following reasons: i) A.9 and A.3 contacted the wanted accused Azam Cheema of Lashkar-e-Taiba through their associates, Rahil and Rizwan Dawrey, to receive funds. A.3 used this money to facilitate the travel of radicalized youths from India to Pakistan via Tehran. ii) Abdul Rehman Dawrey (PW-71) testified about discussions at the SIMI office concerning Muslim issues and identified Faisal, Muzzammil, and others. Literatures connected with SIMI were also found at the houses of A.3 and A.9. iii) Following riots in Pune in 2001 and the ban on SIMI, some members used to say that it will not be sufficient only to talk but they should take some training. Faisal traveled to Pakistan for training in 2002, meeting Hafiz Sayyed of LeT, and had traveled through Attari Rail Check-post in 2001. iii) Following riots in Pune in 2001 and the ban on SIMI, some members used to say that it will not be sufficient only to talk but they should take some training. Faisal traveled to Pakistan for training in 2002, meeting Hafiz Sayyed of LeT, and had traveled through Attari Rail Check-post in 2001. iv) PW-95, Tafheem Akmal Hashmi, a former Pakistani Army hawaldar, testified that he joined the Mujaheeddin after leaving the army in 1994-95, receiving training in Afghanistan and Azad Kashmir, including Muzaffarabad. He claimed to have met A.3 Faisal at a Lashkar-e-Taiba training camp near Muzaffarabad in June or July 2004. v) Training in militancy was reported, with connections to Azam Cheema (chief commander of L-e-T), who funded the accused's training and A.3 had gone to pakistan twice and had taken training in the camps of Lashkar-e-Taiba. vi) PW-59, Mohammed Alam, revealed he was close to Faisal, who changed his name to conceal his identity and admitted training in Pakistan. In February, 2006 once he went to the house of A.3, that at that time he saw 5-6 persons in his house, that they had gathered there for discussion on some special subject. vii) Despite SIMI’s ban, accused members continued their activities, keeping in contact and sharing shared ideological materials. viii) During the course of investigation 26,200 Saudi Riyals were recovered, some from the residence of A.3 and some from witness Abdul Rehman Dawrey, which were meant for A.3, that wanted accused Azam Cheema had asked A.3, A.13 and others to make preparations for bomb blasts strike in the city of Mumbai. ix) Investigations revealed a conspiracy dating back to 1999, involving several trips to Pakistan for training in subversive activities. x) Evidence indicated 15 kg of RDX was smuggled in by Pakistanis, and explosives were procured locally. Pakistani nationals associated with the accused used multiple residences in Mumbai before the blasts. Investigative officers confirmed that Faisal lived in a rented flat in Bandra, with connections to local and infiltrated individuals. Links With Wanted Accused Rizwan Dawrey - Foreign Funding 94. On inquiry about wanted accused Rizwan Dawrey, his father informed police that Rizwan was in Saudi Arabia and his other son, Abdul Rehman Dawrey, resided in flat no. 202 of the 'C' wing in the same building. Links With Wanted Accused Rizwan Dawrey - Foreign Funding 94. On inquiry about wanted accused Rizwan Dawrey, his father informed police that Rizwan was in Saudi Arabia and his other son, Abdul Rehman Dawrey, resided in flat no. 202 of the 'C' wing in the same building. Police, with panch witnesses, visited Abdul Rehman's flat, where he told that Rizwan had sent 500 and 200 Saudi Riyals for A.3 - Faisal. Abdul Rehman stated that Rizwan informed him via email about sending the money. The police seized the envelope and Riyals, properly labeled and signed. 95. Abdul Rehman also shared that A.3 - Faisal and wanted accused Rahil used to visit him in 1996-1997. He knew A.3’s brother, A.9 – Muzzammil, and was aware A.3’s other name was Mustafa. Abdul Rehman stated that Rizwan went to Jeddah in 2003 and worked as a system administrator. Faisal and Rahil visited him there. At one instance, Faisal showed him his Pakistani passport and suggested sending Rizwan for training in Pakistan, which Abdul Rehman opposed. Abdul returned to India in 2005. Rizwan continued to send 500-600 Saudi Riyals for the expenditure of their father. On 17/07/06, Abdul collected a parcel of medicines, sweets and an envelope containing about 500 Riyals sent by Rizwan. 96. In a conversation on 26/07/06, Rizwan told Abdul that the envelope of 500 Riyals was for A.3 - Faisal and told him to dispose of the envelope and move out from Pune as A.3 was picked up in connection with the 07/11 railway blasts. On 30/07/06, Abdul Rehman handed the envelope over to the ATS when they visited, along with the 500 Riyals and Rizwan’s personal computer. 97. In 02/07/2006, Hidayatulla Sundke traveled from Jeddah to Mumbai, carrying 15,000 Saudi Riyals for A.9 - Muzzammil, sent by Rizwan stating that they were for a mosque construction project. Hidayatulla later handed the money to Bilal. Bilal later arranged for Mohsin Khan to deliver the money to A.3 - Faisal in Mumbai. A.3 was unable to explain the source of 26,200 Saudi Riyals found in his house during the house search, which was linked to funds from Azam Cheema, commander of LeT, Pakistan, sent via Rizwan Dawrey. The investigation revealed these funds were intended for militant activities. CHART NO. 6 Trail of 15,000/- Saudi Riyals from Rizwan Dawrey to Mohd. A.3 was unable to explain the source of 26,200 Saudi Riyals found in his house during the house search, which was linked to funds from Azam Cheema, commander of LeT, Pakistan, sent via Rizwan Dawrey. The investigation revealed these funds were intended for militant activities. CHART NO. 6 Trail of 15,000/- Saudi Riyals from Rizwan Dawrey to Mohd. Faisal Rizwan Dawrey (WA) (It is alleged that he used to obtain funding from Azam Cheema. Rizwan convinced Hidayatulla (PW-64), who was working in Jeddah, to take 15,000 Saudi Riyals and give it to A.9 - Muzzammil Shaikh in Pune. He told Hidayatulla that he has collected the money for constructing a masjid in his village.) Hidayatulla Mehboob Sundke (PW-64) (Hidayatuula agreed to take the cash. Upon reaching Pune, he received a call from Bilal (PW-66) who told him that Muzzammil had asked him to pick up the cash. Hence, after talking with Muzzammil on call, Hidayatulla handed over the cash to Bilal.) Bilal Salauddin Shaikh (PW-66) (He was a maternal relative of A.3 - Faisal. A.9 - Muzzammil called Bilal & requested him to collect the Saudi Riyals from Hidayatulla and told him that Faisal shall collect it from him later. Bilal collected the amount. On the same day, Faisal called Bilal and told him to send the cash to Mumbai.) Mohsin Khan (PW-67) (He is cousin of Bilal (PW-66). Mohsin’s father was admitted in J.J.Hospital in Mumbai, therefore, he was going to Mumbai. Bilal told him to take the cash with him to Mumbai and that Faisal will collect it from there. He did as instructed. Faisal came to collect the cash at J.J.Hospital. Mohsin handed over the cash to Faisal.) Mohd. Faisal (A.3) Foreign Travel / Passport Agent / Link Between Accused 98. In 2004, A.3 - Faisal asked PW-46 Mushtaq Ahmed to arrange a visa for his friend, A.2 - Tanveer Ansari, by submitting Tanveer’s passport to an agent named Johar Sayyed. Faisal later repeated similar actions with other individuals, including A.9 - Muzzammil, A.11 - Zameer, and others, using agent Ashik Ali to obtain their visas and tickets for travel to Iran. A.3 - Faisal used to give such work to him every 2-3 months. 99. Faisal later repeated similar actions with other individuals, including A.9 - Muzzammil, A.11 - Zameer, and others, using agent Ashik Ali to obtain their visas and tickets for travel to Iran. A.3 - Faisal used to give such work to him every 2-3 months. 99. PW-44 confirmed that he worked with Mushtaq to arrange tickets and visas for these individuals between 2004 and 2006, noting that they were initially going to travel as part of a group but later traveled independently. The ATS later investigated and retrieved the relevant passport records, identifying several individuals, including Muzzammil, Zameer, and others. 100. Further evidence from PW-114, an Immigration Officer, confirmed that passport records linked to Faisal showed his departure to Karachi in 2001. Additionally, PW-115, another immigration officer, testified about an incorrect entry in his records concerning the date of departure for Faisal. 101. Overall, the evidence points to a network of individuals, primarily Faisal, who facilitated the processing of visas and travel documents for various individuals between 2001 and 2006, possibly as part of a broader scheme. A.4 - Ehtesham Qutubuddin Siddique FIR/Arrest/Crime No. 102. To get insights regarding the arrests of the A.4 in relation to his involvement in different blasts, a chart is produced herein below: - CHART NO. 7 Sr. No. Cr. No. Police Station Place of Blast Date of Arrest 1. 77/06 Mumbai Central Railway Police Station Matunga Railway Station (Between Dadar to Matunga - while entering into Matunga Railway jurisdiction) 12/08/2006 2. 41/06 Andheri Railway Police Station Jogeshwari Railway Station (Train had just departed from the platform no.1) 25/08/2006 3. 86/06 Bandra Railway Police Station Bandra Railway Station (Between Km Pole No.15/1 C and 15/6 A) 08/09/2006 4. 156/06 Borivali Railway Police Station Borivali Railway Station (Platform no. 4 of Borivali Railway Station) 28/09/2006 Train Passenger Who Identified A.4 103. On 11/07/06, PW-74 Vishal Parmar after the work was over, received a call from his employer who directed him to go to the BMC Bank at Dadar, therefore, at 5:15 p.m., he went to Churchgate Station as he wanted to go to Dadar he went to platform no.3, he waited for the 5:19 p.m. Virar fast train on platform 3. Two men asked him about the train, then boarded ahead of him. One of them, carrying a black rexine bag, unintentionally hit Parmar's leg as they boarded. Two men asked him about the train, then boarded ahead of him. One of them, carrying a black rexine bag, unintentionally hit Parmar's leg as they boarded. He sat in a crowded first-class compartment, noticing the bag but not thinking much of it. After stopping at Dadar, the two men exited quickly without the bag. 104. Later, amid reports of bombings involving black bags, Parmar recalled this incident. He approached the ATS police in Bhoiwada, met Officer Patil, and gave his statement, later identifying accused Ehtesham Siddique during the test identification parade conducted by PW-80 SEO Purandare in Arthur Road jail. 105. PW-80 SEO Purandare adopted the same procedure for another parade. In this parade witnesses PW-75 Amar Khan and Ajmeri Shaikh identified A.4 Ehthesham and accused no.6 Mohd. Ali Alam Shaikh, in connection with their role outside and in the house of Accused no.6 Mohd. Ali on the day when they had gone there. Link Between Accused - Connection With SIMI – Conspiracy 106. During the interrogation of A.4 - Ehtesham, he disclosed that A.2 - Tanveer, was teaching them how to make bombs with chemicals. Both A.4 and A.2 faced charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and for rioting at Kurla Police Station. PSI Kshirsagar collected and presented the relevant chargesheets (Exts. 462-463). Ext. 462 shows that on 27/09/2001, A.4 and A.2 illegally assembled at the banned SIMI office, while Ext. 463 indicates that on 28/09/2001, they shouted anti-national slogans in support of SIMI near Kurla court. 107. A.3 – Faisal, in his confessional statement, stated before PW-40 Arvind Singh (Assistant Director of E.D) that A.2 and A.11 - Zameer were sent to pakistan to get training in L-e-T camps via Iran route on the reference of A.4. 108. It has come in the evidence of PW-174 (I.O of Cr. No. 156/2006) that PI Dinesh Ahir had recovered literature connected with SIMI from A.4 - Ehtesham in an LAC case. He was also convinced that, A.4 was involved in the commission of the crime that he was investigating. 109. It has come in the evidence of PW-75 that he met A.4 – Ehtesham in SIMI programs, there used to be aggressive and provocative speeches about jihad at the SIMl programs, that the jihad that they were talking about was in respect of atrocities committed on Muslims, that A.4 used to give such speeches. 110. 109. It has come in the evidence of PW-75 that he met A.4 – Ehtesham in SIMI programs, there used to be aggressive and provocative speeches about jihad at the SIMl programs, that the jihad that they were talking about was in respect of atrocities committed on Muslims, that A.4 used to give such speeches. 110. PW-75 had gone with his friend Ajmeri Shaikh four or five days before the blast to Shivaji Nagar in Govandi at A.6 – Mohd. Ali’s house, before entering the house, they saw A.4 - Ehtesham entered the house from outside with a tea kettle. They both entered the house behind A.4, they saw three-four more persons sitting there, one person was doing something with a wire, two- three newspapers were spread in front of the persons, there was white and black coloured powder on the newspapers, that when they greeted them, A.6 said they are busy in some work and they would meet afterwards, therefore they came out of the house. 111. PW-59 saw A.4 - Ehtesham along with A.2 – Tanveer, A.10 – Suhail, A.9 – Muzzammil and A.13 – Asif at A.3's house in February 2006, that they had gathered there for discussion on some special subject, and later in March 2006, A.3 came to meet PW-59 at Mira Road near Shams Masjid with A.3's three friends, A.4, A.13 and A.2. 112. PW-65 Mehboob Qureshi (Hostile witness) had stated in his 161 statement that when A.4 - Ehtesham used to come to Mumbra, he used to meet his brother-in-law (Sadu) A.8 – Abdul Wahid, that in May 2006 when he was in his shop Hamja General Stores, A.4 came to his shop and asked him to give the keys of A.8's house, that thereupon he gave the keys of the room of the house in which A.8 used to live, i.e., 202 (room no.2), 2nd floor, Moonlite building, B-wing, near Bharat Gear company and Kalshekar college, Kausa, Mumbra, Thane to A.4, at that time A.8 and his wife were not at home and there were five-six other persons with A.4 and during that period A.4 took the keys from him twice and took meetings. 113. 113. It has come in the evidence of PW-186 that it was found that there were cases against A.2 - Tanveer, A.4 - Ehtesham, A.7 - Sajid and A.8 - Wahid, which were of similar nature and were under the provisions of Section 153 A of the IPC or under the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. 114. It has come in his evidence of PW-186 that when the investigation came to him, the admissible evidence that was against A.4 - Ehtesham was the evidence about he being member of SIMI, that he was arrested earlier in the offences under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, that at the time of arrest he was found in possession of objectionable books, that he was continuing with the activities of the SIMI even after the ban and collecting funds for the organization, that he was knowing most of arrested accused in this case, etc. Further, A.4, along with A.2 – Tanveer and A.6 – Mohd. Ali were supervising the assembling of bombs. 115. Further, it is the case of the prosecution that the bomb blast that exploded ahead of Mira Road Railway Station was planted by A.4 Ehtesham along with wanted accused Ammujaan. A.5 - Mohd. Majid FIR/Arrest/CR No 116. A.5 was arrested only in one crime; the details are given as under: CHART NO. 8 Sr. No. Cr. No. Police Station Place of Blast Date of Arrest 1. 156/06 Borivali Railway Police Station Borivali Railway Station (Platform no. 4 of Borivali Railway Station) 29/09/2006 Conspiracy – Link Between The Accused 117. PW-70 M. Shakeel, a childhood friend of A.5 - Majid, identified him in court. He has told that A.5 resides nearby, that he knew one of his relatives by name Asif, who stays in Bangladesh. PW-70 recounted meeting Asif in Kolkata in December 2003 during his uncle's wedding and again in February 2006, when Asif came to Kolkata met him and A.5. Asif told to PW-70 that he had come for some secret work about which he cannot tell him and said that he would tell A.5 about the work for which he had come. PW-70 asked A.5 about the work that Asif told him. He said Asif had come to India for doing some work in connection with the plight of Muslims in India and that he also wants to do that work. PW-70 asked A.5 about the work that Asif told him. He said Asif had come to India for doing some work in connection with the plight of Muslims in India and that he also wants to do that work. PW-70 questioned A.5 as to why he is doing that work. A.5 said that he is doing it as he wants to do something for Islam. PW-70 did not feel it good as A.5 was not attentive to the business of spectacles which PW-70 was doing with A.5. 118. One day, A.5 - Majid said that he wants to do some work about jihad and that Asif and some of his friends are going to do some big work for jihad. PW-70 was shocked on hearing this and told A.5 that he does not want to do that work and he does not want to be concerned with it. While talking with A.5, he came to know that A.5 is in contact with some person of Lashkar-e-Taiba in Mumbai and during the second or third week of May 2006, A.5 told PW-70 that some persons are to be brought from Bongaon on the border of India and Bangladesh, therefore, one day A.5 and PW-70 went to Bongaon by train. At that time, A.5 was talking with Asif and Munna on his mobile. On reaching Bongaon, PW-70 and A.5 went towards the Bongaon market area. After some time, Munna came with six persons. They greeted A.5 and told their names, they were Abu Bakar, Sabir, Kasam Ali, Ammujaan, Abu Hassan and Ehsanulla, all wanted accused. 119. PW-70, A.5 - Majid and the six wanted accused went to a nearby hotel for tea. All of them were between 20 to 30 years of age, all of them gave their passports to Munna. PW-70 could gather from the passports that those persons were from Pakistan as the name Pakistan was written on the covers of the passports. Munna took the passports and left them. 120. PW-70, A.5 - Majid and those six wanted accused persons went by two rickshaws to the railway station. A.5 purchased eight tickets for going back to Kolkata. During their talk, PW-70 came to know that those wanted accused persons are from Pakistan and are sent by wanted accused Azam Cheema, commander of Lashkar-e-taiba in Pakistan. 120. PW-70, A.5 - Majid and those six wanted accused persons went by two rickshaws to the railway station. A.5 purchased eight tickets for going back to Kolkata. During their talk, PW-70 came to know that those wanted accused persons are from Pakistan and are sent by wanted accused Azam Cheema, commander of Lashkar-e-taiba in Pakistan. After reaching Kolkata, PW-70 went to his house and the six wanted accused persons went with A.5 to his house. PW-70 told A.5 that he is not ready to do that work as it is not a good work and that he is a small man and has business, but A.5 was not ready to listen. 121. That wanted accused Azam Cheema sent six persons from Bangladesh in May 2006, who were collected by A.5 and brought to Mumbai and handed over to A.13 - Asif, who made arrangements for their stay, that the names of those persons were disclosed as wanted accused Sabir, wanted accused Ammu Jaan, wanted accused Ehsanullah, wanted accused Abu Hasan, wanted accused Abu Bakar and wanted accused Kasam Ali, all of them Pakistani nationals and it was disclosed that wanted accused Ehsanullah had brought about 15 kgs of RDX with him. 122. The six wanted accused persons who had come from Bangladesh border had assembled in the house of A.8 - Wahid, and from there, they were taken away by A.5 - Majid and A.5 dispatched them out of India from the Bangladesh border. Evidence Of Hotel Manager-(PW-141) (Hotel Heena At Bhendi Bazar) 123. It has come in the evidence of PW-141 Jairam Mahabal Shetty that he was in Mumbai from 2001 to 2007 working at his brother's Hotel Heena in Bhendi Bazar. The ATS police had come to the hotel on 03/11/06 for making inquiries, that they wanted•to know whether a person by name Mohd. Majid and four-five persons whose names they gave, had stayed in the hotel, that on seeing the register he saw entry in the name of Mohd. Majid, who had stayed in room no. 401 in the hotel for three days from 04/01/04 upto 06/01/04 and Shami, Asif, Pappu and Mohsin, who had come from Kolkata, had stayed with him. 124. It has come in his evidence that he was present when the entry no. 6 (Exh.1569) was made by A.5, who had signed it. 125. Majid, who had stayed in room no. 401 in the hotel for three days from 04/01/04 upto 06/01/04 and Shami, Asif, Pappu and Mohsin, who had come from Kolkata, had stayed with him. 124. It has come in his evidence that he was present when the entry no. 6 (Exh.1569) was made by A.5, who had signed it. 125. A.5 – Majid had again come on 10/01/04 and stayed in the hotel in room no. 401 along with the same persons, that they had come from Kolkata and stayed upto 14/01/04 and person by name Shami had signed the entry no. 38 (Exh.1570), which was made by A.5 who had signed it and there was a talk between them when the persons left the hotel on 14/01/04, that they said that the lodging charges were less in Bangladesh and Pakistan than in Mumbai. That the photocopies of the said pages of the register were taken by the ATS when he was called to the ATS office, Bhoiwada. A.6 - Shaikh Mohd. Ali Alam Shaikh FIR / Arrest / Crime No. 126. A.6 was arrested only for one crime; the details are given as under: CHART NO. 9 Sr. No. Cr. No. Police Station Place of Blast Date of Arrest 1. 156/06 Borivali Railway Police Station Borivali Railway Station (Platform no. 4 of Borivali Railway Station) 29/09/2006 House Search 127. On 29/09/06, the team consisting of ACP Shengal, PI TajnePW- 161(Assistant IO) and staff took the house search of A.6 Mohd. Ali and they came back to the office and handed over the house search panchanama Ext. 716 to him and reported that during the search one Kanchan pressure cooker was seized and they had noticed two black and white spots in the box type cot in the house, that they had taken swabs of the spots and had seized the swabs and the pressure cooker was kept in a plastic bag and seized, that the packets of the cotton swabs were marked as Exb- A and B and the cooker was marked as Exb-C, that the said articles were deposited in the muddemal room. 128. PW-161 and PW-58(Panch Witness) have identified the A.6 and also identifies the articles that were seized i.e cotton swabs Art 301 and Art. 302, pressure cooker Art 303 and rubber ring Art-337 in the court. 129. Contents of the FSL report Ext. 128. PW-161 and PW-58(Panch Witness) have identified the A.6 and also identifies the articles that were seized i.e cotton swabs Art 301 and Art. 302, pressure cooker Art 303 and rubber ring Art-337 in the court. 129. Contents of the FSL report Ext. 2383 show that cyclonite (RDX) and charcoal were detected on one swab and ammonium, nitrate and traces of cyclonite (RDX) were detected on the other swab. Identification Of Accused 130. PW-75 Amar Sardar Khan is a witness who has been examined to establish the conspiracy. All the Accused had assembled at the house of A.6 at Govandi for assembling the bombs which at that particular time the witness did not pursue, but it was only later when his friend Ajmeri Shaikh brought the Mumbai Mirror newspaper to him and he read about the arrest of A.6 and others. That he realized that A.2, A.4, A.6 and others whom he had seen on that particular day all sitting in the house of A.6 with two three newspaper spread in front on them, a black coloured power on the said newspapers and some wires were there. It was thereafter that he approached the ATS and his statement came to be recorded and later in TIP he also identified A.6. 131. The Test Identification Parade was held by PW-80 SEO purandare wherein witnesses PW-75 Amar Khan and Ajmeri Shaikh identified accused no.6 Mohd. Ali Alam Shaikh and stated that they had seen some persons at the A. 6's house before 4-5 days of the blast and one person was doing something with wires, and they had also seen black-colored powder on the newspapers. Link Between The Accused - Connection With SIMI/Conspiracy 132. PW-75-Amar Sardar Khan stated that he met accused no.6 Mohd Ali in the programs of SIMI that he attended and has identified him in the court. 133. PW-75 had gone with his friend, Ajmeri Shaikh, four or five days before the blast to Shivaji Nagar in Govandi, that Ajmeri parked the motorcycle outside a lane and they were walking in that lane as A.6’s house is in that lane, they were at some distance from A.6's house, they saw A.2 - Tanveer standing outside his house looking around. At that time A.6 came out of the house in a hurry and said something to A.2. Then A.2 and A.6 both went inside the house. At that time A.6 came out of the house in a hurry and said something to A.2. Then A.2 and A.6 both went inside the house. At the same time, A.4 - Ehtesham entered the house from outside with a tea kettle. They both entered the house following A.4. There they saw that three-four more persons sitting there, one person was doing something with a wire, two- three newspapers were spread in front of the persons, there was white and black coloured powder on the newspapers, that when they greeted them, A.6 said they are busy in some work and they would meet afterwards, therefore they came out of the house. 134. It has also come in the evidence of PW-76 Vijay Ambekar (PC, Crime branch) that he knew one Ajmeri Shaikh and on 28/10/06 Ajmeri Shaikh came to his house at about 10:00-10:30a.m with his friend Amar Khan and said he wants to talk to him about something special and confidential. Ajmeri Shaikh looked around to confirm that no one is hearing him and then showed him the issue of Mumbai Mirror dated 01/10/06 Ext, 810 that was with him, that it was in the news item that two or three days before the bomb blasts, bombs were prepared in the house of A.6 Mohd. Ali in the presence of some Pakistani persons, that Ajmeri Shaikh further told him that two or three days before the blasts he and his friend PW-75 Amar Khan had gone to the Shivaji Nagar area in Govandi in the afternoon and had gone to the house of A.6, their friend, as they had not met him since many months. 135. Ajmeri told PW-76 that when they went to A.6 - Mohd. Ali's house, they saw A.2 - Tanveer, A.4 - Ehtesham and three unknown persons present in A.6's house, that he wondered as to how A.6, A.2 and A.4 were together, where Ajmeri saw an electric wire in the hands of one unknown person and that he was joining the wires, there were heaps of black, gray and white powder in front of the other two unknown persons. 136. It has come in the evidence of PW-186 ACP Patil that it was disclosed in the investigation that A.6 - Mohd. 136. It has come in the evidence of PW-186 ACP Patil that it was disclosed in the investigation that A.6 - Mohd. Ali was having a passport, that by using the said passport he had gone to Dubai and then to Pakistan for terrorist training, thereafter, he came back to Dubai and from Dubai he went to Nepal and from Nepal he entered in India, that it was disclosed that he had used this route to hide his visit to Pakistan and the passport was not traceable and it was suspected that he had destroyed it. 137. It was found during the investigation that the leaders of the Lashkar-e-Taiba organization made use of the SIMI cadre because their ideologies are similar, that one of the commanders of Lashkar-e-Taiba wanted accused Azam Cheema @ Babaji had played a vital role behind the activities of arrested accused as an organized crime syndicate. Wanted accused Azam Cheema had arranged for the training of A.6 Mohd. Ali, in the camps of Lashkar-e-Talba situated in Pakistan. A.7 - Mohd. Sajid Margoob Ansari FIR / Arrest / Crime No. 138. A.7 was arrested only for one crime; the details are given as under: CHART NO. 10 Sr. No. Cr. No. Police Station Place of Blast Date of Arrest 1. 156/06 Borivali Railway Police Station Borivali Railway Station (Platform no. 4 of Borivali Railway Station) 29/09/2006 House Search 139. During the course of investigation, A.7 - Sajid was being interrogated on 23/10/06 at Juhu Unit by PI Tonapi, PI Deshmukh and staff. At that time, A.7 expressed his desire to make a voluntary statement. Therefore, two panchas were called by the staff. PI Tonapi (PW-155) recorded the events chronologically as dictated by PI Deshmukh. PI Tonapi gave his name as ‘Sajid Margub Ansari’ on being asked before the panchas and made the statement in Hindi Ext. 1479 before them voluntarily disclosing that he would show the place where the articles used for making timer circuit devices were kept, which he wrote down. 140. PI Tonapi, PI Deshmukh, staff, PW-129 Raju Tapi (Panch witness), one another panch and A.7 - Sajid went to Malvani Gate No. 6 via Link Road. A.7 asked to stop the vehicle near Mother Teresa School. They got down from the vehicle, went ahead, and went through a small lane by the side to a ladder. A.7 was walking in front of PI Deshmukh. A.7 asked to stop the vehicle near Mother Teresa School. They got down from the vehicle, went ahead, and went through a small lane by the side to a ladder. A.7 was walking in front of PI Deshmukh. They were behind him. There was a board outside the house containing the words in English "Valid Tanjeem'. They followed him inside the room on the first floor. An old person was sitting there. There were two parts in that room. The old person was sitting in one part, there were 5-6 computers in the other part. 141. A.7 - Sajid asked the old man to give the keys to his drawer. The old man, i.e. Mushtaq Ali gave him a key, by which he opened one of the drawers of the computer table, took out one plastic bag with the name 'Priya Gold". 142. A.7 - Sajid took out the articles from the plastic bag and put them on the table. The articles were - one soldering gun, four pieces of soldering wire, soldering paste, one screwdriver, two stainless steel tweezers, one multimeter, one packet of Airtel recharge voucher with a sticker containing Sim number and mobile number and certain electric components like - resistors, capacitors, one coil, transistors, LEDs, diodes, etc. These articles were seized and taken in possession and the panchanama Ext. 1480 was completed. 143. Contents of the FSL report Ext. 2392 show that Art-346 is a 35 watt soldering rod, in working condition and used earlier. Art-347 (1 to 4), the four pieces of soldering wire are used to connect electronic components on PCB and Art-350 is a multimeter in working condition. Art-351 (1 and 2) are two stainless steel tweezers in working condition, Art-352. is a T-6 type screw driver particularly used for mobile repairing in working condition, Arts-354(1 to 22) are resistors of different values in working condition, Arts-355 (1 and 2) are two electrolytic capacitors in working condition, Art-356 is silvery white metallic wire wound on graphite rod, Art-357 (1 to 8) are transistors in working condition, Art-358 (1 to 9) are red coloured Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs) in working condition, Art-359 (1 to.6) are Zener Diodes, generally used as voltage regulator and appeared to be in working condition. Identification Of Accused/Important Witness 144. Identification Of Accused/Important Witness 144. PW-80 SEO purandare conducted the Test Identification parade on 07/11/06 at Arthur Road Jail, wherein PW-75 Amar Sardar Khan identified Mohd. Sajid. Amar Khan as the person who was present in the house of A.6 Mohd. Ali and was doing something with a wire. Ajmeri Sheikh, a friend of PW-75, who went to A.6's house at Govandi with PW-75 before 4 to 5 days of the blast, also identified A.7 in the TIP conducted on 07/11/06 by SEO Purandare. Link Between Accused Persons - Connection With SIMI – Conspiracy 145. It was found that there were cases against A.7 - Sajid, A.2 - Tanveer, A.4 - Ehtesham, and A.8 - Abdul Wahid, which were of similar nature and were under the provisions of Section 153A of the IPC or under the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. 146. Evidence shows that the Pakistani persons were staying at three places in Mumbai, i.e., at the residence of A.3 Faisal at Bandra, at the residence of A.7 Sajid at Mira Road and in the office of SIMI at Mira Road. After the blasts, they went to the residence of A.8 Abdul Wahid at Mumbra. 147. Some of the accused persons had organized a meeting in the month of February 2006 and discussed the proposal of wanted accused Azam Chima, who had promised the accused persons that he would send about 12 people from Pakistan, who would help them in assembling explosive and triggering devices. Wanted accused Azam Cheema had also promised to send high explosives along with those persons. Similarly, wanted accused Azam Cheema sent two persons from the Nepal border and they were collected by A.1 Kamal and brought to Mumbai and handed over to A.7 Sajid, who arranged for their stay. Their names were disclosed as wanted accused Aslam and wanted accused Hafizullah. 148. The wanted accused persons and two dead accused were staying in the safe houses arranged by A.13 Asif Khan, A.3 Faisal and A.7 Sajid. 149. All the accused decided to assemble the explosive devices in the house of A.6 Mohd. Ali, situated at Govandi. Three days prior to the explosions, the explosive devices were assembled by A.7 Sajid and experts in assembling explosive devices, i.e., wanted accused Sohail Shaikh from Pune, who had come from Pakistan and one more Pakistani wanted accused. 149. All the accused decided to assemble the explosive devices in the house of A.6 Mohd. Ali, situated at Govandi. Three days prior to the explosions, the explosive devices were assembled by A.7 Sajid and experts in assembling explosive devices, i.e., wanted accused Sohail Shaikh from Pune, who had come from Pakistan and one more Pakistani wanted accused. On the night of 10/07/06, the assembled explosive devices were transported in the motor car no. MH-01-V-9568 belonging to A.3 Faisal and in one taxi, by A.3 Faisal, A.12 Naveed, A.7 Sajid and the Pakistani nationals and taken to the house of A.3 Faisal and stored there. 150. It has come in the evidence of PW-65 Mehmoob Qureshi (Hostile witness regarding SIMI Activities) that the office of the SIMI was at Kurla Pipe Road where he used to go sometimes. Similar types of programs used to be conducted there. In the year 2000, he had visited Akola for a convention of SIMI. He became acquainted with the workers of SIMI, they were A.8 Abdul Wahid, A.7 Sajid, Irshad Khan, who was the Maharashtra President, etc. PW-65 has identified A.8 Abdul Wahid and A.7 Sajid in the court. PW-65 stated that he knows some SIMI activists, out of which A.7 Sajid is his brother-in-law. 151. PW-78 Shaikh Noman Ahmed (Hostile witness) had stated that there was a program at the house of A.7 Sajid Ansari in 2003 and in that program A.2 Tanveer Ansari, A.4 Ehtesham Siddiqui, Shanu and many others were present. A.10 - Suhail Shaikh Fir/Arrest/Cr. No 152. To get insights regarding the arrests of the A.10 in relation to his involvement in different blasts, a chart is produced herein below: - CHART NO. 11 Sr. No. Cr. No. Police Station Place of Blast Date of Arrest 1. 77/06 Mumbai Central Railway Police Station Matunga Railway Station (Between Dadar to Matunga - while entering into Matunga Railway jurisdiction) 25/07/2006 2. 41/06 Andheri Railway Police Station Jogeshwari Railway Station (Train had just departed from the platform no.1) 06/08/2006 3. 86/06 Bandra Railway Police Station Bandra Railway Station (Between Km Pole No.15/1 C and 15/6 A) 21/08/2006 4. 59/06 Vasai Road Railway Police Station Mira Road (The train had just departed Mira Road Station - It was between KM Pole no. 40/8 & 41/4) 16/09/2006 5. 156/06 Borivali Railway Police Station Borivali Railway Station (Platform no. 86/06 Bandra Railway Police Station Bandra Railway Station (Between Km Pole No.15/1 C and 15/6 A) 21/08/2006 4. 59/06 Vasai Road Railway Police Station Mira Road (The train had just departed Mira Road Station - It was between KM Pole no. 40/8 & 41/4) 16/09/2006 5. 156/06 Borivali Railway Police Station Borivali Railway Station (Platform no. 4 of Borivali Railway Station) 30/09/2006 House Search Of Suhail Shaikh (A.10), Rizwan Dawrey And Abdul Rehman Dawrey 153. A.10 - Suhail used to reside in Pune. Therefore, A.10's residence in Pune was searched after consulting with ACP Tawde. PW-176 directed API Kadam and PSI Gaikwad went to Pune with A.10 to conduct a search of A.10's house and conduct the search of the house of Rizwan Dawrey; therefore, a house search of A.10 and Rizwan Dawrey was conducted as they were directed. 154. When they entered the house of A.10, his mother, wife and two brothers were present in the house, police started the search, there was a cupboard on the right side, police opened it, in the middle drawer they found four audio cassettes some cassettes were titled 'Al-Quran' and some were titled 'Beauty of Islam, a passport in his name, a Samsung mobile, six books two books were titled 'SIMI, Student Islamic Movement of India', the address of SIMI's office of Delhi was at the bottom of the front cover, two books were titled 'Tehrik-e-Millat, Atankwad ka jimmedar kaun' and two books were titled 'April-2004’ Tehrik-e-Millat;, two maps and one ISD call rate card, two chits stapled to that card on which names and phone numbers were written, two of the books were green coloured, one of the maps was of Asia continent, a route from Salet, Tehran in Iran upto Muzzafarabad in Pakistan was marked on this map, there were some numbers in handwriting and email ID and the other map was titled Map of Mumbai', certain spots in, Mumbai like Veer Savarkar Marg, Dadar, Mahalaxmi Temple, Reserve Bank of India, Zaveri Bazar, etc, were marked in red ink encircled by green ink on this map, a tariff card of ISD calls was found. 155. While searching Rizwan Dawrey’s house police received details of Rizwan from his father- Mohd. 155. While searching Rizwan Dawrey’s house police received details of Rizwan from his father- Mohd. Hussain that he is in Saudi Arabia, he had gone to Saudi Arabia on 06/04/06 and, found items in his cupboard, including books titled “India’s Muslim Problem” “Islamic Directives to Reform the Individuals and Community” and photocopies of passports for Rizwan and his wife, which were seized (Arts. 304-307). 156. Additionally, Rizwan’s father informed the police that his elder son Abdul Rehman Dawrey (Rizwan’s brother) resides in flat no. 202 of the 'C' wing in the same building. Therefore, they went to flat 202, where Abdul Rehman Dawrey revealed that Rizwan sent money for accused number 3. Abdul rehman Dawrey produced white closed envelope which was opened and they found Saudi Arabian Riyals- 22 notes of 500 riyals and one note of 200 riyals. Link Between Accused - Connection With SIMI- Visit To Pakistan – Conspiracy 157. It has come in the evidence of PW-71Abdul Rehman Dawrey that wanted accused Rahil, A.3 - Faisal, A.13 - Asif, Firoz and others whose names he does not remember, used to come to the office of the SIMI, that besides Kuran and Hadis; there used to be discussions about Muslim issues like arrests of Muslims and the atrocities on the Muslims, the persons whose names he told and the persons whose names he does not remember used to make the above discussions. He has identified A.10, A.3 and A.9. 158. A.3 – Faisal, in his confessional statement, stated before the Assistant Director of E.D (PW-40) that out of the amount of Rs.1,80,000/- received by him in July 2002, he had made a payment of Re. 1/- lakh to A.10 – Suhail for sending him to Pakistan for training in L-e-T camp. A.10 have returned from Pakistan after getting training in L-e-T camp and told him that he ie. A.10 would be looking after the Le-T work and assignments in Pune, that for this work A.3 had been paying Rs. 4000-5000/-occasionally to A.10 and have paid around Rs. 1.5 lakhs to him. 159. Literatures recovered from the house of A.10 are connected with SIMI, A.10 continued working for the said organization and used to take part in the activities of SIMI. 160. 4000-5000/-occasionally to A.10 and have paid around Rs. 1.5 lakhs to him. 159. Literatures recovered from the house of A.10 are connected with SIMI, A.10 continued working for the said organization and used to take part in the activities of SIMI. 160. A.10 - Suhail had undergone terrorist training in handling of arms and ammunition and explosives in the terrorist camp of Lashkare-Taiba (L-e-T) situated at Muzzafarabad in Pak occupied Kashmir (POK) of Pakistan and A.3 - Faisal had sent A.10, for militancy training in Pakistan. 161. It had come to the notice that A.10 - Suhail had gone to Iran by obtaining Ziyarat Visa and thereafter infiltrated into Pakistan by clandestine way, and had contacted wanted accused Azam Cheema @ Babaji, who is a wanted accused in this case and who is one of the commanders of L-e-T and that had sponsored accused persons training in the training camp of L-e-T at Muzaffarabad. 162. PW-45 (Passport Agent) went to the ATS office on 08/08/06 as the ATS police had telephoned him. Upon reaching there, the ATS officer told him two names, i.e., Suhail Shaikh (A.10) and Firoz Ghaswala and asked him whether these two persons had done the ticketing and visa work from their office. He telephoned his office and asked them to verify. After some time, it was informed that the ticketing and visa work of A.10 - Suhail was done by their office and only visa work of Firoz Ghaswala was done by their office. A.10 had given his passport for visa in 2002. 163. PW-59 saw A.10 Suhail along with Ehtesham, Faisal, Suhail, Muzzammil and Asif Khan at Faisal's house in February 2006, that they had gathered there for discussion on some special subject. A.11 - Zameer Shaikh Fir/Arrest/Cr. No 164. To get insights regarding the arrests of the A.11 in relation to his involvement in different blasts, a chart is produced herein below: - CHART NO. 12 Sr. No. Cr. No. Police Station Place of Blast Date of Arrest 1. 77/06 Mumbai Central Railway Police Station Matunga Railway Station (Between Dadar to Matunga - while entering into Matunga Railway jurisdiction) 25/07/2006 2. 41/06 Andheri Railway Police Station Jogeshwari Railway Station (Train had just departed from the platform no.1) 06/08/2006 3. 86/06 Bandra Railway Police Station Bandra Railway Station (Between Km Pole No.15/1 C and 15/6 A) 21/08/2006 4. 77/06 Mumbai Central Railway Police Station Matunga Railway Station (Between Dadar to Matunga - while entering into Matunga Railway jurisdiction) 25/07/2006 2. 41/06 Andheri Railway Police Station Jogeshwari Railway Station (Train had just departed from the platform no.1) 06/08/2006 3. 86/06 Bandra Railway Police Station Bandra Railway Station (Between Km Pole No.15/1 C and 15/6 A) 21/08/2006 4. 59/06 Vasai Road Railway Police Station Mira Road (The train had just departed Mira Road Station - It was between KM Pole no. 40/8 & 41/4) 16/09/2006 5. 156/06 Borivali Railway Police Station Borivali Railway Station (Platform no. 4 of Borivali Railway Station) 30/09/2006 House Search Of A.11 165. ACP Tawde directed PI Tonapi on 31/07/06 to conduct the search of the house of arrested A.11 - Zameer. PW- 155 PI Tonapi along with panchas and staff entered the house of A.11. There was a nameplate on the room bearing the description 100-6/7, L Block, Latifur Rehman'. A.11 - Zameer knocked on the door, it was opened by a lady, whom he identified as his mother, A.11 Zameer led them to a loft in that house, there was a wooden cupboard on the western side of the loft, A.11 opened the cupboard, opened a drawer and took out a passport in his name and photograph, they checked the passport, there were stamps of Mumbai Immigration, Mehrabad airport and visa of Iran. 166. There were two booklets, one Tehrik-e-Millat Atankvad Ka Jimmedar Kaun and the second was titled Tehrik-e-Millat Asia 2004, another booklet titled 'Road Map of Mumbai and Navi Mumbai', it was a road map of only Mumbai, certain places in the map were marked, like RBI, Rajabai Tower, CST, Mumbadevi, Mahalaxmi and somewhere near Century Bazar, another map containing portions of India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Oman and Iran, a route from India to Tehran, Tehrari to Zaidan, Zaidan to Quetta, Quetta to Bahawalpur and Bahawalpur to Muzaffarabad was marked, it also contained an international number 0066 etc in writing, one E-mail ID, 'gudu_sir@yahoo.com'. A.11 produced a black wallet containing some cash, two Canara Bank ATM-cum-debit cards, one in the name of Latifur Rehman and other in the name of Zubair Ansari, one motor driving license in his name and a small pocket diary containing some names and some figures. Link Between The Accused - Visit To Pakistan - Connection With SIMI - Conspiracy 167. Link Between The Accused - Visit To Pakistan - Connection With SIMI - Conspiracy 167. In 2005 or 2006, A.3 - Faisal had given the passport of A.11 - Zameer for obtaining a visa for Iran, which he had given to agent PW44 Ashik Ali. PW-46 Mushtaq Ali (Passport Agent) said that A.3 used to give such work to him every two-three months. The details of the passport Art-133 are mentioned in the entry in the register Art-617. As per the entry in the register, A.11 was to go to Iran in 2005. On going through the passport Art-133, Ashik Ali stated that A.11 had gone to Iran but not for Ziarat, because persons who go for Ziarat take Niyaz or Prasad and a stamp is put on their passport to show that they had taken the Niyaz and there is no such round stamp on the passport Art 133. 168. A.11 - Zameer had gone to Iran by obtaining ziarat visa and thereafter infiltrated into Pakistan by clandestine way, and had contacted wanted accused Azam Cheema @ Babaji, who is a wanted accused in this case and who is one of the commanders of L-e-T and that had sponsored accused persons training in the training camp of Le-T at Muzaffarabad. 169. A.3 – Faisal, in his confessional statement, stated before the PW40 Arvind Singh (Assistant Director of E.D) that he had sent A.11 - Zameer, SIMI activist, in 2004, Feroz Ghaswala and Mohd. Ali Chipa in 2005 and Zulfiquar Faiyaz in 2006 to get training in L-e-T camps via Iran route. He further stated that A.11 was sent on the reference of A.4 - Ehtesham. 170. PW-95 Tafheem Akmal Hashmi (hostile witness) joined the Pakistan Army in 1993 or 1994 and was a hawaldar when he left service and was posted in 637, Infantry in Bimber in Azad Kashmir. He left army for the first time in 1994 or 1995 and joined the Mujahideen thereafter. He had stated that when he was in police custody in Bombay he was kept in lockup, that there were other persons kept in separate lockups, that they were A.3 - Faisal, A.11 - Zameer, A.9 - Muzzammil, Shakil Warsi and A.2 - Tanveer. A.11, while in custody, told him that he had been to Pakistan for training with Lashkar-e-Taiba and that he had taken the training for 10 days. 171. A.11, while in custody, told him that he had been to Pakistan for training with Lashkar-e-Taiba and that he had taken the training for 10 days. 171. Literatures recovered from the house of A.11 are connected with SIMI. A.11 continued working for the said organization and used to take part in the activities of SIMI. 172. A.11 - Zameer had undergone terrorist training in handling of arms and ammunition and explosives in the terrorist camp of Lashkar- e-Taiba (L-e-T) situated at Muzzafarabad in Pak occupied Kashmir (POK) of Pakistan and A.3 - Faisal had sent A.11, for militancy training in Pakistan. 173. It was found during the investigation that the leaders of the Lashkar-e-Taiba organization made use of the SIMI cadre because their ideologies are similar, that one of the commanders of Lashkar-e-Taiba wanted accused Azam Cheema @ Babaji had played a vital role behind the activities of arrested accused as an organized crime syndicate. Wanted accused Azam Cheema had arranged for the training of A.11 Zameer and his other co-accused in the camps of Lashkar-e-Talba situated in Pakistan. A.12 - Naveed Khan Fir/Arrest/Cr. No 174. A.12 was arrested only for one crime; the details are given as under: CHART NO. 13 Sr. No. Cr. No. Police Station Place of Blast Date of Arrest 1. 156/06 Borivali Railway Police Station Borivali Railway Station (Platform no. 4 of Borivali Railway Station) 30/09/2006 175. PI Khanvilkar, his staff, API Dudhgaokar and PSI Sachin Kadam were inquiring with A.12 - Naveed on 22/10/06, arrested in CR. No 05/06 of ATS Police Station, Mumbai. A.12 expressed his desire to disclose certain important information concerning the crime. He gave the statement (Ext.636) before two panchas, in which he wrote, that he is ready to show the places where he had gone, to show the spot where he had kept the car and to show the person to whom he had given the key of the car on the instructions of A.7 – Sajid. 176. They went to Shivaji Nagar, Govandi and proceeded towards Geeta Vikas Beat Police Chowki and in the lane ahead of the chowki. At some distance, in the lane, A.12 - Naveed asked them to stop the vehicle. A.12 was going to show some places. A.12 led them on foot towards Sandeep Tailor and told them that he had halted the Maruti car there. At some distance, in the lane, A.12 - Naveed asked them to stop the vehicle. A.12 was going to show some places. A.12 led them on foot towards Sandeep Tailor and told them that he had halted the Maruti car there. He told them that A.3 - Faisal, A.7 - Sajid and two Pakistani nationals had got down there. A.12 further told them that he had remained standing near the car. 177. Thereafter, the vehicle was taken to Bandra Perry Cross Road, where the vehicle was stopped as per A.12 - instructions. A.12 - Naveed led them and they followed him and after crossing three 'baithi chawls', A.12 pointed to a building and informed them that it was the Lucky Villa building where A.3 - Faisal used to reside. Then, they went by the staircase to the terrace of the building, there was a temporary structure room on the terrace and A.12 pointed to it and informed them that this was the residence of the A.3 where two Pakistanis used to reside with A.3. 178. Thereafter, as per the direction of A.12 they went to Millat Nagar, Andheri to Khar Danda, Santacruz, Juhu Chowpatty. He led them to a compound in which there was Ocaz Shopping Center. There was a four storied building in front of the shopping center to which he pointed out and informed them that he had dropped A.3 Faisal below that building and A.3 Faisal had gone to meet the Pakistani guests in that building. There is an iron gate behind the building. A.12 - Naveed informed them that he had halted the Maruti-800 vehicle near that gate and had waited there for A.3 Faisal. On his direction, PSI Sachin Kadam prepared a rough sketch of the spot Ext. 639. Then, A.12 led them to the compound of AL Hatim Building and pointed out a white Maruti 800 car amongst other cars that were parked by the side of the south compound wall and said that it was the car of A.3 Faisal. 179. The car was locked. A.12 - Naveed said that the key of that car is in a building nearby. He led them to that building and to a room on the fourth floor. A police officer knocked on the door. 179. The car was locked. A.12 - Naveed said that the key of that car is in a building nearby. He led them to that building and to a room on the fourth floor. A police officer knocked on the door. A person opened the door, A.12 told him that he had come with the police and asked him to give the keys of the car. The name of that person was Rizwan Khot. Rizwan gave the keys of the car to him. 180. The police inspected the car by torch, they saw some black spots on the back side of the driver seat; the black spots were wiped by three cotton swabs. There were similar black spots in the boot, they wiped the black spots by three cotton swabs and put them in separate plastic bags, Police seized the car and took the keys. The report of the FSL Ext. 2391 was received and the contents of the report show that cyclonite (RDX), petroleum hydrocarbon oil and charcoal, were detected on three cotton swabs and ammonium, nitrate and nitrite radicals were detected in the other three swabs and cyclonite (RDX), ammonium, nitrate, nitrite, petroleum hydrocarbon oil and charcoal were detected in the car. Conspiracy 181. Mohd. Alam (PW-59) Stated in his evidence that during the month of june 2006, A.3 - Faisal Shaikh had introduced him to one Rizwan Khot and during that period A. 3 had purchased a white coloured Maruti 800 car. Mohd. Alam, Rizwan Khot, A.12 - Naveed and A.3 - Faisal Shaikh used to go around in that car, which Rizwan Khot used to drive. 182. In June 2006, A.3 - Faisal Shaikh called PW-59 Mohd. Alam and A.12 - Naveed to his house. Then, they all went to a disco bar. As they were at the disco bar upto late hours, they halted at PW-59 Mohd. Alam’s house. On the next morning, A.3 - Faisal Shaikh told A.12 - Naveed that because of the guests, his house is congested and that he should make some arrangements for the guests. After some days, PW59 came to know from A.12 Naveed, that A.12 Naveed had made arrangements of two guests of A.3 Faisal at Millat Nagar, Andheri. 183. All the accused decided to assemble the explosive devices in the house of A.6.Mohd. Ali, situated at Govandi. After some days, PW59 came to know from A.12 Naveed, that A.12 Naveed had made arrangements of two guests of A.3 Faisal at Millat Nagar, Andheri. 183. All the accused decided to assemble the explosive devices in the house of A.6.Mohd. Ali, situated at Govandi. On the night of 10/07/06 assembled explosive devices were transported in the motor car no. MH01-V-9568 belonging to A.3 Faisal and in one taxi, by A.3 Faisal, accused no. 12 Naveed, accused no. 7 Sajid and the Pakistani nationals and taken to the house of A.3 Faisal and stored there. 184. It has come in the evidence of PW-186 that it was disclosed in the investigation that the bomb that exploded at Khar subway was planted by accused no. 12 Naveed along with deceased accused Abu Umed @ Abu Osama @ Mohd. Ali, who was killed in an encounter later on. A.13 - Asif Khan Bashir Khan @Junaid Fir / Arrest / Crime No. 185. A.13 – Asif was arrested only for one crime; the details are given as under: CHART NO. 14 Sr. No. Cr. No. Police Station Place of Blast Date of Arrest 1. 156/06 Borivali Railway Police Station Borivali Railway Station (Platform no. 4 of Borivali Railway Station) 03/10/2006 Recovery 186. On 07/10/06, PI Tajne (PW-161) received a memo from the chief IO instructing him to interrogate A.13 - Asif, alongside ACP Tawde and PSI Kadam. During this interrogation on 09/10/06, A.13 made a voluntary statement(Ext. 664) in the presence of panchas, indicating his willingness to reveal additional evidence. He then led the team to Mira Road, stopping near Naya Nagar at Haidar Chowk, where he directed them to a locked flat (no. 101) in A wing, claiming he had lost the key. A keymaker was called to make a duplicate key, which PI Tajne took possession of before entering the flat with A.13 and the panchas. 187. A.13 - Asif led the police and panchas to a bedroom where he retrieved a rexine bag hidden beneath suitcases. Upon opening the bag, he produced a white plastic bag containing approximately 2.7 kg of white granules. When questioned about the granules, A.13 remained silent. Due to the strong odor of the substances, the police suspected they were explosives and collected two samples of 10 grams each, placing them in separate plastic pouches for further examination. 188. Upon opening the bag, he produced a white plastic bag containing approximately 2.7 kg of white granules. When questioned about the granules, A.13 remained silent. Due to the strong odor of the substances, the police suspected they were explosives and collected two samples of 10 grams each, placing them in separate plastic pouches for further examination. 188. Thereafter, A.13 - Asif took out a blue coloured plastic bag from the other side of the rexine bag, containing 10 aluminum tubes to which wires were joined (20 pieces of white wire). On examination, they found them to be electronic detonators. They carefully kept those detonators in plastic bottles and labels containing his and panchas’ signatures on the samples of granules and the plastic bottle containing detonators and sealed them. 189. The rexine bag was having ash coloured, having chain and the words 'Hindustan ki Kasam' on it, that there was a khaki coloured cardboard box in a corner of that bedroom, that police asked A.13 - Asif to open it, There were 23 books in Urdu language and 2 files containing some documents. They noticed one computer set and CPU while searching the hall, a copy of leave and licence agreement of that flat, Reliance electric bills and some newspaper cuttings were in the hall. PI Tajne seized all these articles under panchanama Ext. 665. 190. The report of the FSL (Ext. 2389) was received and the contents of the FSL report show that Cyclonite (RDX), charcoal and petroleum hydrocarbon oil were found in the blackish oily lumps in the rexine bag in the percentage of 82.34%, 8.00% and 9.17% respectively and ammonium and nitrate radicals are detected in the white granulated powder. Train Passenger Who Identified A.13 191. PW-60 Kishore Popatlal Shah boarded the train going to Virar from Churchgate station at 5:37 PM wherein two boys had boarded the train at Bombay Central Station and kept a black colour bag on the luggage rack. Then they got down at Dadar station and those persons did not have the bag with them when they got down at Dadar. Thereafter, he had gone towards the door on the east side to get down at the next station i.e. Borivali. The train reached Borivali at 6:30 p.m. When it was about to stop, that time the blast had taken place. Thereafter, he had gone towards the door on the east side to get down at the next station i.e. Borivali. The train reached Borivali at 6:30 p.m. When it was about to stop, that time the blast had taken place. He along with other passengers who were standing in the door were thrown on the platform. 192. Two days later, on 14/07/06, he reported his injuries and suspicions about the two individuals to the Borivali Railway Police, providing a description; however, police asked him to wait as they were going to call a person who would prepare a sketch. He waited for some time but the person did not come, therefore, he went back. 193. On being called, he went to the ATS office on 07/11/2006 for the purpose of an identification parade, the parade was conducted by PW-82 SEO Barve. When Kishore Popatlal Shah was taken inside the room in Arthur Road jail, he identified a person, i.e. A.13 Asif Khan @ Junaid, standing at the 8th place out of the fourteen persons standing in the row there. He told the SEO that A.13 was the person who had kept the bag in the train on the day of the blast. SEO Barve asked A.13 his name which he told as Asif Bashir Khan. Taxi Driver Who Identified A.13 194. On the orders of his superiors, PW-175 PI Devram Dagadu Wadmare searched for taxi drivers who may have transported individuals from Bandra to Churchgate on the day of the 11/07/2006 blasts. After 15 days, he located taxi driver PW-57 Santosh Kedar Singh at Hill Road, Bandra. PW-57 told PI Devram that he had a suspicion about two persons. On 11/07/2006, around 3:15 to 3:30 p.m., he picked up two passengers at Perry Road heading to Churchgate. One had a heavy black bag and an umbrella. They asked him to drive carefully as the articles that they had with them were delicate. One passenger was medium-built, aged about 30-35, while the other was thin, aged about 23-25. 195. PW-57 dropped them off at the subway for Churchgate station. The fare was Rs. 180, but they paid with a Rs. 500 note. However, he did not have change to return the the balance amount. One passenger was medium-built, aged about 30-35, while the other was thin, aged about 23-25. 195. PW-57 dropped them off at the subway for Churchgate station. The fare was Rs. 180, but they paid with a Rs. 500 note. However, he did not have change to return the the balance amount. Therefore, he told them that he would bring it and they should wait for two minutes.However, those two persons were in a hurry and told him to keep the change and got off the taxi, taking the bag with them. 196. On being called, PW-63 had gone to the ATS office at Bhoiwada on 07/11/06 for the purpose of an identification parade. There, he met ACP Patil (PW-186), who told him that he would be required to go for identifying the persons whom he had taken in his taxi. The parade was conducted by PW-82 SEO Barve. When PW-63 went inside the room in Arthur Road Jail, there were fourteen persons standing there. SEO Barve(PW-82) asked him to look at them and see whether he could identify anyone. He looked at those persons and identified one person, ie, A.13 Asif Khan as one of the persons who had traveled in his taxi on that day. SEO Barve asked him his name, which he told as Asif Bashir Khan. Link Between Accused - Connection With SIMI- Conspiracy 197. PW-174 Prasad Khandekar came to know that A.13 - Asif is an active member of the SIMI and there were some cases filed against him at Jalgaon. He told ACP Tawde that he wanted information about the cases, so he sent a letter and then deputed an officer to collect the information. Two crimes were registered against him in jalgaon under the Explosives Substances Act and IPC. PW-180- API Padmakar Pandharinath went to the SP office of Jalgaon and met the concerned officers in the District Special Branch, who were handling the cell of SIMI activists. They showed him the record of SIMI activists. The name of A.13 and his photograph was in the record and there was information in it that he was the President of Jalgaon unit of SIMI and there were two crimes registered against him. 198. In February 2006, once PW-59 (Mohd. Alam Gulam Qureshi) went to the house of A.3 - Faisal. At that time, he saw 5-6 persons in his house. 198. In February 2006, once PW-59 (Mohd. Alam Gulam Qureshi) went to the house of A.3 - Faisal. At that time, he saw 5-6 persons in his house. They had gathered there for discussion on some special subject. A.3 introduced those guests to PW-59. One of them was by name Asif Khan (A.13). Thereafter, in March 2006, A.3 came to meet PW-59 at Mira Road near Shams Masjid with his three friends, A.13 - Asif, A.2 - Tanveer and A.4 - Ehtesham. 199. PW-65- Mehmood Qureshi (Hostile witness) had stated to the police that when he had gone to Akola for a convention of SIMI. Ashraf Jafari and Shahid Badar Falai of SIMI had come there from Delhi. A.13 - Asif and others were present in that convention. He further stated to the police the names of twenty-four SIMI activists and addresses of some and mobile numbers of some, including A.13 - Asif, A.4 - Ehtesham, A.2 - Tanveer, A.7 - Sajid, and A.8 - Abdul Wahid. 200. PW-78 Shaikh Noman Ahmed (Hostile witness) had stated to the police that there was a program at the house of A.7 Sajid Ansari in 2003 and in that program, people were desirous of giving some post in the SIMl organization to A.13 Asif Khan. 201. During the course of investigation, 26,200 Saudi Riyals were recovered, some from the residence of A.3 - Faisal and some from witness Abdul Rehman Dawrey, which were meant for A.3. Wanted accused Azam Cheema had asked A.3, A.13 and others to make preparations for bomb blasts strike in the city of Mumbai. 202. The wanted accused Azam Cheema sent six persons from Bangladesh in May 2006, who were collected by A.5 - Majid and brought to Mumbai and handed over to A.13 - Asif, who made arrangements for their stay. The names of those persons were disclosed as wanted accused Sabir, wanted accused Ammu Jaan, wanted accused Ehsanullah, wanted accused Abu Hasan, wanted accused Abu Bakar and wanted accused Kasam Ali, all of them Pakistani nationals and it was disclosed that wanted accused Ehsanullah had brought about 15 kgs of RDX with him. The wanted accused persons and two dead accused were staying in the safe houses arranged by A.13, A.3 and A.7. 203. It was also disclosed that the bomb exploded at Borivali Railway Station was planted by A.13 - Asif along with wanted accused Sabir. The wanted accused persons and two dead accused were staying in the safe houses arranged by A.13, A.3 and A.7. 203. It was also disclosed that the bomb exploded at Borivali Railway Station was planted by A.13 - Asif along with wanted accused Sabir. During the investigation, 500 gms black powder was recovered from A.1 - Kamal. Samples of black and white spots were noticed in the houses of A.3 - Faisal and A.6 - Mohd. Ali and in the hand bag recovered at the instance of A.13 - Asif. The CA reports about these articles are received showing similar explosive substances as found at the spots. PERSONS AFFECTED INCLUDING DIED AND INJURED AND DOCTOR’S EVIDENCE REGARDING POSTMORTEM (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) C. R. No. 77 of 2006 of Mumbai Central Railway Police Station:- 204. On the orders of the superior officers, Dadar Railway Police Station and Bhoiwada Police Station officers prepared inquest panchanamas on the dead bodies that were in the KEM hospital and Sion Police Station officers prepared inquest panchanamas on the dead bodies that were in the Sion hospital. These three police stations registered ADRs at zero numbers and sent the inquest panchanamas to Mumbai Central Railway Police Station, on receipt of which, ADRs were registered and the inquest panchanamas were included in the respective CRs. These three police stations had handed over all dead bodies, except one, to the claimants directly. 28 persons had died in the Matunga blast vide inquest panchanamas, memorandum of postmortem examinations and cause of death certificates, Exts. 854, 856, 865, 866, 873, 874, 878, 1143, 1144, 1157 to 1160, 1163 to 1166, 1871 to 1890. The relevant details thereof are given in the table below: CHART NO. 15 (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) Sr. 28 persons had died in the Matunga blast vide inquest panchanamas, memorandum of postmortem examinations and cause of death certificates, Exts. 854, 856, 865, 866, 873, 874, 878, 1143, 1144, 1157 to 1160, 1163 to 1166, 1871 to 1890. The relevant details thereof are given in the table below: CHART NO. 15 (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) Sr. No. Name of Deceased Exhibit numbers of memorandum of post-mortem examinations, cause of death certificates and inquest panchnamas 1 Prabhakar Shantaram Ghume 1157, 1158, 1879 2 Nand Vallabh Sadanand Daundiyal 1163, 1164, 1883 3 Rajan Rohidas Naik 1159, 1160, 1885 4 Ramesh Kashinath Raut 1143, 1144, 1886 5 Salim, Pakistani National 1165, 1166 6 Bhairinath Krishna Salvi 1867 7 Manual Kustin D'Souza 874, 1868 8 Nitin Sukhlal Patil 854, 1869 9 Girish Baliram Talpade 873 10 Sojiram Modulal Meena 856, 1870 11 Sumant Dilip Day 865 12 Babulal Durlabhbhai Waghani 866 13 Jagannathan Narisngappa Gundappa 878 14 Mohammad Salim Kundiwala 1871 15 Suresh Chandra Sarangadhari Pandey 1872 16 Hemant Sakharam Vaidya 1873 17 Manohar Vaman Raut 1874 18 Sandeep Bhavani Zavar 1875 19 Sandeep Hari Bhosale 1876 & 1890 20 Dushyant Madhukar Bhoir 1877 21 Gokul Birdhichand Sharma 1878 22 Cyrus Jehangir Munshi 1880 23 Francis John Louis 1881 24 Ricard Augustine D'Monte 1882 25 Manish Rameshchandra Manihar 1884 26 Sharad Krishna Bobhate 1887 27 Mohd. Javed Naseem Ahmed Shaik 1888 28 Shankar Ramdin Gupta 1889 205. Out of the above, post-mortem examinations were done on 18 bodies at Sion Hospital and on 10 bodies at KEM Hospital. Random post-mortem examinations of two bodies of deceased Nitin Sukhlal Patil and Shojiram Modulal Meena were done, the memorandums of which are at Exts.854 and 856 respectively. The opinions as to the probable causes of deaths mentioned in the memorandums of postmortem examinations and cause of death certificates were explosive cranio cerebral trauma, terminal cardio respiratory failure due to septicemia in operated case of contaminated grievous facial and left foot injuries, shock due to polytrauma/multiple injuries, haemorrhage and shock due to multiple injuries, head injury as a result of bomb explosion, etc. 206. Dr. Dhirendra Shantilal Balsara, (PW-83) (Ext.846), and Dr. Walter Francis Vaz, (PW-84) (Ext.872), of KEM Hospital had performed the post-mortem on the dead body of Nitin Sukhlal Patil and had recovered fragments of shrapnel for metallurgical analysis, Arts. 313(colly), pieces of burnt/partially burnt explosive material, Arts. 206. Dr. Dhirendra Shantilal Balsara, (PW-83) (Ext.846), and Dr. Walter Francis Vaz, (PW-84) (Ext.872), of KEM Hospital had performed the post-mortem on the dead body of Nitin Sukhlal Patil and had recovered fragments of shrapnel for metallurgical analysis, Arts. 313(colly), pieces of burnt/partially burnt explosive material, Arts. 314(colly), and blood for grouping and for chemical analysis from the dead body, which he forwarded to the FSL alongwith his forwarding letters, office copies of which are at Exts.848 to 850. Infact HC Shrimant Maruti Jadhav, (PW-90) (Ext.896), took the sample bottles from the hospital on 24/07/06 and reached them to the FSL, Kalina alongwith the forwarding letter of his police station, office copy of which is at Ext.898. The reports of the FSL, Exts. 851 to 853 were received by the hospital and they were sent to the police station. The reports, Exts.851 and 852, showed that Nitrite (post explosive residue) was detected in the splinters and pieces of burnt/partially burnt explosive material that were recovered from the dead body of Nitin Sukhlal Patil. 207. Both the above doctors had also performed post-mortem on the dead body of Shojiram Modulal Meena and had recovered fragments of shrapnel for metallurgical analysis, Arts.315(colly), pieces of burnt/partially burnt explosive material, Arts.316 (colly), and blood for grouping and chemical analysis from the dead body and had sent them to the FSL alongwith Dr. Balsara's forwarding letter, copy of which is at Exts.857 to 859. HC Jadhav, PW-90, had taken the sample bottles from the hospital and had reached them to the FSL alongwith the forwarding letter of his police station, office copy of which is at Ext.897. FSL reports, Exts.860 to 862, were received by the hospital and sent to the police station. They showed that Nitrite (post explosive residue) was detected in the splinters and brownish material taken out from the dead body of Shojiram Modulal Meena. The cause of death was hemorrhagic shock in a bomb blast, cerebral and spinal concussion and massive bilateral pulmonary contusion as effects of a bomb blast (unnatural) and that all the external and internal injuries were collectively responsible for the death of that person and all the external injuries may have been caused in a high explosive blast and the internal injuries corresponded to the external injuries. Sion Hospital had also forwarded a sealed bottle containing a foreign body that was removed from the body of an injured Kalpesh Raut, alongwith their letter, Ext.900, addressed to the police station. Sr. PI Rathod, PW-176, sent the said sealed bottle alongwith his forwarding letter, office copy of which is at Ext.899, alongwith HC Jadhav, PW-90, to the FSL, Kalina. Contents of the report, Ext.901, that was received subsequently, showed the result of analysis that traces of Nitrite (post explosion residue) were detected on the metal piece. 208. Dr. Balsara, PW-83, and Dr. Vaz, PW-84, had issued cause of death certificates, Exts.865, 866, 873, 874 and 878 in respect of five dead bodies and Dr. Mukesh Shamrao Ghuge (PW-112) (Ext. 1138) and his junior Dr. Sapna had conducted post-mortem on 15 bodies of the persons who had died in the train blasts at Mahim and other places. They had performed post-mortem on 5 bodies concerning the blast at Matunga and had issued the memorandums of post-mortem examination and cause of death certificates, Exts. 1879, 1157, 1158 and Exts.1883, 1163, 1164 and Exts.1885, 1159, 1160 and Exts. 1886, 1143, 1144. Ext.1165 was of an unidentified dead body. 209. 127 people were injured in the Matunga blast vide injury certificates Exts. 894, 2727 (1 to 3, 5, 6, 8, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 23, 27, 29, 32 to 37, 39, 40, 46 to 50, 52, 55 to 57, 59, 79). The relevant details thereof, to show that those persons had sustained injuries, are given in the table below: CHART NO. 16 (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) Sr. No Name of the Injured PW number or exhibit number of affidavit filed by Injured Exhibit number of medical certificate 1 Ganesh Shantaram Kadam Ext. 1260 2727 (1) 2 Mukund Kamlesh Thakkar Ext. 1261 2727 (2) 3 Zankariprasad Rangnath Joshi Ext. 1262 2727 (3) 4 Surendrakumar Makhanlal Goyal —— 2727 (4) 5 Ramkrishna Changu Mhatre Ext. 1263 2727 (5) 6 Keval Janak Doshi Ext. 1264 2727 (6) 7 Tirumadai Raju Gopal —— 2727(7) 8 Tejas Chandrakant Pathak Ext. 1265 2727 (8) 9 Sanjay Baban More —— 2727 (9) 10 Jaspreet Awatar Singh Kalsi —— 2727 (10) 11 Tarachand Laxman Pawar —— 2727 (11) 12 Shrikant Ramrao Jedhe —— 2727 (12) 13 Sharad Shantaram Gorivale Ext. 1266 2727 (13) 14 Ramsukh Matafer Paasi Ext. 1267 2727 (14) 15 Ms. 1265 2727 (8) 9 Sanjay Baban More —— 2727 (9) 10 Jaspreet Awatar Singh Kalsi —— 2727 (10) 11 Tarachand Laxman Pawar —— 2727 (11) 12 Shrikant Ramrao Jedhe —— 2727 (12) 13 Sharad Shantaram Gorivale Ext. 1266 2727 (13) 14 Ramsukh Matafer Paasi Ext. 1267 2727 (14) 15 Ms. Pooja Chandrakant Yendait Ext. 1407 2727 (15) 16 Mannan Shabbir Husain —— 2727 (16) 17 Vijay Madanraj Jain PW No. 124, Affidavit Ext. 1268 2727 (17) 18 Dinesh Ambubhai Patel Ext. 1269 2727 (18) 19 Naved Mohammad Chouhan - 2727 (19) 20 Vijay Vasudev Amin Ext. 1270 2727 (20) 21 Sudhakaran Krishnan Kotian Ext. 1271 2727 (21) 22 Robinson N. Abraham —— 2727 (22) 23 Kalpesh Suryakant Raut PW No. 81, Ext. 1272 839 24 Sayyed Imtiaz Mubarak Hussain Ext. 1273 2727 (23) 25 Robert Luis Miranda —— 2727 (24) 26 Pranav Vidhushekhar Upadhyaya —— 2727 (25) 27 Uday Ramdas Kaikani —— 2727 (26) 28 Parkel Cherian Vergheese PW No. 132, Affidavit Ext. 1274 2727 (27) 29 Larjaris Khistan Fernandis —— 2727 (29) 30 Tarun Devraj Acharya Ext. 1410 2727 (29) 31 Manohardutt Bisandutt Fulora PW No. 125, Affidavit Ext. 1275 2727 (29) 32 Suresh Vilas Mane Ext. 1276 2727 (29) 33 Thomas Lopez Francis PW No. 135, Affidavit Ext. 1277 2727 (29) 34 Namamishankar Kaliyaji Nima —— 2727 (29) 35 Radheshyam Rammurthi Dube Ext. 1278 2727 (29) 36 Bhairavkumar Rambhil Saha Ext. 1279 2727 (29) 37 Sanjaykumar Ramkisan Baichaliya Ext. 1280 —— 38 Joseph Domnick D'Souza —— 2727 (30) 39 Devendra Sitaram Nimborkar —— 2727 (31) 40 Mohd. Iqbal Jamal Shaikh Ext. 1280 & 1281 2727 (32) 41 Vimal Laxminarayan Soni Ext. 1282 2727 (33) 42 Riaz Ali Kasam Ali Lokhandwala Ext. 1283 2727 (34) 43 Liladhar Jaidutt Sharma Ext. 2734 ---- 44 Ajaykumar Nandkishor Yadav Ext. 1409 2727 (35) 45 Santosh Shankar Patil Ext. 1284 2727 (36) 46 Rameshwar Haribhau Nandanwar Ext. 2735 2727 (37) 47 Mahadeo Appanna Naik ---- 2727 (38) 48 Dinesh Odhavji Ghamelia Ext. 1285 2727 (39) 49 Uday Bhagwant Tale Ext. 1286 ---- 50 Sandip Devaprasad Roy Ext. 1412 ---- 51 Anant Ravikant Surve Ext. 1287 2727 (40) 52 Laxman Sitaram Adhagale Ext. 1284 2727 (36) 46 Rameshwar Haribhau Nandanwar Ext. 2735 2727 (37) 47 Mahadeo Appanna Naik ---- 2727 (38) 48 Dinesh Odhavji Ghamelia Ext. 1285 2727 (39) 49 Uday Bhagwant Tale Ext. 1286 ---- 50 Sandip Devaprasad Roy Ext. 1412 ---- 51 Anant Ravikant Surve Ext. 1287 2727 (40) 52 Laxman Sitaram Adhagale Ext. 1402 ---- 53 Suresh Narayan Manoti ---- 2727 (41) 54 Kalthumani Shivkrishna Iyer ---- 2727 (42) 55 Yogendrakumar Ramdoot Dinkar ---- 2727 (43) 56 Arvind Surendra Jain ---- 2727 (44) 57 Mohandas Parmanudas Parnikar ---- 2727 (45) 58 Rishi Pravin Bobra Ext. 1408 2727 (46) 59 Vishal Prabhakar Patil ---- 2727 (47) 60 Neha Manoj Karve Ext.1289 2727 (48) 61 Ms. Chandrabai Mahadeo Kharatmal Ext. 1414 ---- 62 Chitrasen Singh Dharam Raj Singh PW No. 121, Affidavit Ext. 1290 2727 (49) 63 Hitesh Rohitkumar Kaveria Ext. 1288 2727 (50) 64 Anil Sharadchandra Parab Ext. 1291 ---- 65 Vilas Shantaram Jawkar ---- 2727 (51) 66 Ashish Deviprasad Jain Ext. 1292 2727 (52) 67 Ramdular Ramkinkar Roy ---- 2727 (53) 68 Sambhaji Tatoba Nangre ---- 2727 (54) 69 Ashish Rammohan Sharma Ext. 2736 2727 (55) 70 Nagesh Keshav Mankeshwar Ext. 1411 2727 (56) 71 Anil Pandurang Gamre Ext. 1406 2727 (57) 72 Subhash Suresh Kamble ---- 2727 (58) 73 Prabhakar Laxman Khamkar Ext. 2737 2727 (59) 74 Narendra Monajibhai Lodhia ---- 2727 (60) 75 Pradip Narayandas Agrawal ---- 2727 (61) 76 Jayant Varijvandas Bhansali ---- 2727 (62 & 63) 77 Raju Ghanshyamdas Shah ---- 2727 (64) 78 M. Karunakaran ---- 2727 (65) 79 K. Phalgun Nair ---- 2727 (66) 80 Rajendra Atmaram Khedkar ---- 2727 (67) 81 Bakulbhai Baslubhai Sawani ---- 2727 (68) 82 Ms. Parvati Harischandra Kini ---- 2727 (69 & 70) 83 AmrishKumar Harishankar Diwan ---- 2727 (71) 84 Vinod Shankar Chawan ---- 2727 (72) 85 Rupesh Harkisandas Mestri ---- 2727 (73) 86 Maheshkumar Bhagirath Prasad Kumawat ---- 2727 (74) 87 Ramjibhai Tulshibhai Kakadiya ---- 2727 (75) 88 Sagar Sudhakar Patil ---- 2727 (76) 89 Jaisingh Harisingh Rathod ---- 2727 (77) 90 Shailesh Tribhuvan Singh ---- 2727 (78) 91 Sunil Arjun Halaye Ext. 1404 2727 (79) 92 Sanjay Ashok Pawar Ext. 1404 2727 (79) 92 Sanjay Ashok Pawar Ext. 1403 ---- 93 Tekynath verges Jose ---- 2727 (80) 94 Jitendra Vidyashankar Jappi ---- 2727 (81) 95 Arvind Malappa Kotik ---- 2727 (82) 96 Kishorkumar Surendrakumar Jain ---- 2727 (83) 97 Prabhakar Raghunath Mishra ---- 2727 (84) 98 Kalpana Dinesh Samant ---- 2727 (85) 99 Arvind Gopaldas Oza ---- 2727 (86) 100 Mohmad salim sheikh ---- 2727 (87) 101 Santosh Filip Rathod ---- 2727 (88) 102 Shiban Krishan Kaul ---- 2727 (89) 103 Deepak Umakant Naik ---- 2727 (90) 104 Jitendra Shreeram Raut ---- 2727 (91) 105 Harish Shamlal Pawar ---- 2727 (92) 106 Mansinh Gauri Chouhan ---- 2727 (93) 107 Kamaljeetsingh Govindsing Verma ---- 2727 (94) 108 Nimish Bipin Shah ---- 2727 (95) 109 Hitesh Maganlal @ Raju Gandecha PW No. 89 894 110 N. A. Robinson ---- 2732 (18) C. R. No. 78 of 2006 of Mumbai Central Railway Police Station:- 210. 43 persons had died in the blast at Mahim Railway Station vide inquest panchanamas, memorandums of post-mortem examinations and cause of death certificates, Exts. 863, 864, 867 to 871, 875 to 877, 879 to 881, 1139, 1141, 1142, 1147 to 1151, 1154 to 1156, 1161, 1162, 1167 to 1170, 1891 to 1894, 1897 1925. The relevant t? details thereof are given in the table below: CHART NO. 17 (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) Sr. no. Name of the deceased Exhibit numbers of memorandum of post-mortem, examinations, cause of certificate and inquest panchnamas 1 Jogarao Mantri Pragada 1169, 1170, 1897 2 Namdeo Chintaman Bhagat 1139, 1140, 1900 3 Raman Kutty Kandy Nair 1151, 1154, 1902 4 Arvind Jammanlal Agrawal 1155, 1156, 1906 5 Naval Bhagwandas Mathuriya 1145, 1146, 1907 6 Subhash Chotalal Shah 1147, 1148, 1908 7 Rasiklal Rameschandra Merchant 1141, 1142, 1912 8 Joseph Robert Narona 1161, 1162, 1914 9 Prashant Giridhar Bendale 1149, 1150, 1916 10 Sunil Ganpat Birwadkar 1167, 1168, 1924 11 Vrundesh Ramnirajan Sakeria 1891 12 Zuber Istija Khan 867, 1892 13 Yashwant Prabhakar Badekar 881, 1893 14 Sanfard Tony Diselas 871, 1894 15 Kalubhai Laxman Kasodaria 868, 1895 16 Somnath Pranavkumar Das 879, 1896 17 Anish Vinaykumar Baindur 863 18 Sanjay Mohanlal Jeswani 864 19 Anees Sattar Patel 876 20 Ninad Sudhakar Mahale 870 21 Amritlal Lajibhai Patel 872 22 Chetan Kuldip Sharma 875 23 Mohd. Tariq Ansari 880 24 Anil Lalubhai Shah 869 25 Prashant Yashwant Sawant 1898 26 Yogesh Harirao Phutane 1899 27 Trikamal Keshavlal Pandya 1901 28 Asim Ajit Kumar Bhajan 1903 29 Laxmichand Nanji Gala 1904 30 Naushad Ramaniklal Tejani 1905 31 Maksood Mohd Umar Darvesh 1909 32 Jitendra Maniklal Shah 1911 33 Louis Anthony Siquera 1912 34 Yogesh Mahendrabhai Doshi 1913 35 Niteshkumar Raeshwar Patel 1915 36 Himmatlal Pabhudas Modi 1917 37 Nathmul Dharnraj Saboo 1918 38 Mavjibhai Hairbhai Patel 1919 39 Anuj Navinchandra Kilwala 1920 40 Abhijeet Vilas Ahiwale 1921 41 Parag Vasant Karambelkar 1922 42 Sanjay Dattaram Shirke 1923 43 Chandrakant Mohanlal Mithani 1925 211. These documents show the opinions as to the causes of deaths to be head injury in case of explosion, shock following multiple/polytrauma injuries in case of bomb explosion, haemorrhage and shock due to polytrauma with complete transection of trunk, head injury in bomb blast, terminal cardio respiratory arrest with acute respiratory distressed syndrome following lung contusion following bomb blast, septicemia with bilateral lobar pneumonia due to multiple traumatic injuries as a result of bomb explosion. 212. 96 persons were injured in the blast at Mahim Railway Station vide injury certificates, Exts. 2728 (1 to 96). The relevant details thereof are given in the table below: CHART NO. 18 (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) S Sr. No. Name of Injured PW number or exhibit number of affidavit filed by injured Exhibit number of medical certificate 1 Gajanan Shailam Mergu --- 2728 (1) 2 Shivkumar Jagdishprasad Sharma --- 2728 (2) 3 Sushil Jagannath Sawant Ext. 1416 2728 (3) 4 Giridhar Dejappa Kotiyan Ext. 2745 2728 (4) 5 Ajay Pravinchandra Parekh --- 2728 (5) 6 Ashok Laxmichand Shah --- 2728 (6) 7 Amjad Nurul Ansari --- 2728 (7) 8 Barka Devka Okate --- 2728 (8) 9 Mahadev Bhagvanji Kadam Ext. 1415 2728 (9) 10 Parko Tangavel Nadar Ext. 1405 2728 (10) 11 Kalicharan Kuhari Shetty --- 2728 (11) 12 Umesh Vinayak Naik --- 2728 (12) 13 Mohammad Maharoof Khalil --- 2728 (13) 14 Mohammad Yar Mohd. Sajid --- 2728 (14) 15 Pravin Shankarlal Varma Ext. 2740 2728 (15) 16 Pankaj Rasiklal Shah Ext. 2739 2728 (16) 17 Mohammad Salim Mohd. Sharif Ext. 1418 2728 (17) 18 Rajesh Triveniprsad Ranjan --- 2728 (18) 19 Samir Tulshant --- 2728 (19) 20 Kaushik Uttam Pradhan Ext. Sajid --- 2728 (14) 15 Pravin Shankarlal Varma Ext. 2740 2728 (15) 16 Pankaj Rasiklal Shah Ext. 2739 2728 (16) 17 Mohammad Salim Mohd. Sharif Ext. 1418 2728 (17) 18 Rajesh Triveniprsad Ranjan --- 2728 (18) 19 Samir Tulshant --- 2728 (19) 20 Kaushik Uttam Pradhan Ext. 1293 2728 (20) 21 Aniket Vishwas Joshi --- 2728 (21) 22 Kishan Bugadimal Lakhani --- 2728 (22) 23 Ramesh Khadebhai Goti Ext. 2738 2728 (23) 24 Smt. Shalini Tukaram Jogdhan Ext. 2748 2728 (24) 25 Parag Laxman Kadam --- 2728 (25) 26 Vasant Gopinath Totka --- 2728 (26) 27 Ramniwas Pannalal Laddha --- 2728 (27) 28 Kashinath Vasant Shinde --- 2728 (28) 29 Narendra Jayantilal Mehta --- 2728 (29) 30 Umesh Ramesh Shah --- 2728 (30) 31 Vira Raghvan Shriniwasan --- 2728 (31) 32 Dilip Ramchandra Shirke Ext. 2747 2728 (32) 33 Balkrishna Balram Controllu ---- 2728 (33) 34 Dilip Amichand Khandelwal ---- 2728 (34) 35 Louis Dagdu Kadam ---- 2728 (35) 36 Gautam Bharat Dhanaresha ---- 2728 (36) 37 Umesh Pyarelaal Sonar ---- 2728 (37) 38 Marutiprasad Hemchandra Prakash ---- 2728 (38) 39 Tambi Thomas Lazer ---- 2728 (39) 40 Ashok Laxmichand Shah ---- 2728 (40) 41 Arjun Sakharam Kalambe ---- 2728 (41) 42 Balu Sakharam Kakad ---- 2728 (42) 43 Chandravilas Mahadev Gandhi ---- 2728 (43) 44 Antonito George Narona ---- 2728 (43) 45 J. K. Nair ---- 2728 (43) 46 Arvind Manilal Parikh ---- 2728 (44) 47 Jaiprakash Chandrashekhar Shukla ---- 2728 (45) 48 Prakash Yashwant Samant ---- 2728 (46) 49 Laxman Balwant Samant ---- 2728 (47) 50 Birju Balkrishna Nayar ---- 2728 (48) 51 Sunil Chandrakant Karnik ---- 2728 (48) 52 Sandeep Gajendra Zha ---- 2728 (49) 53 Chandesh Rasiklal Kothari ---- 2728 (50) 54 Rajeev Sumeru Varma ---- 2728 (52) 55 Vijay Palni Makwana ---- 2728 (53) 56 Babu Maruti Kamble ---- 2728 (54) 57 Maheshbhai Shantilal Shah ---- 2728 (55) 58 Roystan Abraham D'mello Ext. 1417 2728 (56) 59 Balkrishnna Divakar Patkar ---- 2728 (57) 60 Mukesh Sadanand Shenoy ---- 2728 (58) 61 Padmachand Mohanlal Gandhi ---- 2728 (59) 62 Nilesh Bhogilal Shah ---- 2728 (60) 63 Lalji Ramkant Pandey PW No. 85 2728 (61) 64 Rameshbhai Popatbhai Nathani ---- 2728 (62) 65 Manesh Natwarlal Ponda ---- 2728 (63) 66 Rajnikant Maganlal Desai Ext. 2743 2728 (64) 67 Damjibhai Mathurbhai Jadhav ---- 2728 (65) 68 Prestan Peter Farnandis ---- 2728 (66) 69 Dipak Vasant Kadam Ext. 2743 2728 (64) 67 Damjibhai Mathurbhai Jadhav ---- 2728 (65) 68 Prestan Peter Farnandis ---- 2728 (66) 69 Dipak Vasant Kadam Ext. 2742 2728 (67) 70 Digambar Limbaji Sasane ---- 2728 (68) 71 Bismilla Mohammad Sultan ---- 2728 (69) 72 Saurabh Vijay Harde ---- 2728 (70) 73 Vinod Gajanan Bhatt ---- 2728 (71) 74 Sanjeeshkumar Sushilkumar Singh ---- 2728 (72) 75 Nikhilkumar Kantilal Mehta ---- 2728 (73) 76 Kamal Rajaram Yadav ---- 2728 (74) 77 Kamlesh Zabbu Rajbhar PW No. 25 2728 (75) 78 Vilas Dhaku Pawar ---- 2728 (76) 79 Bhimrao Sadhou Kesare ---- 2728 (77) 80 Parshuram Rajaram Ingle ---- 2728 (78) 81 Chandrakant Shankar Dalvi ---- 2728 (79) 82 Sitaram Mangiram Rathi ---- 2728 (80) 83 Rakesh Vasant Salunkhe Ext. 2749 2728 (81) 84 Vinod Yellappa Mendhan ---- 2728 (82) 85 Sirajuddin Jaimul Mutaibk Shaikh Ext. 2746 2728 (83) 86 Ramprakr Vasudeo Sarwate Aff. Ext. 2744 2728 (84) 87 Navin Kumar Babu Devadiya Ext. 2741 2728 (88) 88 Mahesh Chotubhai Chavan ---- 2728 (89) 89 Prabhakar Dattram Sadekar ---- 2728 (90) 90 Challaiah Mallaiah Bodge ---- 2728 (91) 91 Mohammad Kaisar Kasim Ansari ---- 2728 (92) 92 Laltaprasad Kalika Yadav ---- 2728 (93) 93 Chandrakant Basanna Dolgaund ---- 2728 (94) 94 Ms. Shantabai Shankar Trimukhe Ext. 1413 2728 (95) 95 Mohammad Aadil Mohd. Ali ---- 2728 (96) 96 Smt. Hirabai Yeshwant Shinde Ext. 1419 ---- C. R. No. 86 and 87 of 2006 of Bandra Railway Police Station:- 213. Dr. Kalpesh Jayantkumar Gajiwala, (PW-69) (Ext.779), a consultant plastic surgeon in the Holy Family Hospital, Bandra, had operated on Devdas Situ Shetty, (PW-23) (Ext.501), an injured in C. R. No.86 of 2006 and had removed the foreign body, Art.94, from the scalp of that patient and had issued the injury certificate, Ext. 781. Dr. Russell Pinto, (PW-56) (Ext.681), consultant surgeon in the Holy Family Hospital at Bandra, had treated Ashok Raghuvir Rao, (PW-27) (Ext.594), an injured in C. R. No.86 of 2006 and had removed the foreign body, Art.93, from the wound on the right side of his chest and had issued the injury certificate Ext.684. He had also treated Vishal Vijaykumar Nagaich, (PW-13) (Ext.445), an injured in C. R. No.87 of 2006 and had removed a triangular shaped foreign body, Art.95, from the right side of his neck and had issued the injury certificate Ext.682. 214. He had also treated Vishal Vijaykumar Nagaich, (PW-13) (Ext.445), an injured in C. R. No.87 of 2006 and had removed a triangular shaped foreign body, Art.95, from the right side of his neck and had issued the injury certificate Ext.682. 214. Holy Family Hospital phoned the police station that they had taken out foreign bodies from the bodies of three injured persons. St. PI Kadri, PW-138, sent PSI Pednekar to bring them. PSI Pednekar seized them under the panchanama Ext.504 in the presence of panch witnesses Suresh Dagdu Vandre, (PW-24) (Ext.503), and one more. Sr. PI Kadri, PW-138, sent the foreign bodies/metal pieces in C. R. No. 86 of 2006 to the FSL, Kalina alongwith WPC Savita Raghunath Satav, (PW-87) (Ext.886), alongwith his forwarding letters, copies of which are at Exts.888(1 and 2). He also sent the foreign body/metal piece taken out from the body of the injured Vishal Nagaich alongwith WPC Satav, PW-87, alongwith his forwarding letters, copies of which are at Exts. 889 (1 and 2). The contents of the FSL. reports, Ext.2434(1) of the metal pieces concerning the injured Devdas Shetty and Ashok Rao and Ext. 2433(1) of the injured Vishal Nagaich, show the result of analysis that traces of Nitrite (post explosive residue) was detected. Exts. 2434(2) and 2433(2) are the FSL reports in respect of analysis of trace elements in the metal pieces. 215. 22 persons had died due to haemorrhagic shock due to 2 polytrauma in the blast occured near Bandra Railway Station vide inquest panchanamas, memorandums of post-mortem examinations and cause of death certificates Exts.2610 to 2631. The relevant details thereof are given in the table below: CHART NO. 19 (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) Sr. No. Name of the deceased Exhibit numbers of memorandum of postmortem examinations, cause of death certificates and inquest panchanamas 1 Krishnakumar Parasnath 2610 2 Shashi Shekhar Gangadhar 2611 3 Suresh Shenshadu Pawar 2612 4 Shashikant Sudam Badekar 2613 5 Jignesh Bipinbhai Mehta 2614 6 Dalpat Chabildas Masekar 2615 7 Sudhir Divakar Chimore 2616 8 Dilip Kashinath Kamath 2617 9 Rupesh Rahul Kamble 2618 10 Sanad Madhubahi Badekar 2619 11 Ajay Daulatrao Shevda 2620 12 Hariharan Chidambaram Ayyar 2621 13 Modh. Sohail Sagir Shaikh 2622 14 Sachin Radhesham Khanna 2623 15 Pinaki Mukhopadhyaya 2624 16 Surendraprabhu Ramchandran 2625 17 Sanjay Ramakant Samant 2626 18 Vishwas Ananat Thorat 2627 19 Kantilal Tulshidas Gohil 2628 20 K. Bhujang Shetty 2629 21 Tejas Chandrakant Shah 2630 22. Hemchandra Vishwanath Mastkar 2631 216. 107 persons were injured in this blast as per the injury certificates, Ext.2729 (1 to 134). The relevant details thereof are given in the table below: CHART NO. 20 (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) Sr. No. Name of Injured PW number or exhibit number of affidavit filed by injured Exhibit number of medical certificate 1 Suman Kumar Pappa Raju ---- 2729 (1) 2 Rakesh Ramnarayan Pandey Ext. 1425 2729 (2 & 3) 3 Mukesh Kanhaiyalal Hinduja Ext. 1300 2729 (4) 4 Anant Sadashiv Raorane ---- 2729 (5) 5 Vijay Ganesh Sahasrabudhe ---- 2729 (6) 6 Bhagyabat Sardeshwar Rahang ---- 2729 (7) 7 Smt. Shobhana Jamunashankar Pandya ---- 2729 (8 & 9) 8 Roshanlal Raghunath Sahay ---- 2729 (10) 9 Nilesh Chandrakant Maru ---- 2729 (11) 10 Mahesh Manoharlal Trivedi PW No. 8 2729 (12 & 13) 11 Ashok Bhaurao Kulgod Ext. 1299 2729 (14 & 15) 12 Arun Gunwant Deshmukh Ext. 1302 2729 (16) 13 Vrishabh Suryakant Pathak Ext. 1298 2729 (17) 14 Kaushik Uttambhai Pradhan ---- 2729 (18) 15 Kalpesh Prakash Mhatre Ext. 1294 2729 (19 & 20) 16 Sajid Ali Mehbob Ali Ext. 1295 2729 (21 & 22) 17 Parag Jayant Mahadani ---- 2729 (23 & 24) 18 Laxman Vasudeo Parab ---- 2729 (25) 19 Morakala Gopalkrishna ---- 2729 (26) 20 Vijay Harish Purohit ---- 2729 (27) 21 Mukesh Indulal Shah Ext. 1296 2729 (28 & 29) 22 Kamlesh Mohanlal Shah ---- 2729 (30) 23 Ravindra Vasant Saravate Ext. 1297 2729 (31) 24 Kishor Tuljashankar Shukla ---- 2729 (32) 25 Cajetan Dennis Espibeiro ---- 2729 (33) 26 Shubendu Shishirkumar Behra Ext. 1420 2729 (34) 27 Ashok Ramchandra Dayani ---- 2729 (35) 28 Vasant Laharchand Gaudani Ext. 1421 2729 (36) 29 Nagin Lalaji Rathod ---- 2729 (37 & 38) 30 Bhaskar Sanayya Kotian Ext. 1424 2729 (39 & 40) 31 Bhagwandas Phuljibhai Makwana Ext. 1301 2729 (41) 32 Nikesh Kantilal Rathod ---- 2729 (42) 33 Suhas Pandurang Chougule Ext. 2750 2729 (43) 34 Ramesh Mahadeo Zope ---- 2729 (44) 35 Mukeshbhai Narendra Zaveri Ext. 1422 2729 (45 & 46) 36 Anup Jagdish Saksena Ext. 1424 2729 (39 & 40) 31 Bhagwandas Phuljibhai Makwana Ext. 1301 2729 (41) 32 Nikesh Kantilal Rathod ---- 2729 (42) 33 Suhas Pandurang Chougule Ext. 2750 2729 (43) 34 Ramesh Mahadeo Zope ---- 2729 (44) 35 Mukeshbhai Narendra Zaveri Ext. 1422 2729 (45 & 46) 36 Anup Jagdish Saksena Ext. 1429 2729 (47) 37 Bipin Dattatraya Raut ---- 2729 (48) 38 Nishit Sitaram Shrivastav ---- 2729 (49) 39 Manveer Singh Rajindra Singh Chandok ---- 2729 (50) 40 Kaustubh Rajendra Kulkarni Ext. 2751 2729 (51) 41 Rajan Kunjbihari Shah ---- 2729 (52 & 53) 42 Harish Ramchandra Kundnani ---- 2729 (54 & 55) 43 Dinesh Vishwanath Tirodkar ---- 2729 (56) 44 Devdas Siddhu Shetty PW No. 23 780 & 781 45 Suryanarayan Subramanyam Iyer Ext. 1428 2729 (59) 46 Ashish Rajulal Chauhan ---- 2729 (60) 47 Yogesh Natwarlal Adia ---- 2729 (61) 48 Sunil Rambhau Sasane ---- 2729 (62) 49 Deepak Vasudeo Chhabria ---- 2729 (63) 50 Bhaven Manohar Desai Ext. 1430 2729 (57 & 58) 51 Nitin Anandrao Jawale Ext. 2752 2729 (64) 52 Amit Ramdas Bante ---- 2729 (65 & 66) 53 Sanjay Ishwarlal Desai ---- 2729 (67 & 68) 54 Sriram Gowardhandas Lanjewal ---- 2729 (69 & 70) 55 Ashok Raghuvir Rao PW No. 27 2729 (71) 56 Ganpat Chintaman Pimparkar ---- 2729 (72) 57 Kiran Anantrai Desai ---- 2729 (73) 58 Subhash Chimaji Tawde Ext. 2753 2729 (74) 59 Sitaram Mahadeo Pandit ---- 2729 (75) 60 Lalkumar Kanasanand Tolani ---- 2729 (76) 61 Jairajan Kunnikrishnnan Nair ---- 2729 (77 & 78) 62 Nitin Rasiklal Shah ---- 2729 (79 & 80) 63 Nutan Harilal Prasad ---- 2729 (81 & 82) 64 Devendra Kumar Jain ---- 2729 (83) 65 Sanjay Satyanarayan Namdeo ---- 2729 (84) 66 Parasharan Gangaram Rathod ---- 2729 (85 & 86) 67 Subbir Kumar Phanindranath Roy ---- 2729 (87) 68 Jaywant Yeshwant Rane ---- 2729 (88) 69 Ramesh Mahadeo Manchekar ---- 2729 (89) 70 Prasanna Sitaram Prabhu ---- 2729 (90) 71 Lakhan Singh Jagram Singh Rajput Ext. 1423 2729 (91) 72 Maulin Harish Momaya Ext. 1423 2729 (91) 72 Maulin Harish Momaya Ext. 2754 2729 (92 & 93) 73 Rampher Sharda Prasad Mishra ---- 2729 (94 & 95) 74 Surendra Pundalik Thavi ---- 2729 (96) 75 Murad Mallick Panjwani ---- 2729 (97) 76 Prabhakar Dhaku Iswalkar ---- 2729 (98) 77 Sunil Kumar Ramesh Chandra Singh ---- 2729 (99) 78 Sanjay Nathuji Patil ---- 2729 (100 & 101) 79 Vaibhav Pradeep Mittal ---- 2729 (102 & 103) 80 Pankaj Ashok Vazirani ---- 2729 (104) 81 Avinash Narayan Karve Ext. 1426 2729 (105) 82 Nishikant Jagannath Gore ---- 2729 (106) 83 Suhas Manohar Jadhav ---- 2729 (107) 84 Dr. Pankaj Poonamchand Lohia ---- 2729 (108) 85 Pundlik Mahadu More ---- 2729 (109) 86 Chandrasekhar Vasant Pujari ---- 2729 (110) 87 Vivek Rajendra Kumar Tulsiyani ---- 2729 (111) 88 Mahendrakumar Ramanlal Parikh ---- 2729 (112) 89 Kaushal Suresh Vora ---- 2729 (113) 90 Deepak Vishwanath Parab ---- 2729 (114) 91 Chetan Anand Bishandas ---- 2729 (115 & 116) 92 Nagendra Prasad Koropolu ---- 2729 (117 & 118) 93 Kamal Jethmal Pareikh ---- 2729 (119) 94 Raju Sethia ---- 2729 (120) 95 Urban John Baptist Sequeira ---- 2729 (121) 96 Gajanan Sitaram Manjrekar Ext. 1427 2729 (122) 97 Abdul Karim Khan ---- 2729 (123) 98 Ashish Mohan Baktani ---- 2729 (124) 99 Saurabh Shantaram Kochrekar ---- 2729 (125) 100 G. Harihar Subrayamanyam Ext. 2755 2729 (126) 101 Mrs. Vinaya Vinayak Palav ---- 2729 (127 & 128) 102 Pradeep Indulal Shah ---- 2729 (129) 103 Mehul Rajendra Trivedi ---- 2729 (130) 104 Siddharth Hindurao Gholap ---- 2729 (131) 105 Veena Ganesh Chorat ---- 2729 (132) 106 Rajendraprasad Shivdayal Pateria ---- 2729 (133) 107 William Baptist Fernandis ---- 2729 (134) 217. 9 persons had died due to shock and haemorrhage due to multiple injuries in the Khar Subway blast near Santacruz Railway Station vide inquest panchanamas, memorandums of post-mortem examinations and cause of death certificates, Exts.2632 to 2640. The relevant details thereof are given in the table below: CHART NO. 21 (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) Sr. no. 9 persons had died due to shock and haemorrhage due to multiple injuries in the Khar Subway blast near Santacruz Railway Station vide inquest panchanamas, memorandums of post-mortem examinations and cause of death certificates, Exts.2632 to 2640. The relevant details thereof are given in the table below: CHART NO. 21 (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) Sr. no. Name of deceased Exhibit numbers of memorandum of postmortem examinations, cause of death certificates and inquest panchanamas 1 Jitendra J. Thadeshwar 2632 2 Kunal Rajnikant Shah 2633 3 Ramesh Shivlal Kumawat 2634 4 Mohanlal Rataplal Shrawji 2635 5 Himanshu Buddhadev 2636 6 Girish N. Paramanand 2637 7 Manish Mohan Divekar 2638 8 Vinod Ari Kottan Thatiotan 2639 9 Waghela Ashok Ramjibhai 2640 218. 102 persons were injured in the same blast as per the injury certificates, Ext.2730 (1 to 118). The relevant details thereof are given in the table below: CHART NO. 22 (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) Sr. No. Name of Injured PW number or exhibit number of affidavit filed by injured Exhibit number of medical certificate 1 Lalit Kumar Bhagwandas Phanse ---- 2730 (1) 2 Pramod Hareshwar Gharat Ext. 1309 2730 (2 & 3) 3 Parimal Jaggjivandas Gandhi Ext. 1328 2730 (4) 4 Sheshrnal Bhurmal Jain Ext. 1307 2730 (5) 5 Gulabrao Ganpat Patole Ext. 1446 2730 (6) 6 Viraj Narendrabhai Panchal Ext. 1303 2730 (7 & 8) 7 Suryakant Balkrishna Sawant Ext. 1311 2730 (9) 8 Ishwaran Tarun Ext. 1450 2730 (10) 9 Jatin Mafatbhai Waghela Ext. 1310 2730 (11) 10 Raees Abdul Rauf Choudhary ---- 2730 (12) 11 Ketan Dalpatbhai Patel ---- 2730 (13 & 14) 12 Hasmukh Narayan Popat Ext. 1447 2730 (15) 13 Nitin Shivaji Tungare Ext. 1306 2730 (16) 14 Kunal Manohar Kolge Ext. 1313 2730 (17 & 19) 15 Lalubhai Puroshattam Gopani Ext. 1318 2730 (18) 16 Rasik Shantilal Sawala ---- 2730 (20) 17 Ashok Hari Kamble ---- 2730 (21) 18 Anat Pandurag Ashtekar Ext. 1343 2730 (22) 19 Chirag Arvind Chauhan ---- 2730 (23 & 24) 20 Kunda Vithoba Shinde Ext. 1304 2730 (25) 21 Narendra Gunwantlal Shah Ext. 1308 2730 (26 & 27) 22 Sukesh Shekhar Amin Ext. 1448 2730 (28) 23 Chintan Badresh Gandhi ---- 2730 (29) 24 Rajendra Deju Shetty Ext. 1314 2730 (30) 25 Mangesh Lallan Zha ---- 2730 (31) 26 Sunil Krushnamurari Goyal ---- 2730 (32) 27 Umesh Jayantilal Maniyar Ext. 1304 2730 (25) 21 Narendra Gunwantlal Shah Ext. 1308 2730 (26 & 27) 22 Sukesh Shekhar Amin Ext. 1448 2730 (28) 23 Chintan Badresh Gandhi ---- 2730 (29) 24 Rajendra Deju Shetty Ext. 1314 2730 (30) 25 Mangesh Lallan Zha ---- 2730 (31) 26 Sunil Krushnamurari Goyal ---- 2730 (32) 27 Umesh Jayantilal Maniyar Ext. 1315 2730 (33) 28 Hemchandra Chandrakant Patankar Ext. 1316 2730 (34) 29 Narendra Surajmal Khandelwal Ext. 1441 2730 (35 & 36) 30 Amitprakash Omprakash Singh ---- 2730 (37) 31 Chandrakant Narayan Deshmukh Ext. 1320 2730 (38 & 39) 32 Jaydip Anantrao Vyas Ext. 1431 2730 (40 & 41) 33 Jayantilal Memribai Kathad Ext. 1436 2730 (42) 34 Sandeep Suresh Naik Ext. 2756 2730 (43) 35 Kishor Gopinath Divekar Ext. 1319 2730 (44) 36 Nimesh Nitin Desai ---- 2730 (45) 37 Minrul Anis Ur Rehman Islam ---- 2730 (46) 38 Dipti Sitaram Ghadigaonkar Ext. 1317 2730 (47) 39 Sanjeev Raghvan Chachil ---- 2730 (48 & 49) 40 Madhukar Narayan Loke Ext. 1305 2730 (50) 41 Sachin Prabhakar Pawar Ext. 1433 2730 (51) 42 Pradeep Kantilal Joshi Ext. 1324 2730 (52) 43 Vinay Hanumant Patil Ext. 1321 2730 (53) 44 Vinodkumar Keshavlal Darji ---- 2730 (54) 45 Mahendra Babulal Mehta Ext. 1444 2730 (55 & 56) 46 Anuj Girishkumar Nandawani ---- 2730 (57) 47 Madhukar Babulal Zaveri Ext. 1312 2730 (58) 48 Jacob K Mathew Ext. 1435 2730 (59) 49 Dhanisharan Ramswarup Jayant Ext. 1443 2730 (60) 50 Amit Ragnath Punja --- 2730 (61) 51 Minesh Popatlal Munani Ext. 1342 2730 (62) 52 Rajeshkumar Sarvanarayan Zha --- 2730 (63 & 64) 53 Dhiraj Kuvarji Rathod --- 2730 (65) 54 Narshinha Muddaggiri Kamat Ext. 1325 2730 (66) 55 Alpesh Ashok Kondalkar Ext. 1400 2730 (67) 56 Jarad Kalapurekal Mathew Ext. 1322 2730 (68) 57 Ansub Ramanuj Isthapak --- 2730 (69) 58 Ashok Tukaram Tandale Ext. 1442 2730 (70) 59 Jagdish Lalji Godia PW No. 9 2730 (71) 60 Rakesh Jaynarayan Kapoor --- 2730 (72) 61 Clinton George Martin --- 2730 (73) 62 Sundaresan S. Iyer Ext. 1327 2730 (74) 63 Anles Anant Desai --- 2730 (75) 64 Sarbinder Sing Harbansing --- 2730 (76) 65 Rajendra Manohar Panchal Ext. 1326 2730 (77) 66 Rohit Jagannath Shetty --- 2730 (78) 67 Prashant Sitaram Rathi --- 2730 (79) 68 Lalit Nikunj Poddar Ext. 1331 2730 (80) 69 Harshadbhai Trambaklal Shah Ext. 1333 2730 (81 & 82) 70 Premal Nalin Ajmera Ext. 1326 2730 (77) 66 Rohit Jagannath Shetty --- 2730 (78) 67 Prashant Sitaram Rathi --- 2730 (79) 68 Lalit Nikunj Poddar Ext. 1331 2730 (80) 69 Harshadbhai Trambaklal Shah Ext. 1333 2730 (81 & 82) 70 Premal Nalin Ajmera Ext. 1330 2730 (83) 71 Nilesh Ganeshbhai Joshalia Ext. 1432 2730 (84) 72 Dara B Shroff Ext. 1329 2730 (85 & 86) 73 Dhananjay Srirang Updekar --- 2730 (87) 74 Ramnathan Sudarshan Iyer --- 2730 (88) 75 Tushar N. Shah Ext. 1332 2730 (89) 76 Ashish Vinayak Gokhale Ext. 1445 2730 (90) 77 Ms. Chaya Pankaj Modi Ext. 1334 2730 (91) 78 Shivaji Arjun Sahinsakhale --- 2730 (92) 79 Anish Kumar Datta Ext. 1449 2730 (93 & 94) 80 Satish Parshuram Madav --- 2730 (95) 81 Brijeshkumar Suryakant Dubey Ext. 1335 2730 (96) 82 Dinesh Satyanarayan Lahoti Ext. 1337 2730 (97 & 98) 83 Ranjit Prataprao Patil Ext. 1336 2730 (99) 84 Indrakumar Shyamsundar Saraf Ext. 1341 2730 (100) 85 Ilancheri K. Padmanabhan Ext. 1339 2730 (101 & 102) 86 Dhawal Ashok Shah Ext. 1434 2730 (103) 87 Harishbhai Hargovind Shah Ext. 1451 2730 (104) 88 Manubhai Shankarlal Bhat --- 2730 (105) 89 Tenilapuram Sundaram Mahalingam --- 2730 (106) 90 Rajesh Haridas Biswadia Ext. 1340 2730 (107) 91 Harish Sumanlal Doshi Ext. 1439 2730 (108) 92 Sachin Dilip Mahimkar --- 2730 (109) 93 E. K. Kutty --- 2730 (110) 94 Vishal Vijaykumar Nagaiech PW No. 13 682 95 Vikas Vishwanath Modi --- 2730 (111) 96 Manojkumar Giridharbhai Kheredia Ext. 1438 2730 (112) 97 Balsubramanyam Sriram --- 2730 (113) 98 Ashfaque Jabbar Khan --- 2730 (114) 99 Anish Pradeep Kelkar --- 2730 (115) 100 Vivek Dattatraya Shirke Ext. 1437 2730 (116) 101 Lakshman Gopalkrishnan Kamath Ext. 1323 2730 (117) 102 Umarshi Raimal Mota Ext. 1338 2730 (118) C. R. No. 41 of 2006 of Andheri Railway Police Station :- 219. 28 persons had died due to haemorrhage and shock due to polytrauma, and multiple injuries suffered in the blast at Jogeshwari vide inquest panchanamas, memorandums of post-mortem examinations and cause of death certificates, Exts.2641 to 2668. The relevant details thereof are given in the table below: CHART NO. 23 (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) Sr. no. 28 persons had died due to haemorrhage and shock due to polytrauma, and multiple injuries suffered in the blast at Jogeshwari vide inquest panchanamas, memorandums of post-mortem examinations and cause of death certificates, Exts.2641 to 2668. The relevant details thereof are given in the table below: CHART NO. 23 (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) Sr. no. Name of the deceased Exhibit numbers of memorandum of postmortem examinations, cause of death certificates and inquest panchanamas 1 Narendra Kundandas Rawal 2641 2 Paresh Chotalal Thakkar 2642 3 Lotan Bhila Bediskar 2643 4 Kumud Manubai Shah 2644 5 Chandrsen Champaklal Bangdiwala 2645 6 Tushit Shanmukhanan Shah 2646 7 Yatin Mahendrakumar Mehta 2647 8 Dr. Krushnakumar Dubey 2648 9 Arvind Arjun Chikne 2649 10 Mukundraj Amidar Modi 2650 11 Nandkumar Bhargav Vaidya 2651 12 Amrish Madhukar Sawant 2652 13 Pravinkumar Keshvlal Upadhayaya 2653 14 Shakir Abid Ali Merchant 2654 15 Ashok Gajanan Bapat 2655 16 Mahendra Motilal Mehta 2656 17 Hitendra Purushottamdas Nagar 2657 18 Manoj Mahendrakumar Shah 2658 19 Amitabh Laxminarayan Pai 2659 20 Ashok Gopikishan Ajmera 2660 21 Shashikant Ramniklal Doshi 2661 22 Prataproy Nanchand Vhora 2662 23 Francis Zevier Lobo 2663 24 Lalit Raghunathprasad Kakani 2664 25 Govindji Gulabchandji Dave 2665 26 Madhu Parshuram Pawar 2666 27 Lalit Jayantilal Kanchaliya 2667 28 Sunil Thakkar 2668 220. 115 persons were injured in the same blast as per the injury certificates, Ext.2731 (1 to 110). The relevant details thereof are given in the table below: CHART NO. 24 (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) Sr. No. Name of Injured PW No. / Exhibit No. of Affidavit filed by injured Exhibit No. Of Medical Certificate 1. Smt. Jasvinder Pradeepkumar Samiyar --- 2731 (1 & 2) 2 Miss. The relevant details thereof are given in the table below: CHART NO. 24 (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) Sr. No. Name of Injured PW No. / Exhibit No. of Affidavit filed by injured Exhibit No. Of Medical Certificate 1. Smt. Jasvinder Pradeepkumar Samiyar --- 2731 (1 & 2) 2 Miss. Lata Bhimrao Shirsat --- 2731 (3) 3 Smt. Deepika Arun Chavan --- 2731 (4) 4 Jayprakash Balkrishna Gurav Desai PW No. 14 2731 (5) 5 Smt. Chhaya Vilas Kothe ---- 2731 (6) 6 Chandravadan Maganlal Savla ---- 2731(7) 7 Sunil Kashiprasad Bajaj ---- 2731 (8) 8 Smt. Sharda Pramod Tople ---- 2731 (9) 9 Nikhil Vasant Khopkar Ext.1452 2731 (10) 10 Bajirao Bhausaheb Desai ---- 2371 (11) 11 Ambar Abani Day ---- 2731 (12) 12 Miss Aparna Vivek Salvi ---- 2731 (13) 13 Nilesh Rohidas Kadam ---- 2731 (14) 14 Smt. Shanta Rohidas Kadam ---- 2731 (15) 15 Rambharan Tadanandan Mishra ----- 2731 (16 & 17) 16 Eshan Bhratkumar Thakkar Ext.2757 2731 (18) 17 Hanasraj M. Kanojia ---- 2731 (19) 18 Rambhau Vitthal Sadavarte ---- 2731 (20) 19 Vilas Maruti Ghoge Ext.2758 2731 (21) 20 Smt. Meena Salvi ---- 2731 (22) 21 Vasant Abhimanyu Sirsikar Ext.2759 2731 (23) 22 Chandrakant Mataprasad Mishra ---- 2731 (24) 23 Dilip Keshavji Vora ---- 2731 (25) 24 Pintukumar Amir Sarosh Ext.2760 2731 (26) 25 Vijay Jagannath Pawar Ext.2761 2731 (27) 26 Tushar Rajesh Rawal ---- 2731 (28) 27 Sanjay Babu Shigvan ---- 2731 (29 & 30) 28 Sabajit Pheku Yadav ---- 2731 (31) 29 Smt. Nandubai Saiba Mujmule ---- 2731 (32) 30 Mahendra Vilas Pitale Ext.2762 2731 (33) 31 Prakash Bhalchandra Wagh Ext.2763 2731 (34) 32 Ashwin Ramesh Boricha PW No. 134, Affidavit Ext.1453 2731 (35) 33 Smt. Manisha Anant Joshi ---- 2731 (36) 34 Ramdas Dhondiba Warange ---- 2731 (37) 35 Vijay Pandurang Mestry ---- 2731 (38) 36 Arvind Vallabhaji Mahendra ---- 2731 (39) 37 Bipin Natwarlal Shah ---- 2731 (40) 38 Janak Harshad Upadhayay ---- 2731 (41) 39 Harshad Subhash Borgaokar Ex.2764 2731 (42) 40 Chandrashekhar Vinayak Joshi ---- 2731 (43) 41 Smt. Supriya Baban Kheratkar ---- 2731 (44 & 45) 42 Rylan Francis Crasto ---- 2731 (46) 43 Vipul Manharlal Halani ---- 2731 (47) 44 Ashok Radhakisan Singal ---- 2731 (48) 45 Narendra Ghusabhai Rupareliya ---- 2731 (49) 46 Smt. Deepjyoti Suprakash Chaterjee ---- 2731 (50) 47 Deepak Balmukund Shah Ext.2765 2731 (51) 48 Keith Anthony D’Souza ---- 2731 (52) 49 Harishchandra Deomal Gandhi ---- 2731 (53) 50 Babay Aaba Sodkar Ext.1454 2731 (54) 51 Gulab Sriram Yadav ---- 2731 (55) 52 Bharat Radheshyam Khatod ---- 2731 (56) 53 Rajkumar Bachhan Singh ---- 2731 (57) 54 Rajan Govind Nair ---- 2731 (58) 55 Shiva Balan ---- 2731 (59) 56 Smt. Sushila Vijay Valtati ---- 2731 (60) 57 Shivanna A. Shetty ---- 2731 (61) 58 Pramodkumar Manager Thakur ---- 2731 (62) 59 Kshitij Anil Baldota Ext.2766 2731 (63) 60 Shashitant Raghunath Dablekar ---- 2731 (64) 61 Sachin Naginaprasad Gupta ---- 2731 (65) 62 Abhijit Avadhesh Sharma ---- 2731 (66) 63 Dadasaheb Baburao Lokhande ---- 2731 (67) 64 Chetan Dwarakdas Mehta Ext.1455 2731 (68) 65 Daji Ganpat Naik ---- 2731 (69 & 70) 66 Ketan Narendra Rathod Ext.2767 2731 (71) 67 Jafar Ali Sayyed Ali Sayyed ---- 2731 (72 & 73) 68 Hitesh Shashikant Shah ---- 2731 (74) 69 Subash Shankar Khedekar Ext.2768 2731 (75) 70 Andrew Gregory Figerado ---- 2731 (76) 71 Mangesh Sadanand Mestry ---- 2731 (77) 72 Kamlakar Jayram Sankhe ---- 2731 (78) 73 Vaibhav Subash Mahale ---- 2731 (79) 74 Dinesh Savlaram Nabar ---- 2731 (80) 75 Amar Nanaji Solanki ---- 2731 (81) 76 Vijay Kumar Narayan Deshpande Ext.2769 2731 (82) 77 Jekim John Fernandez ---- 2731 (83) 78 Dilip Singh Sugandh Singh Shekhwat Ext.2770 2731 (84 & 85) 79 Vinod Koshanan Ayatalla ---- 2731 (86 & 88) 80 Ajay Avinash Narse ---- 2731 (87) 81 Kamal Kumar Ramavatar Devda ---- 2731 (89) 82 Gopal Shyamsunder Chaudhari ---- 2731 (90) 83 Jaydeep Keshavji Sampat ---- 2731 (91) 84 Vijaykumar Bavanna Raippa ---- 2731 (92) 85 Ramkumar Munnar Yadav ---- 2731 (93) 86 Amarkant Mithailal Yadav ---- 2731 (94) 87 Babukumar Basaulkumar Ray ---- 2731 (95 & 96) 88 Kum. Foram Jayesh Shah ---- 2731 (97) 89 Prashant Gangadhar Shetty ---- 2731 (98) 90 Rajneesh Jiten Borkotokhy ---- 2731 (99) 91 Amrut Tulshiram Patil ---- 2731 (100) 92 Suresh Laxman Sapkal Ext.2771 2731 (101 & 102) 93 Sanjay Ghanashyam Pandey ---- 2731 (103) 94 Ninad Vishnu Katdare ---- 2731 (104) 95 Jagdish Dhirajlal Vyas Ext.2772 2731 (105) 96 Kum. Nilam Vishnu Ghegadmal ---- 2731 (106) 97 Mrs. Vaijayanti Anirudha Sule Ext.2773 2731 (107) 98 Rajendrakumar Mulkraj Mahajan ---- 2731 (108) 99 Mr. Mohanlal Damji Pasad Ext.2774 2731 (109) 100 Smt. Gayabai Lakshman Narvade ---- 2731 (110) C. R. No. 156 of 2006 of Borivali Railway Police Station :- 221. 26 persons had died because of complications due to head injury with polytrauma, haemorrhage and shock due to multiple injuries in the blast at Borivali Railway Station vide inquest panchanamas, memorandums of post-mortem examinations and cause of death certificates, Exts. 2669 to 2694. The relevant details thereof are given in the table below: CHART NO. 25 (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) Sr. No. Name of deceased Exhibit numbers of memorandum of postmortem examinations, cause of death certificates and inquest panchanamas 1 Suresh Chunilal Enginner 2669 2 Dipak Ramlakhan Kewat 2670 3 Ravindranath Budhansingh Balhariya 2671 4 Omkarnath Adiyashankar Mishra 2672 5 Bhogilal Ambalal Sarwayya 2673 6 Jaikumar Raman Pilai Nair 2674 7 Kawan Subhash Thakur 2675 8 Naresh Jivajibhai Saliya 2676 9 Ajaj Moin Shaikh 2677 10 Srinivasrao Bhimsenrao Mulbagelu 2678 11 Satyawan Ramchandra Biradar 2679 12 Kirtibhai Sarabhai Shah 2680 13 Harshal Yashwant Bhalerao 2681 14 Anandnath Shambhihari Tiwari 2682 15 Mohanprasad Faujiram Khansali 2683 16 Brij Mohan Prasad 2684 17 Giribau Narsinghrao Nijamapatanam 2685 18 Vitthal Warloji Choudhari 2686 19 Nandini Ramesh Naik 2687 20 Rajnikant Purushottamdas Panchal 2688 21 Subhash Narhari Sawant 2689 22 Hemlata Yadunath Yadav 2690 23 Devesh Satyaprakash Singh 2691 24 Beni Joseph 2692 25 Vikrant Satish Khanvilkar 2693 26 Ramjanali Rajabali Motani 2694 222. 153 persons were injured in the same blast vide injury certificates, Exts.2733 (1 to 152). The relevant details thereof are given in the table below: CHART NO. 26 (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) Sr. No. Name of Injured PW number or exhibit number of affidavit filed by injured Exhibit number of medical certificate 1 Rajesh Amborkar ----- 2733 (1) 2 Ashokbhai Durgashankar Joshi ----- 2733 (2) 3 Prathamesh D. Tawde ----- 2733 (3) 4 Ms. 26 (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) Sr. No. Name of Injured PW number or exhibit number of affidavit filed by injured Exhibit number of medical certificate 1 Rajesh Amborkar ----- 2733 (1) 2 Ashokbhai Durgashankar Joshi ----- 2733 (2) 3 Prathamesh D. Tawde ----- 2733 (3) 4 Ms. Darshana Bhupendra Keni ----- 2733 (4) 5 Vijaykumar Narayan Kuroop Nair ----- 2733 (5) 6 Sudhir Harinath Upadhyay ---- 2733 (6) 7 Santosh Madhukar Vichare ---- 2733 (7) 8 Harshad Vivek Tondawalkar ---- 2733 (8) 9 Nilesh Amritlal Soni ---- 2733 (9) 10 Manoj Jugalkishore Purohit ---- 2733 (10) 11 Ms. Vidya Bhaskar Shetty ---- 2733 (11) 12 Khalid Abdul Hafij Siddique ---- 2733 (12) 13 Avinash Shyamsundar Dhanawat ---- 2733 (13) 14 Parth Pratik Shah ---- 2733 (14) 15 Arvind Bawarilal Sharma ---- 2733 (15) 16 Kamal Ramvilas Parikh ---- 2733 (16) 17 Santoshkumar Kutti Narayan ---- 2733 (17) 18 Rajaram Sawlaram Chavan PW-11 2733 (18) 19 Vinay Madanlal Gupta ---- 2733 (19) 20 Namdeo Ratnu Rade ---- 2733 (20) 21 Bhushan Subhash Kothawale ---- 2733 (21 & 22) 22 Kamal Satyanarayan Khemla ---- 2733 (23 & 24) 23 Ms. Sheela Kamal Khemla ---- 2733 (25 & 26) 24 Dharmendra Atmaram Waghela ---- 2733 (27) 25 Shripal Somlal Jain ---- 2733 (28 & 29) 26 Chinmay Harischandra Mahajan ---- 2733 (30) 27 Kumar Naik ---- 2733 (31) 28 Mrs. Gajra Perukumar Khaniya ---- 2733 (32) 29 Giridhar Daya Koli ---- 2733 (33) 30 Chedilal Kharpatu Yadav ---- 2733 (34) 31 Prashant Satish Shinde ---- 2733 (35) 32 Sanjaybhai Narayanbhai Luwani ---- 2733 (36 to 38) 33 Balakrishna Atayappa Kotian ---- 2733 (39) 34 Zakir Usman Khan ---- 2733 (40 & 41) 35 Gajanan Jagannath Bhavsar ---- 2733 (42) 36 Jathashankar Moreshwar Pande ---- 2733 (43) 37 Ms. Neeta Ashok Ranpura ---- 2733 (44) 38 Alwin Anthony D’Cunha ---- 2733 (45) 39 Ms. Neeta Ashok Ranpura ---- 2733 (44) 38 Alwin Anthony D’Cunha ---- 2733 (45) 39 Ms. Shweta Narayan Ambede PW-37 576 40 Mahesh Shridhar Sawant ---- 2733 (46) 41 Dinesh Tulsibhai Moradia ---- 2733 (47) 42 Honabhai Budhabhai Rathod Ext.2775 2733 (48) 43 Ashish Chinubhai Shah Ext.2776 2733 (49) 44 Piyush Rameshchandra Sharma Ext.2777 2733 (50) 45 Suraj Kalikanja Zha ---- 2733 (51) 46 Baby George Varghese Mathew ---- 2733 (52) 47 Suresh Kamapra Shreyan ---- 2733 (53) 48 Vijay Nair ---- 2733 (54) 49 Vinit Dilip Patil ---- 2733 (55) 50 Brahmesh Shankar Nadkarni ---- 2733 (56) 51 Rahul Ram Wankhede ---- 2733 (57) 52 Nayan Kantilal Tokle ---- 2733 (58) 53 Omkar Prakash Tirodkar ---- 2733 (59) 54 George D'Mello ---- 2733 (60) 55 Yogesh Devmurat Pande ---- 2733 (61) 56 Rajkumar Nabab Singh Chouhan ---- 2733 (62) 57 Hemraj Damaji Satpute ---- 2733 (63) 58 Ms. Kailashben Ranjitbhai Thakur ---- 2733 (64) 59 Aniket Taipanna Shettigar ---- 2733 (65 & 66) 60 Suresh Jayawant Prabhu ---- 2733 (67 & 68) 61 Sayyad Nasiruddin Muniruddin ---- 2733 (69 & 70) 62 Kishore Popatlal Shah PW No. 60 2733 (71) 63 Sunil Motilal Murde ---- 2733 (72) 64 Ms. Shagufa Amir Ansari ---- 2733 (73) 65 Jeenank Pareshbhai Dalal Ext.2778 2733 (74) 66 Suhas Dattatraya Apte ---- 2733 (75) 67 Babu K. Anand ---- 2733 (76) 68 Manubhai D. Jasoliya ---- 2733 (77) 69 Mohd. Safi Munna Mirza ---- 2733 (78) 70 Suresh Shekhar Suvarna ---- 2733 (79) 71 Hemant Jangubhai Surti ---- 2733 (80 & 81) 72 Prakash Ganesh Bhandare ---- 2733 (82) 73 Manish Himmatlal Mehta ---- 2733 (83) 74 Jayanti Veljibhai Kokia ---- 2733 (84) 75 Deepak Taraprasad Sharma ---- 2733 (85) 76 Prabhudas Keshav Goti ---- 2733 (86 to 88) 77 Keni Yogesh Pande ---- 2733 (89) 78 Ashish Narayan Agaawne ---- 2733 (90) 79 Shekhar Chagan Birari ---- 2733 (91 & 92) 80 Vivek Mahadeo Deshmukh ---- 2733 (93 & 94) 81 Premsukh Bafarlal Khandelwal ---- 2733 (95) 82 Ms. Kavita Dilip Shah ---- 2733 (96) 83 Pramod Ganpat Narkar Ext.2780 2733 (97) 84 Kishor Bapu Gawali ---- 2733 (98 & 99) 85 Subhashchandra Jangiram Arora ---- 2733 (100) 86 Pravinchandra Natvarlal Shah ---- 2733 (101) 87 Girishbhai Bhailal Gandhi ---- 2733 (102 & 103) 88 Ajay S. Thakkar Ext.2781 2733 (104) 89 Leeladhar B. Kotian Ext.2782 2733 (105) 90 Sanjeeva Kariappa Suvarna ---- 2733 (106) 91 Ram Ishwarlal Dhawale ---- 2733 (107) 92 Pradeep Prabhakkumar Jindani ---- 2733 (108) 93 Mani Kanthan Nair ---- 2733 (109) 94 Arunkumar Juguraj Prajapati 2733 (110) 95 Mangesh Vishwanath Kolekar 2733 (111) 96 Haridas Ravindranath Puduwal 2733 (112) 97 Rajeshkumar Harkisan Jaiswal 2733 (113) 98 Nitin Vidyadhar Panjari 2733 (114) 99 Santosh Prakash Khanvilkar 2733 (115) 100 Husain Yusuf Singaporwala 2733 (116) 101 Gaurav Rajesh Jain 2733 (117) 102 Jaijeet Jyotindra Sengupta 2733 (118 & 119) 103 Prakash Rajaram Benkar 2733 (120) 104 Amit Bhikaji Padwal Ext.2783 2733 (121) 105 Raja Mohamad Akbar 2733 (122) 106 Jude Milton Vholkart 2733 (123) 107 Surendra Chaitram Hirkane 2733 (124) 108 Smt. C. Jaya Bapuji 2733 (125) 109 Dinanath Bhaskar Save 2733 (126) 110 Chandrakant Somabhai Makwana 2733 (127) 111 Siddharam Shantamallappa Nagur 2733 (128) 112 Raju Sadashiv Kamble 2733 (129 to 131) 113 Ramesh Hajiarichand Thakur 2733 (132 & 133) 114 Ramesh Dattatraya Kulkarni 2733 (134) 115 Allwyn Xavier D’Cunha ---- 2733 (135) 116 Pawan Karunashankar Chaturvedi ---- 2733 (132 & 136) 117 Ravindra Jairam Rawool ---- 2733 (137) 118 Haridwar Mahesh Chauhan ---- 2733 (138 & 139) 119 Mrs. Kalpana Ashok Pawar ---- 2733 (140) 120 Ramesh Devlya Thakre ---- 2733 (141) 121 Chimanlal Bhagwandas Wadher ---- 2733 (142) 122 Samir Krishnachand Gujrathi ---- 2733 (143) 123 Shiva Chandrashekhar Hiremath ---- 2733 (144) 124 Dilip Tatoba Naik ---- 2733 (145) 125 Manideep Murlidhar Seth ---- 2733 (146) 126 Ashok Govind Kini ---- 2733 (147 & 148) 127 Saurav Chandrashekhar Wable ---- 2733 (149) 128 Rajkumar Roshanlal Chauhan ---- 2733 (150) 129 Madhav Manjunath Naik ---- 2733 (151 & 152) 130 Johnson @ Jacson Charles Amanna Ext.2779 ---- C. R. No. 59 of 2006 of Vasai Road Railway Police Station :- 223. 31 persons had died in the blast near Mira Road Railway Station as per the contents of the inquest panchanamas, memorandums of post-mortem examinations and cause of death certificates, Exts.2695 to 2725. 31 persons had died in the blast near Mira Road Railway Station as per the contents of the inquest panchanamas, memorandums of post-mortem examinations and cause of death certificates, Exts.2695 to 2725. One of the injured witnesses by name Amit Dinesh Singh had been admitted in-the Jaslok Hospital after the blast in an unconscious condition and was decerebrating. He died on 03/05/13, i.e., nearly 7 years after the incident, and the prosecution produced his death certificate Ext. 4731 and death summary issued by the Jaslok Hospital Ext.4733. Thus, in all 32 persons have died in this blast. The opinion as probable causes of deaths mentioned in the memorandums of post mortem examinations and cause of death certificates was haemorrhagic shock due to multiple perforating injuries over forehead, chest wall, abdomen, multiple fractures, multiple injuries, and injuries to vital organs of pelvis, haemorrhagic shock due to fracture occipital region of skull vault and multiple fracture of extremities, fractures of right ulna and radius, shock due to amputation of left hand below elbow, amputation of left leg below knee and head injury, fracture of right lower legs, humerus. The relevant details thereof are given in the table below: CHART NO. 27 (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) Sr. No. Name of the Deceased Exhibit numbers of memorandum of postmortem examinations, cause of death certificates and inquest panchanamas 1 Mahipal Madanlal Parihar 2695 2 Narottam Damodar Meher 2696 3 Ajit Laxman Pangle 2697 4 Hasmukhlaal Pauran 2698 5 Dilip Dattatray Kirale 2699 6 Ashok K. Aail 2700 7 Shamsundar Shivkumar Sharma 2701 8 Rimnya Lalya Thakare 2702 9 Pramod Prabhakar Vispute 2703 10 Rakesh Kailas Richariya 2704 11 Ramdas Pundalik Shirodkar 2705 12 Ramesh Ramchandra Nijai 2706 13 Mickel Augustine Dabare 2707 14 Pratik Nivrutti Patil 2708 15 Kamlesh Ravidas Ashar 2709 16 Govind Khema Solankhi 2710 17 Abhinav Harishchandra Shrivastav 2711 18 Mohanan Takekkara 2712 19 Hasan Siraj Patel 2713 20 Rajendrakumar Ramkrushna Dilod 2714 21 Rammilan Birjlal Prajapati 2715 22 Dineshbhai Dhirajbhai Solankhi 2716 23 Jodel Paskal Farnandis 2717 24 Rohit Surendrakumar Jain 2718 25 Anil Kishorchand Satwani 2719 26 Rajesh Damodar Pandharekar 2720 27 Hriday Vaman Naikwade 2721 28 Swapnil Prakash Oak 2722 29 Jaiprakash Sons 2723 30 Arun Kashinath Patole 2724 31 Subramanyam Krushnan 2725 32 Amit Dinesh Singh 2732 (14), 4731 & 4733 224. 122 persons were injured in the same blast as per the injury certificates, Ext.2732 (1 to 54). The relevant details thereof are given in the table below. CHART NO. 28 (Reproduced from the Trial Court Judgment) Sr. No. Name of Injured PW/Exhibit Number of Affidavit filed by injured Exhibit Number of Medical Certificate 1 Abhay Dineshkumar Shrivastav PW No. 192, Ext.1461 2732 (1 & 49) 2 Ms. Vrunda Suresh Hegde Ext.1370 2732 (2) 3 Sunil Rama Choudhari Ext.1372 2732 (3 & 28) 4 Ms. Sonal Xavier Gonsalves Ext.1368 2732 (4 & 18) 5 Macwin William D’souza Ext.1369 2732 (5) 6 Raju Kosiko Thomas Ext.1371 2732 (6) 7 William Sunder Bhasme - 2732 (7) 8 Govardhan Udhumji Ingawale - 2732 (8) 9 Mohammed Shabbir Mohammed Dinos Khan - 2732 (9) 10 Sanjay Thomas Lopes 2732 (10) 11 Prakash Shridharan Kannotikudian Ext.1356 2732 (11) 12 William George Joseph 2732 (12) 13 Sanjay Pandurang Sawant 2732 (13, 16 & 17) 14 Kishor Dattatray Mhatre PW No. 10 2732 (15 & 17) 15 Radheshyam Suraj Prasad Singh 2732 (17) 16 Avadhesh Laxman Thakur 2732 (17) 17 Sachin Somesh Narad Ext.1398 2732 (17) 18 Wilfred Walter Naronha PW No. 130 2732 (17 & 28) 19 Santosh Ramchandra Yadav 2732 (17) 20 Subhash Dharmaj Lad 2732 (17) 21 Manish Vallabhji Gogri 2732 (17) 22 Ashish Anant Borgare 2732 (17) 23 Claudius Wilfred Saldhana PW No. 147, Ext.1366 2732 (18) 24 Suresh Krishna Rao 2732 (18) 25 Shailesh Shirish Kawle 2732 (18) 26 Pradeepkumar Mahakant Jha 2732 (18) 27 Ms. Sonal Xavier Gonsalves 2732 (18) 28 PC. Govindan Nambiyar 2732 (18) 29 Ashok Jai Narayan Sabharwal Ext.1367 2732 (18) 30 Bajranglal Marhadhin Kyal Ext.1386 2732 (18 & 44) 31 Pranav Jayant Ankalesaria Ext.1393 2732 (18) 32 Ajay Singh 2732 (18) 33 Kailash Takatmal Mehta 2732 (19) 34 Rishikesh Ratibhai Bhavsar 2732 (20) 35 Hirendra Suresh Barrot Ext.1361 2732 (21) 36 Vishnu Trimbak Waghode 2732 (22) 37 Mahendrakumar Tarachand Jain 2732 (23 & 24) 38 Arvindkumar Sheshbahadur Kanaujiya 2732 (24) 39 Prakash Hadkar 2732 (24) 40 Gyanendra Jain 2732 (24) 41 Shivkumar Rambheerji Prasad 2732 (24) 42 Pinesh Kalyanbhai Shah Ext.1362 2732 (24) 43 Swadhin Richpal Padiya 2732 (25) 44 Wilfred Rosario Kashta 2732 (26) 45 Dr. Aziz Akbarali Keswani 2732 (27) 46 Manoj Shymdeo Bharadwaj 2732 (28) 47 Yashwant Ramesh Naik 2732 (28) 48 Ramanbhai Hargovinddas Patel 2732 (28) 49 Mahesh Prakash Surve Ext.1460 2732 (28) 50 Santosh Izak Nago Ext.1354 2732 (28) 51 Pratik Prakash Raut 2732 (28) 52 Sanyo Alizar D'Silva Ext.1355 2732 (28) 53 Paresh Vitthaldas Amlani 2732 (28) 54 Gopinath Vitthal Patil Ext.1352 2732 (28) 55 Subhash Shivagan Ext.1353 2732 (28) 56 Nirbhaynath Ramshiromani Tiwari 2732 (28) 57 Nagesh Gopal Shenoy Ext.1350 2732 (28) 58 Umar Hussein Shaikh ---- 2732 (28) 59 Sanjay Khobrekar Ext.1364 2732 (28) 60 Balam Pushpasen Rane PW No. 190, Ext.1351 2732 (28) 61 Jatin Rohit Thakkar ---- 2732 (28) 62 Namdeo Keru Surve Ext.1373 2732 (29) 63 Ajay Bijay Bahadur Singh Ext.1382 2732 (30) 64 Shailesh Shirish Kawle ---- 2732 (31) 65 Nameet Kashinath Vanmale ---- 2732 (32) 66 Milind Vasudeo Kamankar ---- 2732 (33) 67 Dattatray Vasant Choudhari ---- 2732 (34) 68 Pommuti Rai ---- 2732 (35) 69 Prashant Sanath Pandya ---- 2732 (36) 70 Mina Ramesh Maru ---- 2732 (37) 71 Parkot Matai Matai Ext.1349 2732 (28 & 38) 72 Ajay Gangaram Naik ---- 2732 (39) 73 Hastimal Choudamal Solanki Ext.1376 2732 (39) 74 Ashish Suresh Chaturvedi Ext.1375 2732 (39) 75 Tushar Ramesh Kulkarni Ext.1348 2732 (28 & 40) 76 Vrushang Dharmendra Shah ---- 2732 (41 & 43) 77 Vijay Krishna Nair PW No. 187, Affidavit Ext.1379 2732 (42) 78 Lalchand Vidyadhar Dubey Ext.1384 2732 (45) 79 Rampyare Siddheshwar Lal Ext.1391 2732 (46) 80 Chandradras Koragga Karkera Ext.1394 2732 (46) 81 Ramesh Manilal Patel ---- 2732 (47) 82 Devendra P. Chavan PW No. 123, Affidavit Ext.1389 2732 (48) 83 Raghunath Shankar Chindarkar Ext.1458 2732 (49) 84 Shankar Siddhu Abhang Ext.1374 2732 (49) 85 Asitkumar Vijaychandra Panda ---- 2732 (49) 86 Swapnil Rajaram Ambe Ext.1377 2732 (50) 87 Dashrath Kantilal Patel Ext.1387 2732 (51) 88 Aman Anup Pumvani ---- 2732 (51) 89 Eric Fracis Nunis ---- 2732 (52) 90 Rahul Milind Kadam Ext.1399 2732 (53) 91 Parag Sawant ---- 2732(17&54), 2728(83 to 85) 92 Kiran R. Kini PW No. 191, Ext.1347 ---- 93 Umesh Ramanna Shetty Ext.1357 2727 (29) 94 Bamsingh Raisingh Khatri Ext.1358 ---- 95 Madhukar Raghu Mistri Ext.1359 ---- 96 Naresh Gajanan Patil Ext.1360 ---- 97 Ramnaval Dhanukdhari Sahani Ext.1363 ---- 98 Chandrikasingh Sarjuram Yadav Ext.1365 ---- 99 Dr. Ajay Jayant Nikam Ext.1457 ---- 100 Satish Narayan Manoti Ext.1378 ---- 101 Balram Kashinath Sankhe Ext.1459 ---- 102 Naresh Maruti Kalokhe PW No. 126, Affidavit Ext.1380 ---- 103 Kaushal Dharamvir Bali Ext.1381 ---- 104 Pritam Dattatray Mhatre Ext.1383 ---- 105 Murarlial Haridyaji Parekh PW No. 137, Affidavit Ext.1385 ---- 106 Atmaram Vishnu Dalvi PW No. 136, Affidavit Ext.1388 ---- 107 Nandakishore Bajaj PW No. 127, Affidavit Ext.1390 ---- 108 Joseph Anthon Almeida PW No. 128, Affidavit Ext.1392 ---- 109 Habib Chand Shaikh Ext.1395 ---- 110 Hiren Chotelal More Ext.1396 ---- 111 Dhananjay Govind Dighe Ext.1397 ---- 112 Mrs. Swati Ravindra Walinjkar Ext.1400 ---- 113 Nilesh Ramvilas Sharma Ext.1456 ---- 114 Kirit Ramanlal Shah Ext.1401 ---- 115 Rajesh Pondrekar ---- 2732 (1) INVOCATION OF MCOCA 225. During the investigation of CR No. 156 of 2006, PW-174 PI Khandekar, who was analyzing the collected evidence, formed the view that the arrested accused (A.2 and A.4) and one absconding accused, were associated with the banned organization SIMI. It further appeared that the present bomb blast was the handiwork of SIMI, aimed at promoting insurgency and committing terrorist acts. Consequently, PW-174 gathered material concerning the A.13 – Asif, and discovered that two charge-sheets had already been filed against him under Section 153A(1) IPC and the Explosives Act in Jalgaon, Maharashtra. 226. Based on the above information, PW-174 concluded that the railway bomb blasts in Mumbai were perpetrated by SIMI. Accordingly, on 17th September 2006, the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) were invoked in the case. Further, the investigating officer brought to the attention of the chief investigating officer that the case was appropriate for invocation of the MCOCA, and a proposal to that effect was submitted to the Competent Authority through the DCP on 18th September 2006. 227. Subsequently, upon receiving the prior approval from S.K Jaiswal, an officer of the rank of Deputy Inspector General (DIG) on 24th September 2006, the provisions of MCOCA were formally invoked in CR No. 156/2006 of Borivali Railway Police Station. At that point, the investigation, which had been handled by PW-174, was transferred to an officer of the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP), namely ACP Sadashiv Patil (PW-186) . 228. Thereafter, the sanction under Section 23(2) of the MCOCA was accorded by PW-185 A.N. Roy, Commissioner of Police, Mumbai on 25/11/2006, after recording his subjective satisfaction. CONFESSIONAL STATEMENTS 229. 228. Thereafter, the sanction under Section 23(2) of the MCOCA was accorded by PW-185 A.N. Roy, Commissioner of Police, Mumbai on 25/11/2006, after recording his subjective satisfaction. CONFESSIONAL STATEMENTS 229. As alleged, 11 accused gave confessional statements during the course of investigation. These accused are A.1 to A.7 and A.9 to A.12. These confessions were recorded between the period from 04/10/2006 to 25/10/2006. Total 7 DCPs recorded these confessional statements. After recording of confessional statements of all the accused, the accused persons have retracted their confessional statements before the court. The accused have retracted their confessional statements on the following dates: - CHART NO. 29 Sr.No. Name of the Accused Date of Conclusion of Part-II of Confessional Statement Date of Retraction Before Court 1. A.1 - Kamal Ahmed Mohd. Vakil Ansari 05.10.2006 09.10.2006 2. A.2 - Dr. Tanveer Ahmed Mohd. Ibrahim Ansari 05.10.2006 09.10.2006 3 A.3 - Mohd. Faisal Ataur Rehman Shaikh 06.10.2006 09.10.2006 4. A.4 - Ehtesham Qutubuddin Siddiqui 07.10.2006 09.10.2006 5. A.5 - Mohd. Majid Mohd. Shafi 25.10.2006 09.11.2006 6. A.6 - Shaikh Md. Ali Alam Shaikh 25.10.2006 09.11.2006 7. A.7 - Mohd Sajid Margub Ansari 25.10.2006 26.10.2006 8. A.9 - Muzzammil Ataur Rehman Shaikh 05.10.2006 09.10.2006 9. A.10 - Sohail Mehmood Shaikh 06.10.2006 09.10.2006 10. A.11 - Zameer Ahmed Latifur Rehman Shaikh 05.10.2006 09.10.2006 11. A.12 - Naveed Hussain Khan 25.10.2006 09.11.2006 230. We have dealt with the statement, in detail, in the later part of the judgment, while discussing its admissibility in the law. FILING OF CHARGESHEET 231. ACP Patil, PW-186, filed chargesheet in this court on 30/11/06 on the basis of the investigation conducted upto that date against 13 arrested accused and 15 wanted accused. At that time, he requested the trial court to allow them to conduct further investigation and was permitted. SANCTIONS UNDER OTHER ACTS 232. PW-186 ACP Patil had submitted proposals to various authorities before filing chargesheet. He submitted proposals to the Addl. Chief Secretary (Home), Government of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai to grant sanction to prosecute the accused under the provisions of the UA(P)A and under sections 121A, 122, 123, 124A and 120B of the IPC. Awadhesh Prasad Sinha, (PW-160) (Ext. 1699), Vice-Chairman of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, retired from the Indian Administrative Service on 30/06/07 as Addl. Chief Secretary, Home, Government of Maharashtra, on which post he was working from 2005 till retirement. Awadhesh Prasad Sinha, (PW-160) (Ext. 1699), Vice-Chairman of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, retired from the Indian Administrative Service on 30/06/07 as Addl. Chief Secretary, Home, Government of Maharashtra, on which post he was working from 2005 till retirement. He received the proposal sent by ACP Patil, PW-186, through the Commissioner of Police. He studied the entire proposal together with the comments of other officers and departments and after he was prima facie and subjectively satisfied about the applicability of the provisions of Chapter III of the UA(P)A, he accorded sanction and then forwarded the file to the minister incharge of the Home Department for consideration of rest of the proposal under the UA(P)A and the Passport Act. He issued the common sanction order Ext.1700 in the first week of January, 2007, under his signature for prosecution under the UA(P)A and the Passport Act. 233. Ruprao Natthuji Deshmukh, (PW-149) (Ext.1602), Jt. Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Maharashtra Government received a proposal from the Jt. CP, ATS for according sanction to prosecute the accused in C. R. No. 5 of 2006 for the offences under sections 121A, 122, 123 and 124A of the IPC. He studied the proposal and discussed it with ACP Patil, PW-186, and after complying with the formalities and the Home Minister giving the approval, he issued the sanction order Ext. 1603 under section 196 of the Cr.P.C. against 13 arrested accused and 15 wanted accused. 234. Sambhaji Sadhashiv Zende, (PW-166) (Ext.1765), was the Collector and District Magistrate, Thane from December, 2006 to September, 2008 and was the competent authority to issue consent for prosecution under section 7 of the Explosive Substances Act as a District Magistrate. He received a proposal in the beginning of March, 2007 from the ATS, Mumbai to issue consent for prosecuting the accused involved in the serial bomb blasts that had taken place in Mumbai in July, 2006. He had discussions with the Addl. District Magistrate, Tahasildar and ACP Patil, PW-186, and after being subjectively satisfied on the basis of the documents that were sent with the proposal and the discussions that he had with ACP Patil, PW-186, and his staff, that the case was fit for according consent, he accorded consent Ext.1766 on 09/03/07 for prosecuting three accused. 235. Valsa Nair Singh, (PW-151) (Ext.1633), was Collector and District Magistrate, Mumbai City from July 2006 to April 2007. 235. Valsa Nair Singh, (PW-151) (Ext.1633), was Collector and District Magistrate, Mumbai City from July 2006 to April 2007. She received a proposal on 02/03/07 from the ATS, Mumbai for consent order for prosecuting six accused in C. R. No. 5 of 2006 regarding the bomb blasts in seven local trains, as required under section 7 of Explosive Substances Act. She went through the proposal, had discussions with ACP Patil, PW-186, scrutinised all the documents and after satisfying herself, issued consent order Ext.1634 on 17/03/07 to prosecute six accused under section 7 of the Explosive Substances Act. 236. Vishwas Mahipati Patil, (PW-165) (Ext.1761), was Collector of Brihanmumbai Suburban District from 15/12/06 to 21/05/10 and had the power to sanction the prosecution under section 7 of the Explosive Substances Act. He got the proposal for grant of sanction to prosecute the accused in this case under the said act in the first week of March, 2007. He scrutinised it and he, the Deputy Collector and Tahsildar went through the proposal and documents sent with it and on perusing the prosposal and the documents, and after applying his mind, he was satisfied that the case was fit for granting the sanction for prosecution. Hence he granted sanction Ext.1762 on 15/03/07 for prosecuting nine persons under the Explosive Substances Act. 237. Thereafter, a trial was conducted. The prosecution examined 189 witnesses. At the same time, the defence has also examined total 51 witnesses, including A.2, A.4, A.5, A.6, A.7, A.8, A.9, A.10, A.11, A.12 and A.13. Moreover, the prosecution has filed total 252 affidavits of formal witnesses comprising of injured persons, panch witnesses of inquest panchnamas, person who helped to take the injured and dead bodies to the hospitals, claimants of dead-bodies, and doctors who had treated the injured. Some of them were examined as witnesses of the prosecution. 238. Moreover, the prosecution has filed total 252 affidavits of formal witnesses comprising of injured persons, panch witnesses of inquest panchnamas, person who helped to take the injured and dead bodies to the hospitals, claimants of dead-bodies, and doctors who had treated the injured. Some of them were examined as witnesses of the prosecution. 238. The learned Special Judge, after hearing both the parties and scrutiny of evidence, in detail, passed the impugned judgment and order convicting the accused for the offences as under: - A.1 - Kamal Ansari : [Sec. 302 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 307 r/w 120-B IPC,Sec. 326 r/w 120-B IPC,Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC, Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC, Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967, Sec. 325 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 324 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 3(b) (Explosive Substances Act, 1908), Sec. 9-B(2) Explosives Act, 1884 - Sentenced to imprisonment for 3 years, Sec. 16 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 3(1)(i) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 3 (4) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 152 (Railways Act, 1989), Sec. 151 (1) and 153 (Railway Act, 1989), Sec. 3 (2) (e) of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984.] A. 2 - Tanveer Ansari : [Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC, Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC, Sec. 120-B IPC r/w 16 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967, Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 120B of IPC r/w 3(1)(i) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA, 1999, Sec. 3 (4) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 9-B(2) Explosives Act, 1884] A.3 - Mohd. Faisal Shaikh : [Sec. 302 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 307 r/w 120- B IPC, Sec. 326 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC,Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC, Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967, Sec. 201 IPC, Sec. 325 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 324 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 3(b) (Explosive Substances Act, 1908), Sec. 6 r/w 4 (ii) Explosive Substances Act, 1908, Sec. 9-B(2) Explosives Act, 1884, Sec. 16 (UAPA Act, 1967), Sec. 19 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 3(1)(i) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA, 1999, Sec. 3(4) MCOCA, 1999, Sec. 3(5) MCOCA, 1999, Sec. 152 (Railways Act, 1989), Sec. 151 (1) and 153 (Railway Act, 1989), Sec. 3 (2) (e) (Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984)] A.4 - Ehtesham Qutubuddin Siddique : [Sec. 302 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 307 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 326 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC, Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC, Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967, Sec. 325 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 324 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 3(b) (Explosive Substances Act, 1908), Sec. 16 (UAPA Act, 1967), Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 3(1)(i) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 3(4) MCOCA, 1999, Sec. 152 (Railways Act, 1989), Sec. 151 (1) and 153 (Railway Act, 1989), Sec. 3 (2) (e) (Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984), Sec. 9- B(2) (Explosives Act, 1884)] A.5 - Mohamad Majid Mohamad Shafi : [Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC, Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC, Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967, Sec. 120-B IPC r/w 16 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 120B of IPC r/w 3(1)(i) MCOCA,1999,Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA, 1999, Sec. 3 (4) MCOCA, 1999] A.6 - Shaikh Mohd. Ali Alam Shaikh : [Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC, Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC, Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967, Sec. 120-B IPC r/w 16 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 120B of IPC r/w 3(1)(i) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 3(1) (ii) & 3(2) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 3 (4) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 6 r/w 4 (ii) Explosive Substances Act, 1908, Sec. 9-B(2) Explosives Act, 1884] A.7 - Mohammad Sajid Margub Ansari : [Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC, Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC, Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967, Sec. 120-B IPC r/w 16 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 201 IPC, Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 120B of IPC r/w 3(1)(i) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 3 (4) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 6 r/w 4(ii) Explosive Substances Act, 1908] A.9 - Muzzammil Ataur Rahman Shaikh : [Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC, Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC, Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967, Sec. 120-B IPC r/w 16 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 120B of IPC r/w 3(1)(i) MCOCA, 1999, Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 3(4) MCOCA, 1999] A.10 - Suhail Mehmood Shaikh : [Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC, Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC, Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967, Sec. 120-B IPC r/w 16 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 120B of IPC r/w 3(1)(i) MCOCA, 1999, Sec. 3(1) (ii) & 3(2) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 3 (4) MCOCA, 1999] A.11 - Zameer Ahmed Latifur Rehman Shaikh : [Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC, Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC, Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967, Sec. 120-B IPC r/w 16 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 120B of IPC r/w 3(1)(i) MCOCA, 1999, Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA, 1999, Sec. 3 (4) MCOCA,1999] A.12 - Naveed Hussain Khan Rasheed Hussain Khan : [Sec. 302 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 307 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 326 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 120- B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC, Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC, Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967, Sec. 325 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 324 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 3(b) (Explosive Substances Act, 1908), Sec. 9-B(2) Explosives Act, 1884, Sec. 16 (UAPA Act, 1967), Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 3(1) (i) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA, 1999, Sec. 3(4) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 152 (Railways Act, 1989), Sec. 151 (1) and 153 (Railway Act, 1989), Sec. 3 (2)(e) (Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984)] A.13 - Asif Khan Bashir Khan : [Sec. 302 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 307 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 326 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 120-B r/w 121-A and 122 IPC, Sec. 120-B r/w 123 IPC, Sec. 120-B of IPC r/w 13(1) UAPA, 1967, Sec. 201 IPC, Sec. 325 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 324 r/w 120-B IPC, Sec. 3(b) (Explosive Substances Act, 1908), Sec. 6 r/w 4 (ii) Explosive Substances Act, 1908, Sec. 9-B(2) Explosives Act, 1884, Sec. 16 (UAPA Act, 1967), Sec. 20 (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 10 (a) (i) (UAPA, 1967), Sec. 3(1)(i) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 3(1)(ii) & 3(2) MCOCA, 1999, Sec. 3 (4) MCOCA,1999, Sec. 152 (Railways Act, 1989), Sec. 151 (1) and 153 (Railway Act, 1989), Sec. 3 (2) (e) (Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984)] 239. A.1, A.3, A.4, A.12, and A.13 are punished with death penalty. Accordingly, this reference under section 366(1) of Cr.PC is made to this Court for confirmation. Accordingly, the confirmation as well as the appeals filed by the accused are heard together. 240. At this juncture, before proceeding, it is beneficial to look into the scope of section 366(1) of Cr.PC. 241. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Mohinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2013) 3 SCC 294 , has held thus : “10. We are conscious of the fact that in terms of Section 366(1) of the Code, “when the Court of Session passes a sentence of death, the proceedings shall be submitted to the High Court, and the sentence shall not be executed unless it is confirmed by the High Court.” The scope and application of the above section is only in cases where a sentence of death has been passed by the Court of Session. The Court of Session should refer the proceedings to the High Court and the High Court can only deal with them as a court of reference. It is the practice of the High Court to be satisfied on the facts as well as the law of the case, that the conviction is right, before it proceeds to confirm that sentence. In other words, the High Court has to come to its own independent conclusion as to the guilt or innocence of the accused, independently of the opinion of the Sessions Judge. In a reference for confirmation of death sentence, the High Court must examine the entire evidence for itself independent of the Session Court's views. While confirming the capital sentence, the High Court is under an obligation to itself consider what sentence should be imposed and not be content with the trial court's decision on the point unless some reason is shown for reducing the same. Where, in addition to an appeal filed by an accused sentenced to death, the High Court has to dispose of the reference for confirmation of death sentence under Section 366 of the Code, the High Court, while dealing with reference, should consider the proceedings in all its aspects and come to an independent conclusion on the material on record apart from the views expressed by the Sessions Judge. The confirmation of death sentence cannot be based only on the precedents and/or aggravating facts and circumstances of any other case.” 242. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 684 has held thus : 157. We may next notice other provisions of the extant Code (corresponding to Sections 374, 375, 376 and 377 of the repealed Code) bearing on capital punishment. Section 366(1) of the Code requires the court passing a sentence of death to submit the proceedings to the High Court, and further mandates that such a sentence shall not be executed unless it is confirmed by the High Court. On such a reference for confirmation of death sentence, the High Court is required to proceed in accordance with Sections 367 and 368. Section 367 gives power to the High Court to direct further inquiry to be made or additional evidence to be taken. Section 368 empowers the High Court to confirm the sentence of death or pass any other sentence warranted by law; or to annul or alter the conviction or order a new trial or acquit the accused. Section 369 enjoins that in every case so submitted, the confirmation of the sentence, or any new sentence or order passed by the High Court, shall, when such court consists of two or more Judges, be made, passed and signed by at least two of them. Section 370 provides that where any such case is heard before a Bench of Judges and such Judges are equally divided in opinion, the case shall be referred to a third Judge. 157-A. In this fasciculus of sections relating to confirmation proceedings in the High Court, the legislature has provided valuable safeguards of the life and liberty of the subject in cases of capital sentences. These provisions seek to ensure that where in a capital case, the life of the convicted person is at stake, the entire evidential material bearing on the innocence or guilt of the accused and the question of sentence must be scrutinised with utmost caution and care by a superior court. (emphasis supplied) 158. The High Court has been given very wide powers under these provisions to prevent any possible miscarriage of justice. (emphasis supplied) 158. The High Court has been given very wide powers under these provisions to prevent any possible miscarriage of justice. In State of Maharashtra v. Sindhi [ (1975) 1 SCC 647 : 1975 SCC (Cri) 283 : AIR 1975 SC 1665 ] , this Court reiterated, with emphasis, that while dealing with a reference for confirmation of a sentence of death, the High Court must consider the proceedings in all their aspects, reappraise, reassess and reconsider the entire facts and law and, if necessary, after taking additional evidence, come to its own conclusions on the material on record in regard to the conviction of the accused (and the sentence) independently of the view expressed by the Sessions Judge. 243. In the teeth of the law discussed hereinabove, about the scope of confirmation, we now proceed to examine the correctness of the impugned judgment and order imposing death penalty to A.1, A.3, A.4, A.12, and A.13 for the purpose of confirmation. At the same time, we will also examine the merit in the appeals filed by the accused. 244. On 11/07/2006, seven bomb blasts had taken place in first class compartments of seven different local trains, resulting in deaths of 187 persons and causing injuries to around 827 persons, is an admitted fact, as it is not disputed by anyone. Thus, the discussion hereinbelow would be to find out an answer to a question whether the accused are the perpetrators of the bomb blasts? 245. The prosecution, while supporting the judgment of the trial court, has relied upon three categories of evidence. The evidence is namely: - (1) The eyewitnesses who claim to have seen the accused while taking them to Churchgate station in their taxis, or while planting the bombs in the trains, or while making the bombs, or while hatching the conspiracy. There are total eight such witnesses namely, PW-63, PW-77, PW-57, PW-60, PW-62, PW74, PW-75 and PW-59. (2) Recoveries of RDX, granules, detonators, books and maps, CPUs, wires, printed circuit board, soldering gun, pressure cooker, a Maruti-800 car, etc. (3) The confessional statements of the A.1, A.2, A.3, A.4, A.5, A.6, A.7, A.9, A.10, A.11, and A.12. 246. We have dealt with the above referred evidence independtly, category-wise, in the same sequence. 247. (2) Recoveries of RDX, granules, detonators, books and maps, CPUs, wires, printed circuit board, soldering gun, pressure cooker, a Maruti-800 car, etc. (3) The confessional statements of the A.1, A.2, A.3, A.4, A.5, A.6, A.7, A.9, A.10, A.11, and A.12. 246. We have dealt with the above referred evidence independtly, category-wise, in the same sequence. 247. The first category of evidence, i.e., evidence of eyewitnesses has been challenged by the defence on numerous grounds, including trustworthiness and credibility of these witnesses, and some of them are either got up witnesses or stock witnesses, etc. 248. The second category of evidence is challenged by the defence on many grounds, including the ground that the recovered articles, including the RDX, were not kept in a proper custody and in a sealed condition throughout, till the time it was sent to the FSL, etc. 249. The admissibility of the confessional statements is also challenged on various grounds, including the grounds namely, validity of prior approval to invoke MCOCA, the voluntariness of the confessional statements, truthfulness/completeness of the confessional statements, extortion of confessional statements by inflicting torture, etc. 250. We accordingly proceed to examine the above referred evidence as under. EYEWITNESSES T.I. Parade 251. The multiple T.I. Parades were conducted in this case on 07/11/2006 and 08/11/2006. Total seven witnesses identified the accused in T.I. Parades and also in the court. Four out of them claimed to have seen the accused planting the bombs in the trains. Two witnesses (taxi drivers) claimed to have ferried the accused to Churchgate Station in their taxis. The seventh one claimed that he saw the accused preparing bombs. 252. Whereas, the eighth witness, who claimed to have witnessed the accused hatching the conspiracy, identified the accused in court. This witness was not called for the T.I. Parade. 253. There is one more witness who was an injured witness, and he claimed to have seen the suspects after they alighted the train. His statement u/s 161 of Cr.PC was recorded within a short span of the incident, and with his help, two sketches of the suspects were prepared, but he was not called for TIP. Though he was examined, he was not asked to identify the accused in the Court. 254. Following table states the names of the above referred eyewitnesses, dates of sighting, the dates of their statements u/s 161 of Cr.PC, and the accused they have identified. Though he was examined, he was not asked to identify the accused in the Court. 254. Following table states the names of the above referred eyewitnesses, dates of sighting, the dates of their statements u/s 161 of Cr.PC, and the accused they have identified. CHART NO. 30 Sr. No. Name of the Eyewitness Date of Sighting Date of S.161 Statement Accused Identified 1. PW-60 Kishore Popatlal Shah 11.07.06 14.07.06 A.13 2. PW-57 Subhash Nagarsekar 11.07.06 18.10.06 A.1 3. PW-62 Devendra Lahu Patil 11.07.06 20.10.06 A.3 4. PW-75 Amar Sardar Khan 08.07.06 or 09.07.06 28.10.06 A.2, A.4, A.6 & A.7 5. PW-74 Vishal Kishore Parmar 11.07.06 02.11.06 A.4 6. PW-59 Alam Gulam Qureshi February, March & May 2006 02.11.06 A.2, A.3, A.4, A.9, A.10, A.12, & A.13 7. PW-63 Santosh Kedar Singh 11.07.06 03.11.06 A.13 8. PW–77 Rajesh Satpute 11.07.06 03.11.06 A.3 9. PW-85 Lalji Pande 11.07.06 27.07.06, Supplementary statement - 21.08.06 --- 255. Other than these nine eyewitnesses, there are five more witnesses who were the injured passengers. However, none of these witnesses was examined or called for T.I. Parade. It is to be noted that, within a short span of time after the incident, the police recorded their statements u/s 161 of Cr.PC, wherein they claimed to have seen some suspects keeping bag in the trains. 256. One more eyewitness is there who is a shop keeper. According to him, some Kashmiri persons purchased eight cookers from him. 257. The table given herein under will show the names of such witnesses and the dates on which their statements u/s 161 of Cr.PC were recorded. CHART NO. 31 Sr. No. Name of the Witness Date of S.161 Statement 1. Suresh Suvarna (Injured Passenger in Borivali blast) 15.07.06 2. Constable Santosh Prakash Khanvilkar (Injured Passenger in Borivali blast) 22.07.06 3. Ramanand Marutirao Machchevar (Injured Passenger in Mira Road blast) 12.07.06 4. Prabhakar Dattatray Sadekar (Injured Passenger in Borivali blast) 13.07.06 and Supplementary Statement on 09.08.06 5. Vijaykumar Babanna Rayappa (Injured Passenger in Jogeshwari blast) 05.08.06 6. Mohanlal Kumawat (shopkeeper in Santa Cruz East) 28.09.2006 258. In the Chart No. 30 of nine witnesses, the dates of statements under Section 161 of Cr.PC show that, except the statement of PW-60 and PW-85, the statements of all other witnesses were recorded after a delay of 100 or more days, i.e., after more than three months. 259. Mohanlal Kumawat (shopkeeper in Santa Cruz East) 28.09.2006 258. In the Chart No. 30 of nine witnesses, the dates of statements under Section 161 of Cr.PC show that, except the statement of PW-60 and PW-85, the statements of all other witnesses were recorded after a delay of 100 or more days, i.e., after more than three months. 259. Similarly, there is a delay of four months in conducting the T.I. Parade, which is one of the common grounds to raise a question to the fairness in conducting the T.I. Parades. 260. These witnesses may be categorized as follows: - i) The taxi drivers who took A.3 and A.13 to Churchgate station (PW-63 & PW-77), ii) The witnesses who saw the accused planting bomb in the trains (PW-57, PW-60, PW-62, & PW-74), iii) The witness to assembling of bombs (PW-75), iv) The witness to the conspiracy (PW-59), v) The injured witness who saw the suspects while alighting the train. He was not called for T.I. Parade, though with the help of him, two sketches of suspects were prepared. Further, though he was examined, he was not asked to identify the accused in the Court (PW-85), and vi) The witnesses, who saw the suspects and gave their statements u/s 161 of Cr.PC within short span of the incident, with the description of the suspects, but were neither called for T.I. Parade nor examined as witnesses (Total 6 witnesses). 261. The T.I. Parades were conducted by two Special Executive Officers (SEOs), namely, Shri. Barve and Shri. Purandare. 262. The T.I. Parades of A.1, A.3, A.12, and A.13 were conducted by Shri. Barve on 07/11/2006, wherein A.1 was identified by PW-57, A.3 was identified by PW-62 and PW-77, A.13 was identified by PW-60 and PW-63, and no one identified A.12. A challenge to the validity of the T.I. Parades conducted by Shri. Barve is raised by the defence on the ground that Shri. Barve was not an SEO on the date of T.I. Parade conducted by him on 07/11/2006, therefore, the T.I. Parades conducted by him vitiate. Since this point goes to the root of the validity of T.I. Parade, we intend to deal with it first. Authority of Shri. Barve as SEO 263. Learned Counsel Shri. Chaudhary has argued that the appointment of Shri. Barve as SEO expired on 07/05/2005 and his fresh appointment was made on 15/11/2006. Since this point goes to the root of the validity of T.I. Parade, we intend to deal with it first. Authority of Shri. Barve as SEO 263. Learned Counsel Shri. Chaudhary has argued that the appointment of Shri. Barve as SEO expired on 07/05/2005 and his fresh appointment was made on 15/11/2006. Thus, from 07/05/2005 to 15/11/2006, he had no authority to conduct T.I. Parades. Whereas, he conducted T.I. Parades on 07/11/2006. 264. The learned SPP, in reply, has argued that Shri. Barve was continued after 07/05/2005 as SEO and had authority as SEO on 07/11/2006 to conduct the parade. It is further argued that the T.I. Parades held by Shri. Barve were held under the bona fide belief that he was a duly empowered SEO and all precautions, as required, were duly complied with. It is submitted that it is a settled law that a T.I. Parade is mainly for the guidance of the investigating agency as to whether they are proceeding in the right direction. It is submitted that the witnesses identified these accused in the court also, which is a substantive evidence. 265. It is evident from the record that, Shri. Barve (PW-82) was appointed as SEO vide Government Resolution dated 08th May 2001 (Exh.4307), for four years, and assigned a stamp bearing Sr. No. 631. The aforesaid period of four years expired on 07/05/2005. 266. The government issued GRs dated 22/06/2006 and 23/06/2006 (Exh.4377) appointing SEOs. One Mr. Lakampalli Shamkumar was appointed as SEO, who was assigned the Stamp bearing Sr. No. 631, vide GR dated 23/06/2006. 267. It is pertinent to note that Shri. Barve used the Stamp bearing no. 631, which was assigned to Shri. Lakampalli Shamkumar, while conducting the T.I. Parades of A.1, A.3, A.12, and A.13 on 07/11/2006. In this backdrop, the prosecution failed to bring any evidence on record to show that, after the expiry of period of appointment of Shri. Barve (PW-82) as SEO on 07/05/2005, he was continued till his fresh appointment vide GR dated 15/11/2006. 268. The fact that on the date of T.I. Parade, on 07/11/2006, Shri. Barve (PW-82) was not SEO is fortified by his cross-examination. He deposed that he was appointed as SEO again on 15/11/2006 up to 15/11/2011. However, he showed ignorance about the date of his appointment as SEO before 15/11/2006 and the date up to which his appointment was. 269. The fact that on the date of T.I. Parade, on 07/11/2006, Shri. Barve (PW-82) was not SEO is fortified by his cross-examination. He deposed that he was appointed as SEO again on 15/11/2006 up to 15/11/2011. However, he showed ignorance about the date of his appointment as SEO before 15/11/2006 and the date up to which his appointment was. 269. Thus, we have no hesitation to hold that on the date of T.I. Parade, i.e. 07/11/2006, Shri. Barve (PW-82) had no authority to conduct T.I. Parade, and hence, the T.I. Parades of A.1, A.3, A.12, and A.13 conducted by him vitiate and need to be discarded. 270. However, the fact that these accused were also identified in dock identification, cannot be ignored in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Budhsep vs. State of UP (1970) 2 SCC 128 , wherein it has been held that the identification parades belong to the investigation stage. They are generally held during the course of investigation with the primary object of enabling the witnesses to identify persons concerned in the offence, who were not previously known to them. This serves to satisfy the investigating officers of the bonafides of the prosecution witnesses and also to furnish evidence to corroborate their testimony in Court. It is further held that the identification of the accused in the court constitutes substantive evidence. 271. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Bollavaram Pedda Narsi Reddy v. State of A.P., (1991) 3 SCC 434 , has held thus: - “8. The evidence given by the witnesses before the court is the substantive evidence. In a case where the witness is a stranger to the accused and he identifies the accused person before the court for the first time, the court will not ordinarily accept that identification as conclusive. It is to lend assurance to the testimony of the witnesses that evidence in the form of an earlier identification is tendered. If the accused persons are got identified by the witness soon after their arrest and such identification does not suffer from any infirmity that circumstance lends corroboration to the evidence given by the witness before the court. But in a case where the evidence before the court is itself shaky, the identification before the magistrate would be of no assistance to the prosecution.” 272. But in a case where the evidence before the court is itself shaky, the identification before the magistrate would be of no assistance to the prosecution.” 272. Thus, it is incumbent upon the Court to exercise caution while scrutinising the evidence of the witnesses who identified A.1, A.3, and A.13 in the Court, as if there is no T.I. Parade. 273. Let us, therefore, first reiterate the law as regards dock identification in absence of T.I. Parade. 274. In the case of Dana Yadav v. State of Bihar, (2002) 7 SCC 295 , the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held that, if a witness identifies the accused in court for the first time, the probative value of such uncorroborated evidence becomes minimal so much so that it becomes, as a rule of prudence and not law, unsafe to rely on such a piece of evidence. 275. However, there are exceptions to this general rule, one of which is where the court is impressed by a particular witness on whose testimony it can safely rely, without such other corroboration, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Budhsep (supra) 276. The other exceptions as carved out in the following authorities are as under: - i) The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Sukhdev Singh (1992) 3 SCC 700 , laid down that if a witness had any particular reason to remember about the identity of an accused, in that event, the case can be brought under the exception and upon solitary evidence of identification of an accused in court for the first time, conviction can be based. ii) The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Ronny vs. State of Maharashtra (1998) 3 SCC 625 , has observed that where the witness had a chance to interact with the accused or that in a case where the witness had an opportunity to notice the distinctive features of the accused which lends assurance to his testimony in court, the evidence of identification in court for the first time by such a witness cannot be thrown away merely because no test identification parade was held 277. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Bollavaram Pedda (supra), has held that the credibility of the evidence relating to the identification depends largely on the opportunity the witness had to observe the assailants when the crime was committed and memorize the impression. The visibility of the light at the place of occurrence and proximity to the assailants had a clear vision of the action of each one of the accused persons in order that their features could get impressed in their mind to enable them to recollect the same and identify the assailants even after a long lapse of time. 278. Thus, it is evident that to the general rule that if a witness identifies the accused in Court for the first time, the probative value of such uncorroborated evidence becomes minimal, the exceptions are : - i) Where the Court is impressed by a particular witness, ii) If a witness had any particular reason to remember about the identity of an accused, iii) The witness had a chance to interact with the accused, and iv) The witness had an opportunity to notice the distinctive features of the accused. 279. In the teeth of above referred observations, let us now revert back to the facts of the present case. First Category of Witnesses The taxi drivers who took A.3 and A.13 to Churchgate (PW-63 & PW-77) 280. We have already categorized the witnesses in six categories. Witnesses PW-63 and PW-77 fall in the first category, i.e., the taxi drivers who took A.3 and A.13 to Churchgate in their taxis on the day of the incident. We, therefore, first proceed to scrutinize and examine the evidence of PW-63 and PW-77. 281. Learned defence counsel submits that till 02/11/2006, PW-63 and PW-77 did not think that they had any important information about the bomb blast. It is argued that as PW-63 and PW-77 had no reason to remember the passengers they took to Churchgate, it strains credence and is unbelievable that they remember and can accurately identify the passengers. It is submitted that PW-63 admits that after about a week, it is difficult to remember a passenger and it becomes more difficult after a month. 282. It is submitted that PW-63 admits that after about a week, it is difficult to remember a passenger and it becomes more difficult after a month. 282. Learned SPP, while justifying as to how do PW-63 and PW-77 remember so much about that particular day, submitted that the human tendency is such that we recollect the memories of special days. It is submitted that both the witnesses have stated about such special events in their evidence, because of which, they both could recollect the description of A.3 and A.13. 283. In light of the above referred rival submissions, on perusal of record, it is evident that though PW-63 and PW-77 claimed to have taken A.13 and A.3 respectively, in their taxis on 11/07/2006, they remained silent till 02/11/2006 and did not disclose anything to anyone about it. 284. The statements of these witnesses under Section 161 of Cr.PC were recorded on the same day, i.e., 03/11/2006 (after 116 days of sighting). 285. PW-63 identified A.13 in Court on 17/01/2011. Whereas, PW77 identified A.3 on 16/03/2011. Thus, the dock identification of both the accused is after more than a period of four and half years. 286. As we have seen the exceptions to the general rule of identifying the accused first time in the Court without corroborated evidence of T.I. Parade, namely, 1) if a witness had any particular reason to remember about the identity of an accused, 2) the witness had a chance to interact with the accused, and 3) the witness had an opportunity to notice the distinctive features of the accused, let us thus, examine the impact on memory with the passage of time. 287. There are many psychological and neurological studies that support the idea that memory fades over time, but can be re-triggered or recalled under certain conditions. It is known as ‘memory retrieval through cues’ or ‘cue-dependent memory’. There is another study involving emotional memory triggers, which helps explain why we vividly remember emotionally intense events sometimes even years later. 288. There are two theories. One is decay theory. The other one is cue-dependent theory. Decay theory suggests memory fades simply with time. However, cue-dependent theory says that the memory isn’t gone. It is just inaccessible until the right trigger or cue occurs. Sensory cues, contextual cues, emotional states, words, phrase, or conversation are stimuli that help bring a memory to the surface. 289. One is decay theory. The other one is cue-dependent theory. Decay theory suggests memory fades simply with time. However, cue-dependent theory says that the memory isn’t gone. It is just inaccessible until the right trigger or cue occurs. Sensory cues, contextual cues, emotional states, words, phrase, or conversation are stimuli that help bring a memory to the surface. 289. At the same time, it would be beneficial to refer the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Pargan Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in (2014) 14 SCC 619 , wherein it has observed on the theory of ‘memory’ as under: - “18. Before entering upon the discussion on this aspect specific to this case, we would like to make some general observations on the theory of “memory”. Scientific understanding of how memory works is described by Geoffrey R. Loftus while commenting upon the judgment dated 16-1-2002 rendered in Javier Suarez Medina v. Janie Cockrell [Case No. 01-10763, decided on 16-1-2002 (5th Cir 2002)] by the United States Court of Appeals. He has explained that a generally accepted theory of this process was first explicated in detail by Neisser (1967) and has been continually refined over the intervening quarter-century. The basic tenets of the theory are as follows: 18.1. First, memory does not work like a video recorder. Instead, when a person witnesses some complex event, such as a crime, or an accident, or a wedding, or a basketball game, he or she acquires fragments of information from the environment. These fragments are then integrated with other information from other sources. Examples of such sources are: information previously stored in memory that leads to prior expectations about what will happen, and information—both information from external sources, and information generated internally in the form of inferences—that is acquired after the event has occurred. The result of this amalgamation of information is the person's memory for the event. Sometimes this memory is accurate, and other times it is inaccurate. An initial memory of some event, once formed, is not “cast in concrete”. Rather, a memory is a highly fluid entity that changes, sometimes dramatically, with the passage of time. Every time a witness thinks about some event—revisits his or her memory of it— the memory changes in some fashion. Such changes take many forms. An initial memory of some event, once formed, is not “cast in concrete”. Rather, a memory is a highly fluid entity that changes, sometimes dramatically, with the passage of time. Every time a witness thinks about some event—revisits his or her memory of it— the memory changes in some fashion. Such changes take many forms. For instance, a witness can make inferences about how things probably happened, and these inferences become part of the memory. New information that is consistent with the witness's beliefs about what must have happened can be integrated into the memory. Details that do not seem to fit a coherent story of what happened can be stripped away. In short, the memory possessed by the witness at some later point (e.g. when the witness testifies in court) can be quite different from the memory that the witness originally formed at the time of the event. 18.2. Memory researchers study how memory works using a variety of techniques. A common technique is to try to identify circumstances under which memory is inaccurate versus circumstances under which memory is accurate. These efforts have revealed four major categorys of circumstances under which memory tends to be inaccurate. The first two categorys of circumstances involve what is happening at the time the to-beremembered event is originally experienced, while the second two categorys of circumstances involve things that happen after the event has ended. 18.3. The first category of circumstances involves the state of the environment at the time the event is experienced. Examples of poor environmental conditions include poor lighting, obscured or interrupted vision, and long viewing distance. To the degree that environmental conditions are poor, there is relatively poor information on which to base an initial perception and the memory that it engenders to begin with. This will ultimately result in a memory that is at best incomplete and, as will be described in more detail below, is at worst systematically distorted. 18.4. The second category of circumstances involves the state of the observer at the time the event is experienced. Examples of suboptimal observer states include high stress, perceived or directly inflicted violence, viewing members of different races, and diverted attention. As with poor environmental factors, this will ultimately result in a memory that is at best incomplete and, as will be described in more detail below, is at worst systematically distorted. 18.5. Examples of suboptimal observer states include high stress, perceived or directly inflicted violence, viewing members of different races, and diverted attention. As with poor environmental factors, this will ultimately result in a memory that is at best incomplete and, as will be described in more detail below, is at worst systematically distorted. 18.5. The third category of circumstances involves what occurs during the retention interval that intervenes between the to-beremembered event and the time the person tries to remember aspects of the event. Examples of memory-distorting problems include a lengthy retention interval, which leads to forgetting, and inaccurate information learned by the person during the retention interval that can get incorporated into the person's memory for the original event. 18.6. The fourth category of circumstances involves errors introduced at the time of retrieval i.e. at the time the person is trying to remember what he or she experienced. Such problems include biased tests and leading questions. They can lead to a biased report of the person's memory and can also potentially change and bias the memory itself.” 290. In the case at hand, since we are dealing with identification of accused by the witnesses either in T.I. Parade or in dock identification, which mainly relates to face recognition, it is relevant to know about face recognition. 291. Studies show that face recognition is primarily handled by a specific part of the brain. It processes and stores facial features as complex visual patterns. If you met the person regularly before the break, you are more likely to recognise them later. A single brief encounter may not leave a strong imprint unless it was emotionally or contextually significant. Faces associated with emotionally impactful or unique events are remembered better. For example, you might remember a person you met during a crisis more than someone from a routine meeting. Unusual features (hairstyle, facial structure, voice) aid recognition. Generic or familiar looking faces are harder to recall precisely after some time. Seeing the person in a similar context, for example, same office, same spot acts as a cue. 292. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Lal Singh v. State of U.P., (2003) 12 SCC 554 , has held that where there is an inordinate delay in holding a test identification parade, the court must adopt a cautious approach so as to prevent miscarriage of justice. 292. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Lal Singh v. State of U.P., (2003) 12 SCC 554 , has held that where there is an inordinate delay in holding a test identification parade, the court must adopt a cautious approach so as to prevent miscarriage of justice. In case of inordinate delay, it may be that the witnesses may forget the features of the accused put up for identification in the test identification parade. It is further held that this, however, is not an absolute rule because it depends upon the facts of each case and the opportunity which the witnesses had to notice the features of the accused and the circumstances in which they had seen the accused committing the offence. Where the witness had only a fleeting glimpse of the accused at the time of occurrence, delay in holding a test identification parade has to be viewed seriously. Where, however, the court is satisfied that the witnesses had ample opportunity of seeing the accused at the time of the commission of the offence and there is no chance of mistaken identity, delay in holding the test identification parade may not be held to be fatal. It all depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case. 293. As it is the case of the prosecution that A.3 and A.13 traveled in the taxis of PW-77 and PW-63, respectively to go to Churchgate, it was a brief and single encounter and there was no previous acquaintance. These witnesses, as we have noted, identified A.3 and A.13 in dock identification after four and half years of sighting. In case of such inordinate delay, an exception to the rule of a possibility that the witness may forget the features of the accused is that, the witness had ample opportunity of seeing the accused at the time of commission of offence. 294. In the present matter, there was a single encounter of the witnesses PW-63 and PW-77 with A.13 and A.3, respectively. Therefore, it is important to ascertain whether, in this case, both these witnesses had ample opportunity of seeing the accused to recollect their faces after such a long delay. 295. It is a matter of common knowledge that the taxi drivers in Mumbai operate in a manner distinct from many of the cities across India. Therefore, it is important to ascertain whether, in this case, both these witnesses had ample opportunity of seeing the accused to recollect their faces after such a long delay. 295. It is a matter of common knowledge that the taxi drivers in Mumbai operate in a manner distinct from many of the cities across India. Therefore, to appreciate the evidence of both these witnesses in right perspective, it is necessary to understand how the taxis operate in Mumbai. 296. It is a matter of general public knowledge and common experience for anyone who travels by taxi in Mumbai that, prior to commencing the journey, there is no need for elaborate instructions or negotiations with the driver. The passenger simply states the intended destination, upon which, the driver either agrees or declines by a simple gesture or verbal response. Many times a passenger first boards the taxi and then tells the destination. 297. With respect to the fare, there is no opportunity or practice of bargaining, as the fare is calculated strictly in accordance with the fare meter installed in the taxi. This meter automatically determines the total payable amount based on the distance travelled and displays the fare upon reaching the destination. 298. Furthermore, upon arrival at the destination, it is customary for the driver to inform the passenger of the fare without getting down from the vehicle. The fare is received by the driver while he remains seated in the driver’s seat. 299. From the above discussion of the manner in which taxi drivers operate in Mumbai, it can be certainly said that, in normal circumstances, there is hardly any chance for any taxi driver to have long interaction with any passenger and to have sufficient and ample opportunity to notice and observe the passengers and their faces, and to store the same in the memory for long period, unless there is some special reason. PW-63 fairly admits in his deposition that it is difficult to remember a passenger after a week and it becomes more difficult after a month. Although this ability to recall a human memory appears general, it is specific in respect of such ability of PW-63, because the said admission is applicable to him, which is important here. 300. If a witness identified an accused, it means the witness identified the accused by his face. Although this ability to recall a human memory appears general, it is specific in respect of such ability of PW-63, because the said admission is applicable to him, which is important here. 300. If a witness identified an accused, it means the witness identified the accused by his face. Hence, identification in TI parade and court refer to facial recognition. Therefore, memory involved must relate to the person, not just the event. A witness’ memory must link to actual person, predominantly through facial recognition. Let us, therefore, scrutinize the evidence of PW-63 and PW-77 to ascertain what opportunity both the witnesses had, to notice and observe A.13 and A.3, and their faces. 301. However, before making such scrutiny, it is also important to note few important aspects, other than the delay in identification, which demand to have a cautious approach while appreciating the evidence of these witnesses. Such aspects are namely: - i) Both these witnesses PW-63 and PW-77 did not go to police on their own till 03/11/2006 (for 116 days). According to them, they did not think they had any important information. ii) As per the prosecution, police had undertaken search for 15 days to find out taxi drivers who had taken the accused by taxis to Churchgate. There are no station diary entries to this effect to establish the said fact. iii) Both these witnesses were searched by the police on the same day, i.e., on 03/11/2006. There is no case diary entry showing that on 03/11/2006 police went for search of taxi drivers at some particular location/s. iv) The police could search them only after retraction of the confessional statements by the accused. v) According to the defence, these witnesses are got up witnesses. vi) Constable P.N. Salvi, who searched PW-77, did not enter into the witness box. PW-63 Santosh Kedar Singh 302. While narrating an incidence of encounter of PW-63 with A.13, PW-63 deposed that, at about 3.15 to 3.30 p.m., two passengers came for Churchgate. One of them had a black heavy bag and an umbrella. They sat in his taxi on the back seat, keeping the bag in between them. He took them to Churchgate. En route they told him to drive the taxi carefully as the articles that they had with them were delicate. They asked him how much time it would take. One of them had a black heavy bag and an umbrella. They sat in his taxi on the back seat, keeping the bag in between them. He took them to Churchgate. En route they told him to drive the taxi carefully as the articles that they had with them were delicate. They asked him how much time it would take. He told them that it would take about one hour and if required more than that. 303. In this part of his narration, admittedly, PW-63 nowhere states about any interaction taken place between them before A.13 sat on the back seat of the taxi. In this part, there is also no mention about anything unnatural found by PW-63 relating to the behaviour or anything of the accused. 304. PW-63 further deposed that he left them at the subway by which one can go to Churchgate station. The fare was Rs.180/-. They gave him a note of Rs.500/-. He did not have change to return the balance amount to them. He told them that he would bring it and they should wait for two minutes. However, they were in a hurry and they told him to keep the change. They got down taking the bag with them. This was his first experience about passengers keeping such a big amount of change. He deposed that, normally, before they take passengers, they look at the passengers. En route one of the passengers was talking in Mumbai-Hindi language and the other was talking somewhat in Punjabi language. One of the passengers was medium built aged about 30-35 years and the other was thin aged about 23-25 years. 305. In this subsequent part of PW-63’s narration, again there is no mention about any interaction with accused, which facilitated him to have sufficient opportunity to notice and observe A.13 and his face. 306. From his own version, it is evident that A.13 paid the fare amount while sitting in the back seat of the taxi before they alighted. In absence of any contrary evidence, it can safely be presumed that PW-63 accepted the amount while sitting in his driver seat. 307. Thus, the encounter of A.13 with PW-63 can be said to be a brief encounter. And, there was no sufficient opportunity for PW-63 to observe and notice A.13 and his face and store it in his memory. 308. 307. Thus, the encounter of A.13 with PW-63 can be said to be a brief encounter. And, there was no sufficient opportunity for PW-63 to observe and notice A.13 and his face and store it in his memory. 308. As far as triggering of memory of PW-63 is concerned, it is tried to be canvassed before this Court by the prosecution that it was his first experience that some passenger gave him Rs. 500 for a fare of Rs. 180. 309. This possibility, as suggested by the prosecution, may not be ruled out. However, it would help PW-63 to trigger his memory to recollect the events relating to this incidence or events prior to or after this incidence. But, we are ascertaining the possibility of recollection of face of A.13 after a huge gap, that too in absence of any evidence brought on record for justifying the reasons to recollect the face of A.13. No one will have any quarrel on the point that identification of an accused by a witness, either in identification parade or in dock identification, means that the witness identified the accused by his ‘face’. 310. Therefore, having held that PW-63 had no sufficient opportunity to interact with A.13 or to observe and notice him minutely, it can be said that an exception to the rule that if a witness identifies the accused in Court first time, the probative value of such uncorroborated evidence becomes minimal, is absent. In that view of the matter, the manner in which PW-63 got to the police as the witness and considering the fact that the present matter pertains to capital punishment, we are of the opinion that it is highly unsafe to rely upon the evidence of PW-63 to hold A.13 as guilty. PW-77 Rajesh Satpute 311. Similar is the quality of evidence of PW-77, another taxi driver who claimed to have taken A.3 in his taxi on the date of incident from Carter Road, Bandra to Churchgate. 312. However, before scrutinizing the evidence of PW-77, there is one important question raised by the defence that no T.I. Parade was conducted. In his statements u/s 313 and 314 of Cr.PC, A.3 states that he was taken out from the Anda Cell at around 1:30 pm and he was put back at 1:50pm and no TIP was held. 313. 312. However, before scrutinizing the evidence of PW-77, there is one important question raised by the defence that no T.I. Parade was conducted. In his statements u/s 313 and 314 of Cr.PC, A.3 states that he was taken out from the Anda Cell at around 1:30 pm and he was put back at 1:50pm and no TIP was held. 313. This submission made by the defence requires us to look into the Awak-Jawak Register (Ingress-Egress Register) maintained in the Arthur Road Jail and referred by the defence. 314. The entries taken in such Awak-Jawak Register, in relation to the T.I. Parade of A.3, held on 07/11/2006, are as under: - CHART NO. 32 Register at Arthur Road Jail (Exh. 2474) TIP Memo SEO: PW 82 - Shashikant Barve Outward Inward Panchnama Start Panchnama End 07/11/2006, 1:30 pm 07/11/2006, 1:50 pm 07/11/2006, 1:30 pm ---- 315. From the above referred chart, it can be seen that A.3 was taken out of the barrack at 1:30 pm and was put back at 1:50 pm, indicating that he was outside for only 20 minutes. In view of the specific allegation made by A.3 that no T.I.Parade was conducted, it is imperative to exercise caution while appreciating the evidence of PW77. 316. Let us now examine the evidence of PW-77. In his oral testimony, he deposed that two persons came there from the left side of his taxi and asked him whether the taxi is empty. He said yes to them. They sat in the back seat in the taxi. 317. PW-77, in his cross-examination, states that he was in his seat reading a newspaper when those two persons came. He did not get down from the seat till the time they sat in the taxi and he started the taxi. 318. The above referred deposition of PW-77 shows that when the said two passengers came, PW-77 was sitting in his driver seat and was reading newspaper and there was no interaction between them, except an inquiry made by the passengers whether the taxi is occupied or empty. The evidence further shows that both the passengers sat in the back seat. 319. Then, PW-77 deposed that one of them had a black bag with him. He kept it on the front seat by his side. When he started the taxi, he asked them where to take it. The evidence further shows that both the passengers sat in the back seat. 319. Then, PW-77 deposed that one of them had a black bag with him. He kept it on the front seat by his side. When he started the taxi, he asked them where to take it. They told him to take the taxi to Churchgate. He was required to apply the brakes when they had gone some distance, at that time, the bag moved ahead slightly. The person behind caught the handle of the bag at that time and told him to drive the taxi carefully, he asked him whether he should keep the bag in the boot. Thereupon, the other person said that there are valuable articles in the bag and said that the bag should remain there. 320. In this part of evidence of PW-77, he does not refer or mention any unnatural thing. Moreover, in this part of evidence, he does not say that he saw A.3 and that he had sufficient opportunity, or any reason, to observe or notice him minutely or otherwise, or to store his face in his memory for any particular reason. As far as interaction took place in between them relating to the bag or otherwise, at that time, PW-77 was in his driver seat and A.3 was on the back seat. Therefore, though there was conversation between them, it was without looking at each other’s faces or eye contacts with each other. 321. PW-77 further states that he stopped the taxi near a subway at Churchgate station. The persons asked him about the fare and he told them that it was Rs. 140/- They gave him two notes of Rs.100/- each and he returned Rs.60/- to them. They gave back Rs. 10/- to him. Thereafter, they went towards the subway. 322. Here again, there is nothing to suggest that before alighting the taxi, there was any long interaction between them. On the contrary, in cross-examination, PW-77 says that there was no waste of time when he reached the passenger at Churchgate subway except the talks that they had about the fare. He states that he was not required to get down since the time they sat in his taxi upto Churchgate. He states that when they got down, he was sitting in his seat. 323. He states that he was not required to get down since the time they sat in his taxi upto Churchgate. He states that when they got down, he was sitting in his seat. 323. Thus, the gist of the evidence of PW-77, as regards his encounter with A.3, is that when A.3 came, PW-77 was reading a newspaper sitting in driver seat of the taxi. The passengers asked him whether his taxi is available. After this brief interaction, A.3 sat along with a person accompanying him in the backside of the taxi. After reaching Churchgate subway, the passengers did not speak except asking the fare. The passengers paid the amount while PW-77 was sitting in his seat. He did not get down from the taxi right from the time when they boarded till the time they got down from the taxi. 324. In the whole evidence, PW-77 does not speak about any sufficient opportunity he could get to notice or observe A.3 or his face. He nowhere states about the reason for triggering of his memory and to recollect the face of PW-77 after a long period. He does not speak about any unnatural thing or special thing to give reason for storing A.3’s face in his memory. Moreover, in the evidence which we have discussed, there is nothing which would trigger the memory of PW-77 and to recollect A.3’s face. 325. According to the prosecution, the reason for triggering the memory of PW-77 was that, he had been to his sister in law’s house on that day for lunch. 326. As suggested by the prosecution, this may be the reason to trigger his memory, but, it would help PW-77 to recollect the events, and not the faces of all the passengers who traveled in his taxi or the strangers who met him on that day. 327. But, for the sake of convenience, we again say that, here we are ascertaining the possibility of recollection of face of A.3 after a huge gap. When PW-77 identified A.3, he identified him by his face. Thus, it is doubtful, in absence of any evidence brought on record for justifying the reasons to recollect the face of A.3. 328. Therefore, we are of the opinion that it is highly unsafe to rely upon the evidence of PW-77 to hold A.3 as guilty. 329. When PW-77 identified A.3, he identified him by his face. Thus, it is doubtful, in absence of any evidence brought on record for justifying the reasons to recollect the face of A.3. 328. Therefore, we are of the opinion that it is highly unsafe to rely upon the evidence of PW-77 to hold A.3 as guilty. 329. In the backdrop of the above observations we have recorded, let us see the relevant portion of the observations made by the Learned Special Court while accepting the evidence of PW-63 and PW-77, which read thus: - Observations relating to the evidence of PW-63: “474. In my humble opinion it is clear from the above discussion that the evidence of Santosh Singh, PW-63, is a cogent and convincing evidence and his credibility has not been impeached during his cross-examination. The most important fact is that he has no criminal antecedents, no history of he having acted as a panch or a witness in any other case and no contact with the police, which rules out the possibility of he being a pliable police witness. Therefore, it will have to be held that he is not at all got up witness and his evidence is not fabricated. He is surely a total independent witness and his evidence inspires confidence. I have, therefore, no hesitation in accepting his testimony as a truthful. Hence, it will have to be held that by his evidence prosecution has proved that on 11/07/06 the A13 alongwith one more person had traveled in a taxi from Perry Cross Road, Bandra at about 3.15 to 3.30 p.m. to a subway of Churchgate Railway Station, reaching there at about 4.45 to 5.00p.m. and that they were carrying a black heavy bag with them. This is the circumstance no. 2 proved by the prosecution against the accused. It is the first circumstance against the A13. “Observations relating to the evidence of PW-77: “456. It will have to be held that Rajesh Satpute, PW-77, has given a very straightforward evidence, it is not artificial, it is not articulated or decorated with any fantasies or falsehood and he has not made any tall claims. To my mind, if the investigating machinery, i.e., the ATS wanted to fabricate such type of evidence practically at the end of investigation, because the chargesheet was filed on 30/11/06, it would not have stopped at only two taxi drivers. To my mind, if the investigating machinery, i.e., the ATS wanted to fabricate such type of evidence practically at the end of investigation, because the chargesheet was filed on 30/11/06, it would not have stopped at only two taxi drivers. Nothing prevented them from creating such type of evidence of taxi drivers to give evidence against some more accused. The ATS could have done this earlier also. Why wait till 03/11/06? This shows the naturalness. Hence, it will have to be held that by the evidence of Rajesh Satpute, PW77, the prosecution has proved that on 11/07/06, the A3 alongwith one more person had travelled in a taxi from Carter Road, Bandra at 3.30 to 4.00 p.m. to a subway of Churchgate Railway Station, reaching there at about 5.00 p.m. and that they were carrying a black coloured bag with them which was of rexine. This is the first circumstance proved by the prosecution against the accused. It is the first circumstance against A.3.” 330. Having held that it is highly unsafe to base conviction on the evidence of PW-63 and PW-77 for the reasons recorded, we are of the considered view that the above referred observations of the Trial Court are perverse and are contrary to well settled principles of law. Second Category of Witnesses The witnesses who saw the accused planting bomb in the trains (PW-57, PW-60, PW-62, & PW-74) 331. Moving further to the second category of witnesses namely, the witnesses who saw the accused planting bombs in the trains. These witnesses are the passengers who were traveling in the trains wherein the blasts had taken place. These witnesses are PW-57, PW-60, PW-62, and PW-74. 332. Except PW-60, the witnesses PW-57, PW-62 and PW-74 remained silent for 100 or more, and thereafter, they approached the police and gave statement under Section 161 of Cr.PC. 333. In the T.I. Parades held on 07/11/2006, PW-57 identified A.1, PW-62 identified A.3, and PW-74 identified A.4. All these witnesses further identified the above referred accused in the court too, after more than four years from the date of sighting of the accused. 334. PW-57, PW-62, and PW-60 identified A.1, A.3, and A.13 respectively in T.I. Parades held by Shri. Barve. We have already held that on 07/11/2006, Shri. Barve had no authority as SEO to conduct T.I. Parades. 334. PW-57, PW-62, and PW-60 identified A.1, A.3, and A.13 respectively in T.I. Parades held by Shri. Barve. We have already held that on 07/11/2006, Shri. Barve had no authority as SEO to conduct T.I. Parades. Therefore, the T.I. Parades conducted by Shri. Barve, wherein PW-57, PW-62, and PW-60 have identified the above referred accused, vitiate. The effect of the same will be that there were no identification parades identifying A.1, A.3, and A.13 by PW-57, PW-62, and PW-60 respectively, but only dock identification is there. 335. One more factor, other than delay, which needs to be kept in mind while scrutinizing the evidence of these witnesses, is that they all have given their statements under Section 161 of Cr.PC after retraction of confessions by the accused namely A.1, A.3, and A.4. Furthermore, according to the defence, PW-57 and PW-62 are got up witnesses, whereas, PW-74 is a stock witness. 336. There is another reason for the defence to say that these witnesses are either got up or stock witnesses, i.e., there were five injured passengers who were traveling in the trains in which the blasts had taken place. These five injured passengers were Suresh Suvarna, Constable Santosh Prakash Khanwilkar, Ramanand Marutirao Machchewar, Prabhakar Dattatray Sadekar, and Vijaykumar Babanna Rayappa. They all claimed that they saw the suspects of the blasts and gave description of the suspects in their statements u/s 161 of Cr.PC which they gave within a short span of the incident, and much prior to invocation of MCOCA. Despite this, none of them was examined as witness or called for T.I. Parade. 337. As far as PW-60 is concerned, he gave his statement under Section 161 of Cr.PC on 14/07/2006, i.e., on the fourth day of the incident. However, despite the fact that the first arrest was made on 20/07/2006 and further arrests were continued till 03/10/2006, PW60 was not called for T.I. Parade till 07/11/2006. 338. 337. As far as PW-60 is concerned, he gave his statement under Section 161 of Cr.PC on 14/07/2006, i.e., on the fourth day of the incident. However, despite the fact that the first arrest was made on 20/07/2006 and further arrests were continued till 03/10/2006, PW60 was not called for T.I. Parade till 07/11/2006. 338. Thus, the factors which prompt us to be cautious are, namely: - i) Not calling PW-60 for identification for more than three and half months from the date of recording of his statement u/s 161 of Cr.PC, despite the fact that the first arrest was made on 20/07/2006, ii) A huge delay of 100 or more days in approaching the police for giving statement u/s 161 of Cr.PC, by PW-57, PW-62, and PW-74, iii) Delay of four months in conducting T.I. Parade, wherein PW74 identified A.4, iv) The witnesses who have given their statements u/s 161 of Cr.PC within a short span of the incident and much before invocation of MCOCA, were not examined or called for T.I. Parade, v) One Mohanlal Kumawat who claims that some Kashmiri people purchased eight cookers from his shop in the month of May 2006. Though his statement is relevant from the point of view of the prosecution story that the bombs were packed in cookers by the accused, he was not examined or called for T.I. Parade, and vi) According to the defence, these witnesses are either got up witnesses or stock witnesses. 339. Learned Counsel Shri. Chaudhary submits that it is almost impossible for someone to be attentive to a stranger. Virar bound trains are always crowded and there is a heavy rush on them in the evenings. It is very difficult to get down at Dadar on a fast train, because as soon as the train stops at Dadar, a rush of persons enters the train. It is, thus, difficult to believe that he remembered a complete stranger whom he saw in such strenuous circumstances, remembered his bag so many days after the incident, and remembered the type of bag for four years, and identified that person who he claimed to have seen just for few moments. 340. On the other hand, the learned SPP argues that the reason for triggering their memory has come in the evidence of these witnesses. He, accordingly, submits that these witnesses are trustworthy and can be made basis for conviction. 340. On the other hand, the learned SPP argues that the reason for triggering their memory has come in the evidence of these witnesses. He, accordingly, submits that these witnesses are trustworthy and can be made basis for conviction. 341. In the above referred backdrop, let us now examine the evidence of witnesses PW-57, PW-60, PW-62, and PW-74. PW-57 Subhash Nagarsekar 342. PW-57 claims that he saw A.1 – Kamal keeping a big rexine bag on the luggage rack of 5:57 PM virar Fast train on 11/07/2006. However, he remained silent till 18/10/2006 (i.e for 100 days) and on that day, he gave his statement under section 161 of Cr.P.C. He identified A.1 in TI parade held on 07/11/2006 (i.e after four months of the sighting). Therefore, the defence has questioned his credibility. 343. Before scrutinizing the evidence of PW-57, there is one important question raised by the defence that no T.I. Parade was conducted. It is argued that A.1, in his 313 statement, states that he was taken out from the Anda Cell at around 1:30pm and put back at 1:50pm. He further states that no T.I. Parade was held. 344. This submission made by the defence requires us to look into the Awak-Jawak Register maintained in the Arthur Road Jail and referred by the defence. In the said register, whenever any accused goes outside and comes inside, on both occasions, the entries are made as regards the name of the accused and the time of going outside and coming inside the barrack. 345. The entries in such Awak-Jawak Register in relation to the T.I. Parade of A.1, held on 07/11/2006 are as under : - CHART NO. 33 Register at Arthur Road Jail  (Exh. 2474) TIP Memo SEO: PW 82 – Shashikant Barve Outward Inward Panchnama Start Panchnama End 07/11/2006, 1:30 pm 07/11/2006, 1:50 pm 07/11/2006, [Time not mentioned] 07/11/2006, 3:25 pm 346. However, PW-57, who identified A.1 in the fourth round, which according to him, took place at around 2:15 pm. Whereas, we have in the above referred chart that A.1 came out at 1:30 and went back in the Barrack at 1:50pm. 347. At the same time, PW-82 Shri. Barve, who conducted the T.I. Parade wherein PW-57 identified A.1, has stated in cross-examination that the parade started at about 2:30 pm and was over at about 3:15 pm. 348. Whereas, we have in the above referred chart that A.1 came out at 1:30 and went back in the Barrack at 1:50pm. 347. At the same time, PW-82 Shri. Barve, who conducted the T.I. Parade wherein PW-57 identified A.1, has stated in cross-examination that the parade started at about 2:30 pm and was over at about 3:15 pm. 348. The above referred discrepancies, are serious and have not been explained by any satisfactory explanation. Therefore, it can be said that the relevant entries in the Avak-Javak Register, maintained in the Prison, are contrary to the contents of Panchnama of T.I. Parades. Moreover, panchas to this panchnama are not examined. 349. We now proceed to examine the evidence of PW-57. According to PW-57, it was Guru Pournima, therefore, he wanted to go for darshan to the Saibaba Temple in Vartak Nagar, Thane. 350. As per prosecution, for PW-57, the reason for triggering his memory as regards his encounter with A.1, is that on 11/07/2006, there was Guru Pournima and he went for darshan to SaiBaba Temple in Vartak Nagar, Thane. 351. This possibility, as suggested by the prosecution, may not be ruled out. Therefore, it would help PW-57 to trigger his memory to recollect the events relating to this incidence or events prior to or after this incidence. But, we are ascertaining the possibility of recollection of face of A.1 after a huge gap, that too in absence of any evidence brought on record for justifying the reasons to recollect the face of A.1. Identification of an accused by a witness, either in identification parade or in dock identification, means he identified the accused mainly by his face. 352. PW-57 deposed that at about 5.15 to 5.30 p.m., he started from his house and went to the Charni Road Station. He sat on the fast train going towards Churchgate. He was in the first class compartment, which was the first from Virar side. He was sitting inside the compartment by the window side, facing towards Virar. He did not get down at Churchgate as he wanted to go to Dadar and then to Thane. 353. PW-57 further deposed that at Churchgate station, people entered the compartment. Some people kept their bags on the racks. At that time two persons entered the train from the left side door, with a big rexine bag. They kept it on the rack above him. 353. PW-57 further deposed that at Churchgate station, people entered the compartment. Some people kept their bags on the racks. At that time two persons entered the train from the left side door, with a big rexine bag. They kept it on the rack above him. As there was more crowd, he asked his neighbour as to which train it was. He told him that it was the 5.57 p.m Virar fast train. It had halted at platform no.3 at Churchgate. The bag was blackish in colour. The two persons stood in the passage. 354. From this part of narration, it is evident that, at Churchgate station people entered the compartment. It is further evident that some people kept their bags on the racks. At that time, PW-57 noticed two persons enter the train from the left side door with a big rexine bag. 355. While referring to these two persons, he has not given any reason to attract his attention towards these two persons. Thus, these two persons entered into the train like other passengers. Similarly, these persons entered with a bag and kept their bag on the rack like other passengers. 356. If the big rexine bag was the reason to attract the attention of PW-57 towards these two people, he could not give the description of the bag. 357. However, in absence of such description, if we consider the prosecution story that the bombs were packed in the cookers, and therefore, if we try to ascertain the possible size of the bag on the basis of the size of the cooker, then we need to undertake an exercise on the basis of two pieces of evidence available on record. 358. From the evidence on record, we can ascertain both, the diameter of the gasket and the capacity of the cookers used. The first relevant piece of evidence is the House Search Panchnama of A.6 (Exh.716). This Panchnama reveals that the pressure cooker recovered from the residence of A.6 had a capacity of 5 litres. This supports the conclusion that the cookers employed in the offence were of 5-litre capacity. 359. The second relevant piece of evidence concerns the diameter of the gaskets used in the cookers. This Panchnama reveals that the pressure cooker recovered from the residence of A.6 had a capacity of 5 litres. This supports the conclusion that the cookers employed in the offence were of 5-litre capacity. 359. The second relevant piece of evidence concerns the diameter of the gaskets used in the cookers. Seven gaskets, claimed to be of the cookers used for the bombs, were recovered under Panchnama Exh.1108 (Recovery Panchnama of leftover bomb materials at the instance of A.3), which shows the outer diameter of the gasket as 220 mm (approximately 8.661 inches). This measurement is consistent with the standard dimensions of a 5-litre pressure cooker. 360. It is pertinent to note that the typical dimensions of a 5-litre pressure cooker, irrespective of the manufacturer, are approximately 41 cm in width and 20 cm in height (equivalent to 16.14 inches in width, including handles, and 7.874 inches in height). 361. Therefore, the size of the cookers used can be stated to be approximately 16.14 inches in width and 8 inches in height. To put this in perspective, if these dimensions are compared with a standard A4- size paper (used for Court proceedings) which measures 8.27 inches in width and 11.69 inches in height, it can be observed that the height of the cooker is nearly equal to the width of an A4 sheet, while its width exceeds the height of an A4 sheet by approximately 4 inches. This comparative visualization aids in comprehending the physical dimensions of the cookers used in the offence. 362. This exercise we have done just to find out the size of the bag required for putting a cooker. From the above referred discussion, as regards size of 5-litre cooker, it is now certain that the bag required to put such cooker will be of a normal size and in any case it will not be of an abnormal size, which would attract anybody’s attention, including the attention of PW-57, and give cue for triggering memory. 363. PW-57 then, deposed that the train started at 5.57 p.m. It was slow upto Bombay Central. As he wanted to get down at Dadar, before Bombay Central he went towards the left door and stood there. The train started from Bombay Central. 363. PW-57 then, deposed that the train started at 5.57 p.m. It was slow upto Bombay Central. As he wanted to get down at Dadar, before Bombay Central he went towards the left door and stood there. The train started from Bombay Central. There was a heavy rush at Dadar, therefore, at Dadar from the corner he got down immediately and stood by the side wiping his face by his handkerchief. At that time he realized that the person who had kept the bag there had also got down along with him at Dadar. Two persons were with him when he got down. 364. PW-57 in this part of his narration states that there was heavy rush at Dadar therefore from the corner he got down. Further, in cross- examination, he states that he was the first person to get down when the train was about to stop which suggests that he got down in a moving train. Though he again speaks about these two persons who got down along with him at Dadar Station, but he could not tell in the cross-examination how many persons got down behind him or their, age group or the people who were trying to get in and get out of the train. 365. From the above referred evidence of PW-57, it can be safely said that the accused was seen by him in the train barely for a very short time in the middle of crowd, which makes it impossible for him to clearly view or record the face of the accused. 366. Furthermore, PW-57 did not give any special reason for remembering A.1 and his face, even after about 100 days. Such explanation is required in the backdrop that PW-57 in his cross deposed that, he was not paying much attention to the persons entering the coach and was not in a position to tell any description of any other passenger. The train became crowded at Churchgate. 367. It is important to note that, when PW-57 claims that he can identify and describe A.1, he could not describe the person who was sitting beside him in the train to whom he asked about the train. In cross-examination, he failed to tell the age of that person or his clothes. He also failed to tell the description of the person who was sitting in front of him. In cross-examination, he failed to tell the age of that person or his clothes. He also failed to tell the description of the person who was sitting in front of him. He could not tell the number of person standing in the passage. Though he saw people keeping their briefcases, small bags on the racks, he could not tell the make and the colour of those bags. He could not describe the persons who were standing beside him in the passage when he stood there at the Bombay Central Railway Station. 368. In these circumstances, the evidence of this witness creates doubt about the trustworthiness and credibility of this witness. 369. As far as his silence for about 100 days, PW-57 states that he realized in the first week of October that a bomb blast had taken place in the first class compartment of the train in which he had traveled and that it was 5:57 pm train. At the same time he deposed that he told his wife when he returned home on 11/07/2006 that he traveled in the 5:57 Virar train, and also saw in the news that the blast had taken place in the 5:57 Virar Train. 370. Thus, it is evident that from day one he knew that the blast had taken place in the 5:57 Virar Fast train. Therefore, the case of the prosecution that he first time realized in the first week of October 2006 that the bomb blast had taken place on the train in which he had traveled, cannot be accepted. 371. Thus, in the circumstances, if the evidence of PW-57 is considered in totality it doesn’t inspire confidence for basing the conviction on his evidence. The credibility and trustworthiness of this witness itself is thus doubtful for the reasons recorded herein above. 372. Let us see the observations made by the Learned Special Court while accepting the evidence of PW-57 which read thus: - “509. … Thus, it will have to be said that the evidence of Subhash Nagarsekar, PW-57, in respect of the incident in question, is unimpeached and is a cogent evidence. He has withstood the test of cross-examination and nothing material has been brought on record to discredit his version. … Thus, it will have to be said that the evidence of Subhash Nagarsekar, PW-57, in respect of the incident in question, is unimpeached and is a cogent evidence. He has withstood the test of cross-examination and nothing material has been brought on record to discredit his version. That the witness is a totally independent witness, is absolutely clear from the most important fact that he has no criminal antecedents and no prior connection with the police either as an accused or a witness or a panch. This rules out the possibility about he being a pliable police witness and a got up witness and it will have to be held that his evidence is not fabricated. I have, therefore, no hesitation in accepting his testimony as truthful. This is the circumstance no. 3 proved by the prosecution against the accused. Hence, it will have to be held that by his evidence prosecution has proved that on 11/07/06 the Al had kept a big rexine bag in the first-class compartment of the 5.57 p.m. Virar fast train at Churchgate and he was accompanied by a person, who did not get down at Dadar. It is against the A1.” 373. In light of the findings recorded by us, we have no hesitation to hold that the Learned Special Court committed a grave error on placing reliance on the evidence of PW-57. PW-60 Kishore Popatlal Shah 374. PW-60 Kishore Popatlal Shah identified A.13 in T.I. Parade held on 07/11/2006. He claims that he saw A.13 keeping a black bag on the luggage rack of 5:37pm Virar Fast train (621 DN) on 11/07/2006. The explosion in the said train occurred at 06:28pm while the train was at Platform no. 4 of Borivali Railway Station. 375. It is pertinent to note that we have already held that the T.I. Parades held by Shri. Barve vitiate for the reason that on the date of T.I.Parade, he had no authority as SEO. Thus, the T.I. Parade, in which PW-60 identified A.13, is to be discarded as it was conducted by Shri. Barve. 376. Despite this, even if for a moment, if we consider the T.I. Parade, in which PW-60 identified A.13, it is evident that the T.I. Parade was held after four months of the alleged sighting of A.13 by PW-60. Thus, the T.I. Parade, in which PW-60 identified A.13, is to be discarded as it was conducted by Shri. Barve. 376. Despite this, even if for a moment, if we consider the T.I. Parade, in which PW-60 identified A.13, it is evident that the T.I. Parade was held after four months of the alleged sighting of A.13 by PW-60. It is to be noted that the first accused was arrested on 20/07/2006 and the last accused was arrested on 03/10/2006. If the ATS had no knowledge to whom PW-60 had seen keeping a black bag in the train, ATS ought to have called PW-60 immediately after the first few arrests, for T.I. Parade. 377. In addition to this factor, we have already discussed the factors as regards the witnesses of second category which prompt us to be cautious while scrutinizing the evidence of PW-57, PW-60, PW-62, and PW-74. 378. There is one more reason to be cautious as regards PW-60, and that is the evidence brought on record by way of cross-examination by the defence to the effect that PW-60 was called in Bhoiwada Police Station in the last week of October 2006 and at the same time A.13 was also kept in Bhoiwada Police Station. Therefore, it is argued by the defence that A.13 was shown to PW-59, PW-60, and PW-63 in the last week of October 2006. 379. PW-60 identified A.13 in the court on 04/01/2011, i.e., after a period of about more than four and a half years from the alleged date of sighting. 380. It is argued by the defence that PW-60 deposed that he would not have recognized any of the dummies in the T.I. Parade if they were repeated in the subsequent parade. Thus, it is submitted that PW-60 does not have an unusual memory, or an eye for detail or remembering faces. If he would not have recognized the dummies, whom he had a chance to see carefully, there was no reason for him to remember the passenger with the bag. 381. Learned Counsel Shri. Choudhary submitted that the IO PW144 states that the description given by PW-60 was not sufficient for identifying any person. Even the IO PW-174 states that the statement of PW-60 was insufficient to identify the culprit. 382. Learned SPP, on the other hand, submits that this witness had identified the accused in TIP. 381. Learned Counsel Shri. Choudhary submitted that the IO PW144 states that the description given by PW-60 was not sufficient for identifying any person. Even the IO PW-174 states that the statement of PW-60 was insufficient to identify the culprit. 382. Learned SPP, on the other hand, submits that this witness had identified the accused in TIP. However, on coming to know that the police had visited his house repeatedly he went to Bhoiwada ATS office. This explains that there has not been any delay. 383. Before we peep into the evidence of PW-60, let us reiterate the law as to why holding T.I. Parade without unreasonable delay is necessary. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Gireesan Nair vs. State of Kerala, (2023) 1 SCC 180 , has held that it is a matter of great importance both for the investigating agency and for the accused and a fortiori for the proper administration of justice that a TIP is held without avoidable and unreasonable delay after the arrest of the accused. This becomes necessary to eliminate the possibility of the accused being shown to the witnesses before the test identification parade. This is a very common plea of the accused, and therefore, the prosecution has to be cautious to ensure that there is no scope for making such an allegation. It is further held that if identification in the TIP has taken place after the accused is shown to the witnesses, then not only is the evidence of TIP inadmissible, even an identification in a court during trial is meaningless. 384. In the case at hand, PW-186 Chief I.O. Shri. Patil admits that A.13 was in Bhoiwada lock-up in the last week of October 2006. And at the same time, PW-60 himself and PW-186 Shri. Patil both admitted that PW-60 was called to the ATS, Bhoiwada office in the last week of October 2006. 385. In the said backdrop, it is important to note that A.13, in his complaint dated 09/11/2006, has stated that while he was in police custody he was shown to some persons. He said ‘some persons’ because on the date of complaint he was unaware of their names. However, after PW-59, PW-60 and PW-63 entered into witness box, he got to know their names. He said ‘some persons’ because on the date of complaint he was unaware of their names. However, after PW-59, PW-60 and PW-63 entered into witness box, he got to know their names. He, therefore, in the statements under sections 313, 314 of Cr.PC and in his oral evidence on oath, stated that he was shown to PW-59, PW-60 and PW-63 in the last week of October 2006. 386. The evidence of PW-60 will show that he has not given a special reason for triggering of his memory and to recollect the face of A.13 at the time of dock identification. Therefore, possibility of showing A.13 to PW-60 in Bhoiwada prison in the last week of October 2006 is difficult to rule out. 387. In the above referred backdrop, let us scrutinize the evidence of PW-60. According to PW-60, he boarded the 5.37 p.m. Virar fast local. He was standing in the middle of the two doors. About two minutes before the departure time of the train, two persons entered the compartment and said that they wanted to go inside. He moved aside to let them go inside and they went inside and kept their bag on the luggage rack. Thereafter, they came and stood near him. Out of the two men, one was slightly fat and one was medium-built. The bag was in the hand of the medium built person. The bag was black coloured having chain. He does not know whether it was of rexine. There was more crowd in the compartment at Marine Lines. After Bombay Central, the train was to directly halt at Dadar. At that time those two persons tried to go towards the door and they had some exchange of words with other passengers who asked them where they wanted to get down. The two persons told them that they want to get down at Dadar. The other passengers asked them as to why they were standing so much inside in the compartment and that there were many trains for going to Dadar and why they caught the Virar train. He also thought that why they had boarded that train and troubled others. 388. The other passengers asked them as to why they were standing so much inside in the compartment and that there were many trains for going to Dadar and why they caught the Virar train. He also thought that why they had boarded that train and troubled others. 388. From this part of narration of PW-60, it is evident that the train was crowded and therefore, according to PW-60, A.13 had some exchange of words with other passengers who asked them as to why they were standing so much inside in the compartment and there were many train for going to Dadar and why they caught the Virar train. At that time, PW-60 also thought that why they boarded that train and troubled others. 389. If this part of the narration is the reason to trigger the memory, there is nothing unusual in exchange of words between the passengers in the crowded local trains in Mumbai. Such incidences happen everyday. Even if this is so, and it is accepted that this was the reason for triggering of memory, this would help to recollect this event even after lapse of time, but unless a special reason is mentioned about imprinting of face of accused in his mind, it is difficult to accept that PW-60 could recollect the face of A.13 after such a long gap. There is one more reason to say so as he has not given description of the accused, except stating that one was slightly fat and one was medium built (Whereas, in his statement under Section 161 of Cr.PC, he described both the persons as medium built). 390. PW-60 further deposed that thereafter they got down at Dadar. He went towards the opposite door as he wanted to get down at Borivali and he was waiting for the platform no. 4 to come. The train reached Borivali at about 6.30p.m. When the train was about to stop, there was a loud explosion and he along with the other persons who were standing in the door were thrown on the platform. He lost his spectacles, purse, mobile and a handbag of clothes and his pant was torn. He sustained injuries on his forehead, lips, both elbows and legs. 391. Then he states that a policeman approached him and told him that he is injured and he would take him to the Bhagwati Hospital. He lost his spectacles, purse, mobile and a handbag of clothes and his pant was torn. He sustained injuries on his forehead, lips, both elbows and legs. 391. Then he states that a policeman approached him and told him that he is injured and he would take him to the Bhagwati Hospital. He told him that he did not want to go to the hospital and asked him to engage an autorickshaw for him so that he can go home. A couple was going by an autorickshaw, the policeman asked them to come out and made him sit in that rickshaw and then he went home. When he went inside his home, even his wife could not recognize him as his face had blackened and there were injuries and blood on his face. Then he went and took treatment from Dr. Gohil, who is his family doctor. In the same night he also went to an ENT doctor, who advised him to take rest. 392. He further states that after about two days, i.e., on 14/07/2006, he went to Borivali Railway Police Station. He told the police that he was injured in the bomb blast and he had a doubt about two persons. Police took his statement about the incident. He gave some description of the two persons, but the police asked him to wait as they were going to call a person who would prepare a sketch. He waited for some time but he did not come, therefore, he went back. 393. He further states that in between police visited his house two or three times to meet him but he was not at home. Thereafter, in the last week of October, 2006, he went to the ATS office behind Bhoiwada Police Station to inquire as to why they (police) had come twice or thrice. He was taken to officer Patil. Officer Patil told him that they had caught some persons and asked him whether he could identify the persons about whom he had stated in his statement. He told Officer Patil that if they are brought before him, he can identify them. 394. Then, PW-60 was called by PW-186 on 07/11/2006 for the purpose of identification parade. In a parade conducted by Shri. Barve, he identified a person standing at the 8th place out of the fourteen persons standing in the row there. He told Officer Patil that if they are brought before him, he can identify them. 394. Then, PW-60 was called by PW-186 on 07/11/2006 for the purpose of identification parade. In a parade conducted by Shri. Barve, he identified a person standing at the 8th place out of the fourteen persons standing in the row there. He told Shri. Barve that he was the person who had kept the bag on the train on the day of the blast. Shri. Barve asked him his name and he told it as Asif Bashir Khan (A.13). 395. In cross-examination, PW-60 deposed that the police did not ask him to describe the size of the bag. He states that it is not unusual for people to board trains with bags and keep them on the luggage racks. Even the persons who get seats, keep their bags on the luggage rack. 396. He further states that except describing the two persons as medium built and slightly fat, he did not give any other description as the police did not ask him. He did not give any other description as the police asked him whether he would help them in preparing sketches and he said yes. 397. Whereas, PW-144 (PI Satish Ahir), who recorded the statement of PW-60, states that the description given by PW-60 was not sufficient for identifying any person. He deposed that he wrote down the description of the suspects as per PW-60’s version. He did not give more description than that he gave. PW-144 further admits that he did not make any query to him about the description. The description that he (PW-60) gave was not sufficient for identifying any person. He did not ask him further questions about the description as they had other sources like preparing sketches, showing photographs of the person. He did not get any sketch prepared. He further states that witness (PW-60) had not stated to him that one out of two persons was slightly fat. 398. Admittedly, the sketch of A.13 was not prepared for whatsoever reasons. 399. Similar is the statement of IO PW-174 who deposed that the statement of PW-60 was insufficient to pin point the identity of the culprit. 400. The evidence of PW-144 and PW-174 sufficiently make it clear that the description given by PW-60 about the person who kept the bag was not sufficient to identify the accused. 399. Similar is the statement of IO PW-174 who deposed that the statement of PW-60 was insufficient to pin point the identity of the culprit. 400. The evidence of PW-144 and PW-174 sufficiently make it clear that the description given by PW-60 about the person who kept the bag was not sufficient to identify the accused. Thus, the description given by PW-60 within four days of the incident is said to have not sufficient to identify the accused. This fact strengthens the submission made by the defence that A.13 was shown to PW-60 in Bhoiwada lockup. 401. Having held so, the evidence of PW-60 loses its credibility and is not safe to place reliance upon for conviction of A.13. 402. Let us see the observations made by the Learned Special Court, while placing reliance on the evidence of PW-60, which read thus: - “622. It is clear from the above discussion that the evidence of Kishore Shah, PW-60, is an unimpeached and cogent evidence and as is alleged by the defence, it cannot be said that he is a got up witness, because he went to the railway police station on 14/07/06, i.e., two days after the incident when the ATS was not investigating the crime. He has no criminal antecedents, he had not acted as a panch witness or a witness in any previous case thereby having no contact with the police. I have, therefore, no hesitation in accepting his testimony as truthful. Hence, it will have to be held that by his evidence the prosecution has proved that on 11/07/06, the A13 had kept a black coloured bag having chain in the first-class compartment of the 5.37 p.m. Virar fast local at Churchgate and he was accompanied by one more person. This is circumstance no. 6 proved by the prosecution. It is against the A13. It is the second circumstance against the A13.” 403. In light of the observations and the findings recorded by us as regards the evidence of PW-60, we have no hesitation to hold that the Learned Special Court committed a grave error on placing reliance on the evidence of PW-60. PW-62 Devendra Lahu Patil 404. PW-62 Devendra Lahu Patil identified A.3 in T.I. Parade held on 07/11/2006. In light of the observations and the findings recorded by us as regards the evidence of PW-60, we have no hesitation to hold that the Learned Special Court committed a grave error on placing reliance on the evidence of PW-60. PW-62 Devendra Lahu Patil 404. PW-62 Devendra Lahu Patil identified A.3 in T.I. Parade held on 07/11/2006. He claims to have seen A.3 keeping a black coloured bag below the seat near the window on the 5:36 pm Borivali Slow train (619 DN) on 11/07/2006. The explosion in the said train occurred at 06:24 pm at Jogeshwari Railway Station. 405. Learned Sr. Counsel Nagamuthu submitted that, more than 101 days after the incident, PW-62 thought that he had seen a person keeping a bag on the train and therefore, his S.161 statement was recorded on 20/10/2006. He identified A.3 as the said person in TIP on 07/11/2006, i.e., 119 days after the incident. He also identified A3 in Court. This delayed disclosure of almost 101 days in his 161 statement in itself renders his evidence unreliable. 406. Learned Sr. Counsel Shri. Nagamuthu argues that PW-62, in his statement under section 161 of Cr.PC, does not describe the men that he saw with the bag. He also does not describe the bag to the police. PW-62’s statements in chief regarding where the two men went upon entering and that they kept the bag under the seat comes by way of omission. 407. It is argued that in his evidence in court, PW-62 attempts to explain this delay by stating that he found out the fact about the use of bags only on 17th or 18th October 2006. However, this contradicts his S. 161 statement which was earlier in time and more likely to be accurate. 408. On the other hand, Learned SPP argued that PW-62 has given cogent evidence and he has no criminal antecedents or connection with police as a panch witness. It is argued that his testimony is truthful and his credibility nowhere has shaken in cross examination. It is further argued that the Learned Special Court has rightly placed reliance on his evidence for conviction of A.3. 409. It is evident from the record that PW-62 remained silent till 20/10/2006, i.e., for 102 days and gave a statement under section 161 of Cr.PC on 20/10/2006 and the T.I. Parade was conducted on 07/11/2006. It is further argued that the Learned Special Court has rightly placed reliance on his evidence for conviction of A.3. 409. It is evident from the record that PW-62 remained silent till 20/10/2006, i.e., for 102 days and gave a statement under section 161 of Cr.PC on 20/10/2006 and the T.I. Parade was conducted on 07/11/2006. However, it is pertinent to note that Shri. Barve conducted the said T.I. Parade. We have already held that the T.I. Parades held by Shri. Barve vitiate for the reason that on the date of T.I. Parades he had no authority as SEO. Thus, the T.I. Parade in which PW-62 identified A.3 is to be discarded, and only dock identification needs to be considered keeping in mind the value of dock identification without corroborative evidence of T.I. Parade. At the same time, the factors which we discussed in the beginning which suggest us to be cautious, also need to be kept in mind while scrutinizing the evidence of this witness. 410. According to PW-62, he had some work at about 3.00 p.m. at the Custom House in Fort. Therefore, he had gone there. The work there was finished in one and a half hours and then he wanted to go to Goregaon-Malad. He went to Churchgate station. When he reached the platform, the Churchgate-Borivali 5.36 p.m. slow local was coming to the platform. He boarded the first class bogie that was fourth from the motorman cabin. He stood near the last row of seats in between the gap of the two rows of seats. Some people were sitting and there were some vacant seats. A person had boarded the train along with him. He had a black coloured bag with him. There was another person with him. The person who had the black bag with him, tried to keep the bag on the rack. As there were some small bags already on the rack, he could not keep his bag there. Therefore, he kept his bag below the seat near the window that was facing towards Churchgate. He sat on that seat. The other person stood in between the two rows of the seats. 411. PW-62 further states that at the two-three stations thereafter, the crowd in the bogie increased. He could not see those persons thereafter. He was pushed back because of the crowd. He sat on that seat. The other person stood in between the two rows of the seats. 411. PW-62 further states that at the two-three stations thereafter, the crowd in the bogie increased. He could not see those persons thereafter. He was pushed back because of the crowd. The train reached Jogeshwari after about 6.15 p.m. After the train started from Jogeshwari, there was a loud explosion. 412. PW-62 further states that after some days it was in the news that some persons had kept black bags containing bombs in the trains and the blasts had taken place. He thought that he had seen the person keeping a bag in the train and therefore, he should go to the police. Therefore, he went to the ATS office, Bhoiwada on 20/10/06. He met ACP Patil there and told him that he wanted to give some information about that incident. He gave him the information about the incident in the train that had taken place in his presence. They wrote his statement. He described the two persons whom he had seen. 413. We have already discussed, in detail, what would be the size of the bag used for keeping the pressure cookers loaded with bomb while discussing the evidence of PW-57. And after a detailed discussion, and after ascertaining the possible size of the bag used for keeping such cookers, we have held with certainty that a bag could not be of an abnormal size but it would be of a normal size which could not be the reason to attract anybody’s attention. 414. Therefore, it is difficult to accept that on a reference in the news, about a ‘black bag’ containing bomb, PW-62 recollected the event and went to the police. Even if it is accepted for a moment, it will help PW62 to recollect the event, and not the face of A.3. It is to be noted that in a statement given under Section 161 of Cr.PC, no description of the accused is given by PW-62. 415. Moreover, PW-62 has not given any special reasons for storing the face of A.3 in his memory. In absence of such evidence, one may recollect the event, but it is difficult to accept that he can recollect the face of A.3 after such a long gap. 416. 415. Moreover, PW-62 has not given any special reasons for storing the face of A.3 in his memory. In absence of such evidence, one may recollect the event, but it is difficult to accept that he can recollect the face of A.3 after such a long gap. 416. PW-62 identified A.3 in the court and stated that he was the same person whom he had identified in the T.I. Parade on 07/11/2006 as the person who had kept the black bag in the train on 11/07/2006. 417. Similarly, in his statement under section 161 of Cr.PC, PW-62 claims that he works as a customs clearing agent and on 11/07/2006, i.e. on the date of blasts, he had gone for customs clearing work to Fort and after completing the work he had gone to Churchgate station. However, in the cross examination, he admits that he had not gone there for customs clearing work. He further admits that he did not have any work in custom house on that day. 418. PW-62 claims that from Fort he boarded the train at Churchgate in order to travel to Goregaon. However, he is unable to give any reason as to why he had to go to Goregaon. He claims that he was going to Goregaon to meet some parties for customs work, but he is unable to name them or even state their office address. He is also unable to state any of the details of the parties for whom he deposited custom duty with bank. He admits that he has never obtained any challan from the customs office for payment of custom dues. He is also unable to name any party he had worked for on 11/07/2006. Therefore, the evidence of PW-62 creates doubt about the credibility of this witness. 419. A.3, in his statements under section 313 and 314 of Cr.PC, states that on 07/11/2006 he was taken out at 1:30 pm from the lock up and put back at 1:50 pm and no T.I. Parade was held. This fact is corroborated with the jail register (Exh.2474) which shows that A.3 was taken out at 1:30 pm and put back at 1:50 pm. Whereas, according to PW-82, the parade started at around 12:10 hrs. and ended at 2:30 hrs. 420. This fact is corroborated with the jail register (Exh.2474) which shows that A.3 was taken out at 1:30 pm and put back at 1:50 pm. Whereas, according to PW-82, the parade started at around 12:10 hrs. and ended at 2:30 hrs. 420. Thus, the identification of A.3 goes on the ground of truthfulness and on the ground that Shri. Barve SEO had no authority on 07/11/2006 to conduct TI Parade of A.3. 421. In the circumstances, in absence of any cogent evidence to show that there was some special reason for PW-62 to recollect the face of A.3 after such a long gap, it will be hazardous to rely upon this witness to convict A.3. 422. Let us see the observations made by the Learned Special Court while placing reliance on the evidence of PW-62, which read thus: - “536. In view of the above discussion, it will have to be held that Devendra Patil, PW-62, has given cogent and convincing evidence. Considering the fact that no criminal antecedents or his connection with the police of he having acted as a panch or witness or as an accused in some case have been brought on record, it will have to be held that he is an independent witness. This rules out the possibility of he being a pliable police witness and a got up witness and it will have to be held that his evidence is not fabricated. I have, therefore no hesitation in accepting his testimony as truthful. Hence, it will have to be held that by his evidence the prosecution has proved that on 11/07/06, the A3 had kept a black coloured bag in the first-class compartment of the 5.36 p.m. Churchgate-Borivali slow train at Churchgate and he was accompanied by one more person. This is circumstance no. 4 proved by the prosecution. It is against the A3. It is the second circumstance against the A3.” 423. In light of our findings, it can be said that the Trial Court committed a grave error on placing reliance on the evidence of PW-62. PW-74 Vishal Parmar 424. PW-74 Vishal Parmar identified A.4 in T.I. Parade held on 07/11/2006. He is claiming to be an eyewitness who saw A.4 with a black rexine bag at the time of boarding 607 DN Virar Fast train on 11/07/2006. PW-74 Vishal Parmar 424. PW-74 Vishal Parmar identified A.4 in T.I. Parade held on 07/11/2006. He is claiming to be an eyewitness who saw A.4 with a black rexine bag at the time of boarding 607 DN Virar Fast train on 11/07/2006. He further claims that when A.4 got down at Dadar with one more person said bag was not with them. The explosion in the said train occurred at 06:23 pm when the train had just departed from Mira Road Station. 425. However, after the incident, he remained silent for 115 days and gave a statement under section 161 of Cr.PC on 02/11/2006. His evidence came to be challenged on various grounds including a ground that he is a stock witness and has acted as a Panch in at least four cases other than the present case. It is further challenged on the ground that he is an employee of one Mukesh Rabadiya who is also a stock witness of the police and who acts regularly as a panch witness for the police and has acted as RDX seizure panch in the present case. 426. Learned Counsel Shri. Chaudhary argues that PW-74 did not visit ENT Hospital to meet one Baban Rankhambe, therefore, the whole story is falsehood. 427. Whereas, the Learned SPP submits that there is a strong probability that the witness might have stated incorrect name because of similar phonetic, it was mistakenly understood by the typist as ‘Baban Rankhambe’ instead of ‘Baban Rongya Kamble’. 428. Learned SPP opposed the connection of Mukesh Rabadiya with the police on the ground that he has not been examined as a witness in this case. He further submits that on the ground that Mukesh Rabadiya was panch witness in three cases, the evidence of PW-74 cannot be discarded. 429. Learned Counsel Shri. Chaudhary further pointed out that even a story that PW-74 on the date of incident, had gone to meet one Lalit Waghela at BMC Bank is also false as the said person was on leave. 430. There is one more challenge raised by the defence in relation to the discrepancies in the jail register and timing mentioned in the TIP Panchnama. This submission by the defence requires us to look into the Avak-Jawak Register. 430. There is one more challenge raised by the defence in relation to the discrepancies in the jail register and timing mentioned in the TIP Panchnama. This submission by the defence requires us to look into the Avak-Jawak Register. A comparative chart of of the timings mentioned in the jail register as well as the TIP Panchnama can be seen in the chart herein under. CHART NO. 34 Register at Arthur Road Jail (Exh. 2474) TIP Memo SEO: PW 80 – Kirti Purandare Outward Inward Panchnama Start Panchnama End 07/11/2006, 12:35 pm 07/11/2006, 12:40 pm 07/11/2006, 12:55 pm 07/11/2006, 1:30 pm 431. PW-80, in cross, while referring to Exh.835 (short notes taken by PW-80 during TIP), stated that he conducted the TIP between 11:55 am to 1:30 pm. Learned Counsel states that, as per PW-80, the accused were outside the barracks for this entire duration. 432. As early as his complaint on 09/11/2006, A.4 states that he was taken into an open ground for a few minutes and were shown to witnesses who were inside a room and further that proper dummies were not selected. A.4 has stated that he was taken out of the barrack for 5 minutes and no T.I.Parade was held. The so called T.I.Parade was conducted within 5 minutes, three witnesses identified him on the pointing of the officers. This fact, in addition to the earlier observations, brings the truthfulness of this witness under shadow of doubt. 433. PW-74 Vishal Parmar has deposed that he had gone to ENT hospital in front of Hutatma Chowk at 4.30 pm on 11/07/06. After the work there was over, he got a call from his employer who directed him to go to the BMC Bank at Dadar. 434. This part of the deposition of PW-74 relates to the prior events before boarding the train. According to PW-74, as he stated in crossexamination, he went to ENT Hospital to meet one Baban Rankhambe. Whereas, the information obtained by the defence under RTI (Exh.3808) shows that there is no person ‘Baban Rankhambe’ working in the ENT Hospital. As per the information obtained by the prosecution from ENT Hospital vide Exh.3929, it is revealed that one Mr. Baban Rongya Kamble was an employee in ENT Hospital. According to Learned Counsel Shri. Chaudhary, the whole story of PW-74 is false because no such person was working. As per the information obtained by the prosecution from ENT Hospital vide Exh.3929, it is revealed that one Mr. Baban Rongya Kamble was an employee in ENT Hospital. According to Learned Counsel Shri. Chaudhary, the whole story of PW-74 is false because no such person was working. However, Learned SPP argues that there is a strong probability that the witness might have stated the name as ‘Baban Rongya Kamble’ but because of the similar phonetic, it was wrongly typed as ‘Baban Rankhambe’. 435. Even if the argument of learned SPP is accepted, the RTI information (Exh.4391) shows that Baban Rongya Kamble was supposed to be on night shift on the date of the incident, however, he was absent. Thus, it creates doubt about the veracity of the evidence of PW-74. 436. PW-74, in his oral evidence, further deposed that at 5.15 p.m., he went to Churchgate Station as he wanted to go to Dadar. He went to platform no.3. He stood near the first class bogie that was in front. The indicator on the platform was showing a train of 5.19 p.m. going towards Virar. Two persons came there and asked him whether Virar fast train would go from there. He looked at the indicator and told them that such a train is going from there. Thereupon they stood there. After two or three minutes the train came there. Out of those two persons, the person other than the person who had asked him about the train and the time, had a black rexine bag with him. 437. From this part of the narration, it is evident that there was a brief interaction while making inquiry about the train, between the witness and the accused. In this part, there is a reference to black bag, about which, we have made detailed discussions while considering the evidence of PW-57. With the evidence available on record, we also recorded our finding as regards the probable size of the bag and at the end of the said discussion, we observed that the bag in any case could not be of an abnormal size which will attract anybody’s attention. 438. PW-74 further deposed that they had started to board the train before him and when he was boarding the train, the rexine bag hit his leg. He wanted to catch a window seat, but he did not get it. 438. PW-74 further deposed that they had started to board the train before him and when he was boarding the train, the rexine bag hit his leg. He wanted to catch a window seat, but he did not get it. He sat on the seven-seater long bench, facing Churchgate, at the third seat from Hutatma Chowk side. Those two persons stood in the passage in between at some distance. After the train started, he looked at the bag and thought that it was a big bag being carried in the first class compartment. 439. Here, in this part, PW-74 refers to hitting of black bag to his legs, and further he deposed that though it was a big bag, it was being carried in first class compartment. If the incident of hitting of the bag to his leg is the cue to triggering his memory, then unless PW-74 specifically states that he noticed the face of the accused or stored the same in his memory for certain special reasons, such cues would, at the most, help the witness to recollect the event, and not the face of the accused, that too after a long gap of 120 days. 440. PW-74 further deposed that at Bombay Central, the bogie became crowded. After Bombay Central, the train stopped at Dadar. After the train had passed the Elphinstone Station, he started moving towards the door as he wanted to get down at Dadar. He got down at Dadar. The two persons got down in front of him at Dadar and were walking fast empty handed. As he was engrossed in the thought of his work, he did not think much about the persons walking away without taking their bag with them. At Dadar he went to the BMC Bank in front of Plaza Cinema and met the client. After about half an hour there was a talk in the public that there were blasts in the trains. 441. In this part of the narration, he has stated that after alighting the train at Dadar, he went to the BMC Bank, infront of the Plaza Cinema and met the client. PW-74, in his cross-examination, stated the name of the person as Lalit Waghela, to whom he went to meet in BMC Bank. However, no person named ‘Lalit Waghela’ is employed at the said bank as disclosed in Exh.2911 (RTI Information obtained by A.4). PW-74, in his cross-examination, stated the name of the person as Lalit Waghela, to whom he went to meet in BMC Bank. However, no person named ‘Lalit Waghela’ is employed at the said bank as disclosed in Exh.2911 (RTI Information obtained by A.4). Furthermore, one Sukhlal Ambadas Rathod was examined as defence witness no. 24. DW-24 was working as assistant head supervisor. He refers to Exh.3083 which shows that one Lalit Waghela was working as motor loader in BMC. However, on 11/07/2006, he was on leave. 442. Thus, the gist of the above observation is that there was no Lalit Waghela in BMC Bank, Dadar. One Lalit Waghela was there in BMC, but he is a motor loader. In the circumstances, even if it is considered that PW-74, on the date of incident, went to meet this Lalit Waghela, who was working as a motor loader in the BMC, he was on leave. Though, the Learned SPP tried to raise a question regarding the correctness of the information obtained via RTI Act vide Exh.3083, it will not help the prosecution in absence of any positive and cogent evidence to support its own case that on the date of incident, PW-74 went to meet one Lalit Waghela. 443. The above referred observations create a doubt about the veracity of the evidence of PW-74, and also whether he traveled in the said train on the date of incident. There are further reasons for such doubt, which are mentioned herein under. 444. It is to be noted that PW-74 had acted as a Panch witness in four crimes, and interestingly, out of four crimes, three crimes were related to DCB CID police station. PW-74 acted as a seizure panch in CR. No. 11/2006 (CC 675/PW/2006) of DCB CID Police Station, in which a gun and a cartridge was recovered on 11/03/2006. (Exh.4554), just four months before the incident dated 11/07/2006. 445. He further acted as a Panch in the following cases: - i) Acted as a TIP Panch in Panchnama dated 17/03/2011 in FIR No. 27/2011 of DCB CID Police Station for the offences punishable under S.302 of IPC r/w S.325 and S.327 of Arms Act. (Exh.3828) ii) Acted as a TIP Panch in panchnama dated 03/09/2011 in CR No. 105/2010 of DCB CID Police Station for the offence punishable under S.307, S.34 of IPC r/w S.3, 25 and 27 of Arms Act. (Exh.3828) ii) Acted as a TIP Panch in panchnama dated 03/09/2011 in CR No. 105/2010 of DCB CID Police Station for the offence punishable under S.307, S.34 of IPC r/w S.3, 25 and 27 of Arms Act. (Exh.3827) iii) Acted as a TIP Panch in panchnama dated 21/01/2010 in Cr. No. 107 of 2011 of Crime Branch for the offences punishable under S.394, 395 of IPC r/w S.35 of Arms Act r/w S.37(1)(a), 135 of Bombay Police Act r/w S.3(1)(ii), 3(2), 3(4) of MCOC Act. (Exh.3826) 446. PW-74, in his deposition, has stated that one Mukesh Rabadiya is his employer. The Learned Counsel for A.4 has pointed out that Mukesh Rabadiya is also a stock witness and he acted as a panch witness in the present offence in the house search of A.6. 447. Mukesh Rabadiya is a money lender and it is pointed out that he has acted as a search and seizure panch in Cr. No.256/P/203 of DCB CID Unit-II Police Station (Exh.3295) in which Shri. Kolhatkar (PW18) & Shri. Tajne (PW-161) were the investigating officers. In Spl. LAC 03/2006 (Exh.4812), ACP Shengal (DW-51), Shri. Tajne (PW-161) were the officers. And in LAC No. 01/2006, PW-161 and PW-168 were the officers in the investigation team. 448. Let us now look at the law as regards stock witnesses. 449. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Tarseem Kumar vs. Delhi Administration, reported in (1994) SCC Cri 1735, it is held that many witnesses who can be said to be the stock witnesses of the police, have been produced on behalf of the prosecution to prove important circumstances. In this background, the court has to be very cautious about the investigation done by the police in such case. 450. In light of the above referred law and considering the fact brought on record that PW-74 acted as a panch witness in many cases, it appears that he is a stock witness, and therefore, on this count also, his evidence creates doubt about the truthfulness of his evidence. 451. The learned Special Court, while placing reliance upon the evidence of PW-74, has observed thus: - “583. 451. The learned Special Court, while placing reliance upon the evidence of PW-74, has observed thus: - “583. …In respect of the incident in question the evidence of Vishal Parmar, PW-74, unimpeached and a cogent evidence and looking at the facts and circumstances of the case it cannot be said that he is a got up witness or that his evidence is fabricated. I have, therefore, no hesitation in accepting his testimony. Hence, it will have to be held that by his evidence the prosecution has proved that on 11/07/06, the A4 had a black rexine bag with him when he boarded the firstclass compartment of the 5.19 p.m. Virar train at Churchgate and he was accompanied by one more person and when they got down at Dadar, they did not have the bag with them. This is circumstance no. 5 proved by the prosecution. It is against the A4.” 452. In light of the above referred observations and findings recorded by us, as regards the evidence of PW-74, it can be said that the learned Special Court committed a grave error in placing reliance on the evidence of PW-74. Third Category of Witnesses The witness to assembling of bombs (PW-75) 453. Moving further to the third category of witnesses namely, the witness who saw the accused assembling bombs. This witness is PW-75 Amar Sardar Khan. 454. PW-75 Amar Sardar Khan identified A.2, A.4, A.6, and A.7 in TIP conducted by SEO Purandare on 07/11/2006 and also in Court. Though, according to him, he saw A.2, A.4, A.7 at A.6’s house 4-5 days before the incident, he gave statement to the police under section 161 of Cr.PC on 28/10/2006, i.e. after about 112 days from the date of sighting. It is important to note that PW-75 himself was a suspect in this case and he was repeatedly called by police for inquiry immediately after the incident. However, he did not disclose anything to the police at that time about the preparation of bomb at the house of A.6 by the accused. One more important aspect which needs to be considered is that he gave statement u/s 161 of Cr.PC after the retraction of confessions by the accused. The above referred factors suggest us to be cautious while examining the evidence of PW-75. 455. One more important aspect which needs to be considered is that he gave statement u/s 161 of Cr.PC after the retraction of confessions by the accused. The above referred factors suggest us to be cautious while examining the evidence of PW-75. 455. Before scrutinizing the evidence of PW-75, there is one important question raised by the defence that no T.I. Parade was conducted. It is argued that A.2, in his 313 statement, states that he was taken out of the barrack to an open area with other co-accused A.4 & A.7 at 12:35 pm and after 5 minutes he was again sent back with coaccused A.4 and A.7. He was forced to stand in an open ground and then he was forced to stand with some other inmate of the jail, and he was shown to some persons. 456. Further, it is argued that A.7, in his 313 statement, states that he was taken out at 12:35 pm for a few minutes and made to stand in an open ground and no TIP took place. 457. This submission made by the defence requires us to look into the Avak-Jawak Register maintained in the Arthur Road Jail and referred by the defence. 458. The entries in such Awak-Jawak Register (Exh.2474) in relation to A.2 & A.7 on 07/11/2006, i.e. the date of T.I. Parade disclose the entries of date and time of outward and inward, given in the chart herein below: - CHART NO. 35 Acc.No. Register at Arthur Road Jail (Exh. 2474) TIP Memo SEO: PW 80 – Kirti Purandare Outward Inward Panchnama Start Panchnama End A.2 07/11/2006, 12:35 pm 07/11/2006, 12:40 pm 07/11/2006, 11:55 am 07/11/2006, 12:50 pm A.7 07/11/2006, 12:35 pm 07/11/2006, 12:40 pm 7.11.06, 11:55 am 07/11/2006, 12:50 pm 459. PW-75, who identified A.2 and A.7 during the first round of the TIP, in cross-examination, stated that he may have gone inside the parade room on the first occasion on 07/11/2006 at about 11:45 am to 12:00 pm. 460. PW-80 SEO Purandare, in cross, while referring to Exh.835 (short notes taken by PW-80 during TIP), stated that he conducted the TIP between 11:55 am to 1:30 pm. 461. 460. PW-80 SEO Purandare, in cross, while referring to Exh.835 (short notes taken by PW-80 during TIP), stated that he conducted the TIP between 11:55 am to 1:30 pm. 461. On perusal of the above referred entries in the Avak-Javak register and in view of the contention of the defence that no T.I. Parade was conducted, since it creates doubt about holding T.I.Parades, it is imperative to exercise caution while scrutinising the evidence of PW75. 462. According to PW-75, he met Dr. Tanveer (A.2), Ehtesham Siddique (A.4) and Mohd. Ali (A.6) in the programs of SIMI that he attended. 463. PW-75 further states that they used to give provocative speeches about jihad at the SIMI programs. The jihad that they were talking about was in respect of atrocities committed on Muslims. A.2 and 4 used to give such speeches. However, it was his view that they should not talk like this. Yet, they used to say that, if they want to do something, they will take the help from outside and will do anything. He states that he had a long-standing friend by name Ajmeri Shaikh, he used to meet him often and states that Ajmeri Shaikh had also come with them for the programs of SIMI. 464. He deposed that Ajmeri Shaikh used to do the work of plaster of paris (POP) and interior decorator and for the purpose of purchasing the material required for POP he used to go on his motor cycle to Govandi. He used to accompany Ajmeri on Ajmeri’s motorcycle. He had so gone with him four or five days before the blast to the Shivaji Nagar in Govandi. He parked the motorcycle outside a lane and they were walking in that lane. A.6's house is in that lane. Ajmeri said that we would go to his house as we had not met him since many days and would greet him and then go to our work. They were at some distance from his house. At that time, they saw A.2 standing outside his house, and looking around. At that time, A.6 came out of the house in a hurry and said something to A.2. 465. Then they both went inside the house. At the same time A.4 entered the house from outside with a tea kettle. They both entered the house behind him. They saw three-four more persons sitting there. At that time, A.6 came out of the house in a hurry and said something to A.2. 465. Then they both went inside the house. At the same time A.4 entered the house from outside with a tea kettle. They both entered the house behind him. They saw three-four more persons sitting there. One person was doing something with a wire. Two-three newspapers were spread in front of the persons. There was white and black coloured powder on the newspapers. He further states that when they greeted them, A.6 said that they are busy in some work and that they will meet afterwards. Therefore they came out of the house. 466. From the above referred narration of PW-75, it can be seen that he saw 3-4 more persons other than A.2, A.4, and A.6. He then states that they greeted them and A.6 said that they are busy in some work and they will meet afterwards. Therefore, they came out of the house. Thus, it is evident that PW-75 did not get sufficient time even to see whether there were 3 persons or 4 persons inside the room other than A.2 and A.6. Therefore, a question arises, if he did not get sufficient time even to notice the exact number of persons present in the room, he could see the face of A.7 minutely, with whom, admittedly, he had no acquaintance, to identify him after more than four months of sighting him. 467. He further deposed that in Mumbai Mirror dated 01/10/06 a photograph of A.6 was published concerning the blasts. Ajmeri had read the said newspaper and he had come and told him about it. At that time he and Ajmeri thought that they should tell someone about the incident that they saw four-five days before the blasts at the house of the A.6, so that the real accused would be caught. After thinking it in deep, on 28/10/06 Ajmeri said to him that they would tell about this to one police constable Vijay Ambekar. 468. Thereupon, PW-75 was called for T.I. Parade on 07/11/2006 and he identified A.2, A.4, A.6 and A.7. At the same time, he identified the above referred accused in the Court. 469. According to PW-75, it was probably on Sunday when he had gone with his friend Ajmeri Sheikh to pick up Plaster of Paris material, and passed A.6’s house in Govandi. At the same time, he identified the above referred accused in the Court. 469. According to PW-75, it was probably on Sunday when he had gone with his friend Ajmeri Sheikh to pick up Plaster of Paris material, and passed A.6’s house in Govandi. However, the record from Saboo Siddique Hospital shows that A.2 was at the hospital from 11:41 am till 10:58 pm on Sunday, i.e., 09/07/06 (Exh.2932). Thus, this document falsifies the claim of PW-75 that when PW-75 allegedly visited A.6’s house, A.2 was present there. 470. PW-75 knew A.4 from previous SIMI meetings. PW-75 states in his chief that he saw A.4 entering A.6’s house with a kettle and that he saw A.7 joining wires inside A.6’s house. However, during TIP (Exh.833), he identified A.4 as the person who was joining wires. 471. In cross-examination, PW-75 admits that he did not go inside the house and see anything but merely repeated what Ajmeri Shaikh had told him. Thus, it is clear that PW-75 did not himself see what he deposed in chief. 472. In his examination in chief, PW-75 stated that he and his friend Ajmeri Shaikh used to go on Ajmeri’s motorcycle to Govandi, and that PW-75 used to accompany Ajmeri on his motorcycle. He further stated that before 4-5 days of the blast, he had gone to Govandi with Ajmeri. However, later in his cross-examination, PW-75 stated that Ajmeri did not have a motorcycle in 2006, and that PW-75 had taken his own motorcycle, driven it and parked it on that day. Further PW-75 states that Ajmeri does not know how to drive a motorcycle. He also stated that what he stated in the examination-in-chief was not correct. 473. During cross-examination, PW-75 admits that he was called to the Park Site Police Station one or two days after the blast, and the police had inquired with him, but it was not for four-five hours. His statement was recorded at that time. He had not stated about his visit to Govandi four-five days before the blasts to the police officer at that time, because at that time he was not knowing its relevance. He came to know only when he saw the photo in the Mumbai Mirror. 474. His statement was recorded at that time. He had not stated about his visit to Govandi four-five days before the blasts to the police officer at that time, because at that time he was not knowing its relevance. He came to know only when he saw the photo in the Mumbai Mirror. 474. The gist of the evidence of PW-75 is that he was a suspect in the present case and he was called by police immediately after the blast, and at that time though his statement was recorded, he did not disclose anything about alleged making of bomb at the house of A.6. According to him, he did not know the relevance of it. He then suddenly realised its relevance and went to ATS after 112 days just on seeing photo of A.6 in the newspaper. That apart, he saw the photo on 01/10/2006, however, he went to the police station delayedly on 28/10/2006. 475. PW-75 identified A.7, who was stranger to him. Whereas, in fact, he could not get sufficient opportunity to even see whether there were three persons or four persons other than A.2, A.4, and A.6. He further changed his version of going to A.6’s house on a motorcycle of Ajmeri as a pillion rider, and stated in the cross-examination that Ajmeri had no motorcycle in 2006, he did not know how to drive motorcycle. Most importantly, he said in the cross-examination that he did not enter into the room but Ajmeri told him about the presence of the accused in the room and their suspected activities. Admittedly, Ajmeri has not been examined as a witness by the prosecution. 476. PW-75 says that a few days prior to the blast he went to the house of A.6 and several accused were present there including A.2, A.4, A.7, and A.6. At that time, they were preparing something. Later, he realised that it must be a bomb. However, he says that some papers, materials, chemicals, wires were there and they were doing something. He is not sure whether what was made by them or prepared by them was a bomb. 477. Thus, it can be said that the evidence of PW-75 has been completely shattered in the cross-examination. And considering his cross-examination, it can be said that he is not a trustworthy and credible witness to rely upon his evidence. There are further reasons to discard his evidence. 477. Thus, it can be said that the evidence of PW-75 has been completely shattered in the cross-examination. And considering his cross-examination, it can be said that he is not a trustworthy and credible witness to rely upon his evidence. There are further reasons to discard his evidence. The same are discussed herein below. 478. PW-75 states that Ajmeri and his statements were recorded by PW-153 API Alaknure in ATS Bhoiwada office between 2-3 pm on 28/10/2006. However, the station diary entry dated 28/10/06 (Exh.3322) shows that API Alaknure returned to Crime Branch Office at 1:45 pm. There is no entry of leaving of PW-153 from the crime branch officer thereafter. 479. PW-153 though initially states that he does not remember whether he had recorded the statement of PW-75, but on going through the case diary, admits that he did record the statements of PW75 and Ajmeri Shaikh on 28/10/06, but the time is not mentioned in the station diary. 480. Ajmeri Shaikh also identified A.2, A.4, A.6 and A.7 in TIP dt. 07/11/06 conducted by PW-80 Shri. Barve. However, he was not examined in this case. Therefore, a question arises here is that, if he was an important witness to bomb making in A.6’s house, then why did he not enter into the witness box. 481. Amar sardar Khan and Ajmeri Sheikh were also used as witnesses in the Ghatkopar blast. The list of witnesses in that case shows that Amar sardar Khan and Ajmeri Shaikh are cited as witnesses at sr. no. 169 and 170. 482. Thus, there are numerous grounds to discard the evidence of this witness. 483. The Learned Special Judge, while relying on the evidence of PW-75, has recorded its conclusion to accept the evidence, as under: - “884. … It will have to be held that the prosecution has not proved that Amar Khan, PW-75, saw some persons including the A7 in the house of the A6 a few days before the blasts. However, it will have to be held that by the cogent evidence of Amar Khan, PW-75, PC Ambekar, PW-76, and PI Alaknure, PW-153, prosecution has proved that Amar Khan, PW-75 had gone to the house of the A6 a few days before the blasts and had seen the A2, A4 and A6 outside his house. This is the circumstance no. 18 proved by the prosecution. It is against A2. This is the circumstance no. 18 proved by the prosecution. It is against A2. A4 and A6. It is the second circumstance against the A2, A4 and A6.” 484. Having held that PW-75’s evidence is not trustworthy and credible, the reliance placed by the Learned Special Judge on such evidence is nothing but a grave error committed by the Learned Trial Court. Fourth Category of Witnesses The witness to the conspiracy (PW-59) 485. Let us now examine the witness who falls in the fourth category, and who claims that he is a witness to the hatching of conspiracy. 486. PW-59 claims to be a close friend of A.3 and A.12 and met A.2, A.4, A.9, A.10, and A.13 through A.3. He identified A.2, A.3, A.4, A.9, A.10, A.12, and A.13 in the Court. The prosecution examined this witness to establish the conspiracy and also his acquaintanceship with the above referred accused. 487. PW-59 gave his statement under section 161 of Cr.PC on 02/11/2006 after retraction of confessional statements of A.2, A.3, A.4, A.9, and A.10. He states in his oral evidence that if the police would not have called him, he would not have gone and given his statement. It is to be noted that the statements under Section 161 of Cr.PC of PW59 and PW-74 were recorded on the same day, i.e., on 02/11/2006. 488. Learned SPP states that PW-59 is an important witness as he is not somebody who is a stranger to the accused persons but he is conversant with the some of the accused. He is a friend of A.3 and A.12 and also well acquainted with A.2, A.4, A.9, A.10, A.11 and A.13. It is submitted that A.9 is the brother of A.3, and A.3 was a close friend of PW-59. Therefore, he has unmistakably identified A.9 to be present in the conspiracy meeting and there is no reason to discredit his evidence. 489. It is further argued by Learned SPP that PW-59 knew A.3’s name as ‘Sameer’ which, according to PW-59, A.3 used to use the said name to hide his identity. It is argued that though cross examination of this witness was made by multiple counsels, no contradiction could be brought on record which would go to the root of the matter branding this witness as a liar. 490. It is argued that though cross examination of this witness was made by multiple counsels, no contradiction could be brought on record which would go to the root of the matter branding this witness as a liar. 490. Before scrutinizing the evidence of PW-59 on the point of conspiracy, it would be beneficial to reiterate the law as regards conspiracy. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Yogesh v. State of Maharashtra, (2008) 10 SCC 394 , has held thus: - “20. The basic ingredients of the offence of criminal conspiracy are : (i) an agreement between two or more persons; (ii) the agreement must relate to doing or causing to be done either (a) an illegal act; or (b) an act which is not illegal in itself but is done by illegal means. It is, therefore, plain that meeting of minds of two or more persons for doing or causing to be done an illegal act or an act by illegal means is sine qua non of criminal conspiracy. Yet, as observed by this Court in Shivnarayan Laxminarayan Joshi v. State of Maharashtra [ (1980) 2 SCC 465 : 1980 SCC (Cri) 493] a conspiracy is always hatched in secrecy and it is impossible to adduce direct evidence of the common intention of the conspirators. Therefore, the meeting of minds of the conspirators can be inferred from the circumstances proved by the prosecution, if such inference is possible. 21. In Mohd. Usman Mohammad Hussain Maniyar v. State of Maharashtra [ (1981) 2 SCC 443 : 1981 SCC (Cri) 477] it was observed that for an offence under Section 120-B, the prosecution need not necessarily prove that the perpetrators expressly agree to do and/or cause to be done the illegal act, the agreement may be proved by necessary implication. 22. In Kehar Singh v. State (Delhi Admn.) [ (1988) 3 SCC 609 : 1988 SCC (Cri) 711] the gist of the offence of the conspiracy has been brought out succinctly in the following words [Ed. : Quoted from Russell on Crime (12th Edn., Vol. I, p. 202).] : (SCC p. 731, para 271) “271. 22. In Kehar Singh v. State (Delhi Admn.) [ (1988) 3 SCC 609 : 1988 SCC (Cri) 711] the gist of the offence of the conspiracy has been brought out succinctly in the following words [Ed. : Quoted from Russell on Crime (12th Edn., Vol. I, p. 202).] : (SCC p. 731, para 271) “271. … ‘The gist of the offence of conspiracy then lies, not in doing the act, or effecting the purpose for which the conspiracy is formed, nor in attempting to do them, nor in inciting others to do them, but in the forming of the scheme or agreement between the parties. Agreement is essential. Mere knowledge, or even discussion, of the plan is not, per se, enough.’ ” 23. Again in State of Maharashtra v. Som Nath Thapa [ (1996) 4 SCC 659 : 1996 SCC (Cri) 820] a three-Judge Bench of this Court held that to establish a charge of conspiracy knowledge about indulgence in either an illegal act or a legal act by illegal means is necessary. In some cases, intent of unlawful use being made of the goods or services in question may be inferred from the knowledge itself. This apart, the prosecution has not to establish that a particular unlawful use was intended, so long as the goods or service in question could not be put to any lawful use. 24. More recently, in State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu [ (2005) 11 SCC 600 : 2005 SCC (Cri) 1715] , making exhaustive reference to several decisions on the point, including State v. Nalini [ (1999) 5 SCC 253 : 1999 SCC (Cri) 691] Venkatarama Reddi, J. observed thus : (Navjot Sandhu case [ (2005) 11 SCC 600 : 2005 SCC (Cri) 1715] , SCC p. 689, para 97) “97. Mostly, conspiracies are proved by circumstantial evidence, as the conspiracy is seldom an open affair. Usually both the existence of the conspiracy and its objects have to be inferred from the circumstances and the conduct of the accused (per Wadhwa, J. in Nalini case [ (1999) 5 SCC 253 : 1999 SCC (Cri) 691] at p. 516). Mostly, conspiracies are proved by circumstantial evidence, as the conspiracy is seldom an open affair. Usually both the existence of the conspiracy and its objects have to be inferred from the circumstances and the conduct of the accused (per Wadhwa, J. in Nalini case [ (1999) 5 SCC 253 : 1999 SCC (Cri) 691] at p. 516). The well-known rule governing circumstantial evidence is that each and every incriminating circumstance must be clearly established by reliable evidence and ‘the circumstances so proved must form a chain of events from which the only irresistible conclusion about the guilt of the accused can be safely drawn and no other hypothesis against the guilt is possible’ (Tanviben Pankajkumar case [Tanviben Pankajkumar Divetia v. State of Gujarat, (1997) 7 SCC 156 : 1997 SCC (Cri) 1004] , SCC p. 185, para 45). G.N. Ray, J. in Tanviben Pankajkumar [Tanviben Pankajkumar Divetia v. State of Gujarat, (1997) 7 SCC 156 : 1997 SCC (Cri) 1004] observed that this Court should not allow suspicion to take the place of legal proof.” 25. Thus, it is manifest that the meeting of minds of two or more persons for doing an illegal act or an act by illegal means is sine qua non of the criminal conspiracy but it may not be possible to prove the agreement between them by direct proof. Nevertheless, existence of the conspiracy and its objective can be inferred from the surrounding circumstances and the conduct of the accused. But the incriminating circumstances must form a chain of events from which a conclusion about the guilt of the accused could be drawn. It is well settled that an offence of conspiracy is a substantive offence and renders the mere agreement to commit an offence punishable, even if an offence does not take place pursuant to the illegal agreement.” 491. In light of the above referred well settled principle of law, let us examine and scrutinize the evidence of PW-59. 492. According to PW-59, in February 2006, once he went to the house of A.3. At that time, he saw 5-6 persons in his house. They had gathered there for discussion on some special subject. After the namaj, A.3 introduced them to him. One of them was by name Asif Khan (A.13), Dr. Tanveer Ahmed (A.2), Ehtesham Siddique (A.4), Suhail Shaikh (A.10), and Muzzammil Shaikh (A.9). They were sitting together. At that time, he saw 5-6 persons in his house. They had gathered there for discussion on some special subject. After the namaj, A.3 introduced them to him. One of them was by name Asif Khan (A.13), Dr. Tanveer Ahmed (A.2), Ehtesham Siddique (A.4), Suhail Shaikh (A.10), and Muzzammil Shaikh (A.9). They were sitting together. Asif Khan took a Quran and asked all to keep their hands on it and to take the oath that whatever discussion they had there will be secret. Asif Khan asked about him. Faisal told him, he was his best friend and he should not take tension about him. Asif Khan asked him to take the oath but he did not take it as he did not have any knowledge about the subject matter of the meeting. Afterwards, he asked Faisal about that meeting but he did not tell him anything. 493. PW-59 further deposed that thereafter in March 2006, A.3 came to meet him at Mira Road, near Shams Masjid with his three friends Asif Khan (A.13), Dr. Tanveer (A.2), and Ehtehsam (A.4). A.3 asked him whether he could arrange for a house for 6-7 months for his friends. Then he asked him to phone A.12 – Naveed and call him. Accordingly he phoned A.12 and told him to come near Shams Masjid in the restaurant where they were sitting. After some time, A.12 came there. Faisal asked him to leave that place saying that he wanted to talk with A.12. 494. PW-59 further states that in May 2006 once or twice he went to A.3’s house. He saw the guests in his house. He told him that they are his guests from Pakistan and they have come for the good work of religion. A.3 told him the names of those guests as Abdul Razzak, Abu Umed, Sohail Shaikh, and one Salim. PW-59 states that in June 2006, A.3 called him and Naveed (A.12) to his house. On the next day morning, A.3 told A.12 that because of the guests, his house is congested and he should make some arrangements for the guests. After some days, he came to know from A.12 that he had arrangements of two guests of Faisal at Millat Nagar, Andheri. During that month, A.3 had introduced him to one Rizwan Khot. During that period, A.3 had purchased a white colored Maruti-800 car. After some days, he came to know from A.12 that he had arrangements of two guests of Faisal at Millat Nagar, Andheri. During that month, A.3 had introduced him to one Rizwan Khot. During that period, A.3 had purchased a white colored Maruti-800 car. PW-59 then deposed that he and Rizwan Khot, A.12 and A.3 used to go around in that car. Rizwan Khot used to drive the car. He met A.3 lastly on 02/07/2006. After some days he came to know from the news that A.3 and A.12 were caught by the police as they were involved in the blasts. 495. In cross examination, PW-59 states that the police did not ask him to describe any person. He did not describe any person to police on his own. The ATS police did not ask him any identification mark on any accused or person, and he did not tell the police on his own. The police did not prepare a sketch of any person with the help of any expert in his presence. 496. According to PW-59, when he went to A.3’s house, he saw 5-6 persons in his house. They had gathered there for discussion on some special subject. PW-59 gave the names of who were there, including Pakistanis. He saw the accused in the month of February and March 2006, and the incident took place on 11/07/2006. However, he was quiet for 170 days and gave his statement under section 161 of Cr.PC on 02/11/2006. 497. PW-59 claims that A.3 had made an extra-judicial confession to him in January 2006 that A.3 was a Jihadist and had gone to Pakistan for arms training by the L-e-T. Despite such anti-nation and serious disclosure by A.3, PW-59 did not think of immediately alerting the police nor he disclosed that fact to anyone till October 2006, even after knowing that A.3 had been arrested in connection with the bomb blasts a few days after the incident. Thus, this inordinate delay in disclosure, in itself, renders PW-59 as a wholly unreliable witness and so his testimony. 498. According to PW-59, in May 2006, he went to A.3’s house where he saw guests from Pakistan, namely Abdul Razzak, Abu Umed, Sohail Shaikh, and one Salim. PW-59 had never met those four Pakistani accused before. Some special reasons are required to recollect the names heard on a single solitary instance. 498. According to PW-59, in May 2006, he went to A.3’s house where he saw guests from Pakistan, namely Abdul Razzak, Abu Umed, Sohail Shaikh, and one Salim. PW-59 had never met those four Pakistani accused before. Some special reasons are required to recollect the names heard on a single solitary instance. It, therefore, creates doubt that PW-59 could recollect all these names with full name and surnames, more particularly when he himself claims that there was nothing unnatural and that he did not have any knowledge about the subject matter of the meeting. He admits that even A.3 did not tell him about the meeting. 499. At the same time, he could not recollect the name of a particular dancer, with whom he had a close relationship for over a month in the same year. He does not even remember the name of the policeman who had called him on 02/11/2006. 500. Furthermore, the prosecution does not seem to have done any investigation to corroborate PW-59’s claim regarding having met the accused at Shams Masjid or at A.3’s house. The prosecution could have produced the CDR of either PW-59 or the accused to establish the their location. 501. PW-59 did not approach the police himself and claims that the police approached him for the first time on 02/11/2006 by a call from a landline number to his mobile number. The prosecution did not produce any CDR. On the contrary, when the defence made an application to call the CDR of two mobile numbers used by PW-59 for the period of February to June 2006, it was strongly objected as frivolous. Therefore, PW-59’s statement is shrouded in doubt. 502. It is further pointed out that his statement was recorded by ACP Patil (PW-186) at Chandan Chowki. However, the certified true copy of the log book (Exh.4299) of the Bolero MH-01-SA-131 shows that ACP Patil had not even gone to Chandan Chowki on 02/11/2006. 503. A.4 was a stranger to PW-59. At best, PW-59 had only a brief glimpse of A.4 sitting along with other persons and had no reason to remember him. T.I. Parade was therefore necessary to be conducted. However, it was not conducted. PW-59 did not describe any of the persons he saw, in his statement under Section 161 of Cr.PC, nor did the investigating officer ask for any identifying features. T.I. Parade was therefore necessary to be conducted. However, it was not conducted. PW-59 did not describe any of the persons he saw, in his statement under Section 161 of Cr.PC, nor did the investigating officer ask for any identifying features. In the circumstances, a T.I. Parade ought to have been conducted for identification of A.4 and the other unknown accused. 504. Furthermore, when a photograph of Salim (Pakistani national) was shown to PW-59, he said that it is of Abu Umed. At the same time, he could not identify A.11 in the court. Therefore, it again creates a doubt as to how could PW-59 remember the full names of all those persons without any reason to remember their names, that too after so many months. 505. Learned Sr. Counsel Shri. Nagamuthu submits that PW-59 was in China in the period from February to May 2006. It is submitted that PW-59’s elder brother Parvez had business at China of Chinese products. 506. It is submitted by Learned SPP that although an attempt was made by the defence to show that PW-59 was not in India but was in China at the relevant time, the defence could not succeed in establishing the said fact. 507. Though, in the cross-examination, PW-59 denies the suggestions regarding his trip to China, on being asked to produce his passport, he refused to produce the same with an excuse that it had gone missing in his house in 2006. 508. Moreover, PW-59 has deposed that he had no knowledge about the subject of discussion between the accused, and A.3 did not tell him. In these circumstances, in absence of direct evidence of conspiracy, as per the well-settled principle of law, a chain of events has to be completed from which a conclusion of guilt of the accused can be drawn. The said chain, in this case, could not be completed having found the other seven witnesses as unreliable. In these circumstances, the evidence of PW-59 in the above referred backdrop, is of no consequence or help to the prosecution to establish hatching of conspiracy by the accused. 509. The learned Special Judge, while relying on the evidence of PW59, has recorded its conclusion to accept the evidence, as under: - “951. In my humble opinion, the submissions by the learned SPP are very much valid for appreciating the evidence of all types of witnesses. 509. The learned Special Judge, while relying on the evidence of PW59, has recorded its conclusion to accept the evidence, as under: - “951. In my humble opinion, the submissions by the learned SPP are very much valid for appreciating the evidence of all types of witnesses. Applying, these tests to the evidence of Mohd. Alam, PW59, I have no hesitation to hold that he is an impeccable witness. He has no criminal antecedents, no connection with the police either as a witness or panch or accused and no animosity against any of the accused. Thus, I have no hesitation in accepting his evidence as truthful. Hence, it will have to be held that by his evidence the prosecution has proved: (i) that the A3 was concerned with the atrocities being committed on Muslims and was of the view that the only way to solve their problems was by way of jihad, (ii) that the A3 had gone to Pakistan twice and had taken training in the camps of Le-T, (iii) that wanted accuiled no. 1 Azam Cheema rendered financial assistance to the A3, (iv) that the A3 was commander of Le-T in Mumbai (v) that the A2, A4, A9, A10 and A13 had assembled in the house of the A3 in February, 2006, (vi) that the A2, A3, A4, A12 and A13 had assembled near Shams Masjid in Mira Road in March, 2006 and (vii) that wanted accused no. 5 and 14 and deceased accused no. 1 and 2 were in the house of the A3 in the second or third week of May, 2006 and later on they were shifted to the house of the A3 at Millat Nagar in Andheri (W), Mumbai. This is the circumstance no. 19 proved by the prosecution. It is against the A2, A3, A4, A9, A10, A12 and A13. It is the third circumstance against the A2. It is the sixth circumstance against the A3. It is the third circumstance against the A4. It is the first circumstance against the A9. It is the first circumstance against the A10. It is the second circumstance against the A12. It is the fourth circumstance against 15 the A13.” 510. Having held that PW-59’s evidence is not trustworthy and credible, the reliance placed by the Learned Special Judge on such evidence is nothing but a grave error committed by the Learned Trial Court. It is the first circumstance against the A10. It is the second circumstance against the A12. It is the fourth circumstance against 15 the A13.” 510. Having held that PW-59’s evidence is not trustworthy and credible, the reliance placed by the Learned Special Judge on such evidence is nothing but a grave error committed by the Learned Trial Court. Fifth Category of Witnesses The injured witness who saw the suspects after they alighted the train, but not called for T.I. Parade, though with his help two sketches of suspects were prepared. Further, though he was examined, he was not asked to identify the accused in the Court (PW-85). 511. PW-85 Lalji Ramakant Pande boarded Borivali semi-fast 5:54 pm train from Churchgate. As the train left Mahim Station, there was a loud explosion in which he sustained injuries on the back, head, hands, stomach, legs, etc. He was operated in the hospital. He was discharged from the Sion Hospital on 24/07/2006. Police took his statement on 27/07/2006 at his house and again on 21/08/2006 at ATS Office. 512. In cross, PW-85 deposed that he saw two persons getting down hurriedly and they looked frightened, therefore, he became suspicious. He looked at them carefully. He described the two persons, their features, age, appearance, body structure, and the clothes worn by them. He had stated about mustache and beards that they had. He told the police about the features of the two persons that he remembered. Police prepared sketches of the two persons on the basis of their description that he gave. According to PW-85, police prepared the sketches correctly as per the description that he gave. 513. He further deposed that the description of one of the persons that he gave was that he was around 27-28 years old, height 5 10", wheatish complexion, a longish face, medium build, clean-shaven, with a small mustache, wearing a half shirt and full pants. He had described another suspect as being around 28-30 years old, height 5'7" tall, with a sallow complexion, a round face, slim build, clean-shaven, with a small mustache, wearing a checked full shirt and full pants. 514. It is evident from the evidence of PW-85 that he gave detailed description of the accused and helped the police to prepare sketches of the suspects. He found that the sketches were correctly prepared. 514. It is evident from the evidence of PW-85 that he gave detailed description of the accused and helped the police to prepare sketches of the suspects. He found that the sketches were correctly prepared. The reason for giving detailed description was that he looked at the suspects carefully as he became suspicious about them. 515. His statement u/s 161 of Cr.PC was recorded immediately after he was discharged from the hospital. Thus, it can be said that when everything was fresh in his memory namely, the occurrence, faces of the suspects, and their other description, his statement was recorded and the sketches were prepared. Despite the said fact, he was not called for T.I. Parade. Furthermore, he was even not asked to identify the accused in the Court. This conduct of the prosecution speaks volume, in absence of any explanation offered by the prosecution for the same, and an adverse inference needs to be drawn for not calling him for T.I.Parade and also not asking him to identify the accused in Court. Sixth Category of Witnesses The witnesses who saw the suspects, and gave their statements under Section 161 of Cr.PC within short span of incident with the description of the suspects, but were neither called for T.I. Parade nor examined as witnesses. (Total 6 witnesses) 516. It is argued by the defence counsel that injured and material eyewitnesses whose statements were recorded within 2-4 days of the blast were not called for TIP. Learned Counsel Ms. Roy states that immediately after the blasts, various investigating officers recorded statements of a number of injured witnesses who claimed to have seen suspicious travellers or passengers in the bogie in which the blasts happened. It is submitted that these witnesses gave detailed descriptions and features of the people they saw; sketches were also made on the basis of their descriptions. However, none of them were called for TIP. 517. It is further submitted that considering the fact that the first 7 accused persons were arrested in the month of July itself, the investigating agency should have immediately put the arrested accused persons for a TIP & called the injured witnesses to identify them. However, no such thing was done. 518. However, none of them were called for TIP. 517. It is further submitted that considering the fact that the first 7 accused persons were arrested in the month of July itself, the investigating agency should have immediately put the arrested accused persons for a TIP & called the injured witnesses to identify them. However, no such thing was done. 518. It is further submitted that instead of calling the injured witnesses who gave description, and whose S.161 statements were promptly recorded within few days of the blast, the investigating agency called those witnesses whose statements were recorded after more than three months after the blast, who were not injured, and who gave no description. It is further submitted that, except the statement under Section 161 of Cr.PC of PW-60 Kishore Popatlal Shah and PW85 Lalji Pande, statements of all other witnesses who were called for TIP were recorded more than three months after the train blasts. 519. Learned SPP, on the other hand, submits that the submission of the defence is baseless. It is submitted that the I.Os and Chief I.O. have explained the reasons for not examining them. 520. Learned SPP submits that the contention of the defence is that some of the persons who were the eyewitnesses like Ramanand Machchewar, Prabhakar Dattatray Sadekar, Vijay Kumar Rayappa and constable Khanvilkar had been held back and were not called for TIP. Learned SPP further submits that one of the injured witness Khanvilkar is from police department and if it was really the intention of the investigating agency to falsely fabricate the evidence or to falsely implicate anyone then this witness would have been best available to the police. However, the prosecution has been transparent, and ACP Patil has given straight forward answers. 521. In light of rival contentions, we perused the record in this regard, wherefrom it is evident that there are five witnesses who claimed to have seen the suspected passengers planting bombs. Sixth witness claims that some Kashmiri persons purchased eight pressure cookers from his shop. These six witnesses were not examined. Furthermore, none of these six witnesses was called for TIP. 522. Before, scrutinising the evidence of the I.O.s and the police officers as to why these witnesses were not called for T.I. Parade or examined as prosecution witnesses, let us first see the law as regards adverse inference. 523. These six witnesses were not examined. Furthermore, none of these six witnesses was called for TIP. 522. Before, scrutinising the evidence of the I.O.s and the police officers as to why these witnesses were not called for T.I. Parade or examined as prosecution witnesses, let us first see the law as regards adverse inference. 523. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Takhaji Hiraji v. Thakore Kubersing Chamansing, reported in (2001) 6 SCC 145 , has held thus : - “19. ...It is true that if a material witness, who would unfold the genesis of the incident or an essential part of the prosecution case, not convincingly brought to fore otherwise, or where there is a gap or infirmity in the prosecution case which could have been supplied or made good by examining a witness who though available is not examined, the prosecution case can be termed as suffering from a deficiency and withholding of such a material witness would oblige the court to draw an adverse inference against the prosecution by holding that if the witness would have been examined it would not have supported the prosecution case. On the other hand if already overwhelming evidence is available and examination of other witnesses would only be a repetition or duplication of the evidence already adduced, non-examination of such other witnesses may not be material. In such a case the court ought to scrutinise the worth of the evidence adduced. The court of facts must ask itself — whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, it was necessary to examine such other witness, and if so, whether such witness was available to be examined and yet was being withheld from the court. If the answer be positive then only a question of drawing an adverse inference may arise. If the witnesses already examined are reliable and the testimony coming from their mouth is unimpeachable the court can safely act upon it, uninfluenced by the factum of non-examination of other witnesses. ...” 524. In the present case, the statements given by these six witnesses under section 161 of Cr.PC, shows that five of the said witnesses are the injured witnesses and they gave the description of the suspicious passengers. Prabhakar Dattatray Sadekar 525. ...” 524. In the present case, the statements given by these six witnesses under section 161 of Cr.PC, shows that five of the said witnesses are the injured witnesses and they gave the description of the suspicious passengers. Prabhakar Dattatray Sadekar 525. An injured passenger in the Borivali blast named Prabhakar Dattatray Sadekar, whose statement u/s 161 of Cr.PC was recorded on 13.7.06 by IO PW 140 PI Godbole. IO PW 162 PI Iqbal Shaikh further recorded the supplementary statement on 09.08.06. 526. Learned Counsel Ms. Roy argues that the witness described the suspects, including the apparels on their body. Sketches of the suspects were prepared on this description. It is further argued that even though IO PW-140 admits that he was an important witness, he was not called for T.I.Parade. 527. PW-140, in his cross, admits that statement under Section 161 of Cr.PC of Prabhakar Dattaram Sadekar was taken on 13/07/2006. He further states that he cannot say whether Prabhakar Dattaram Sadekar was an eyewitness. 528. PW-162 Iqbal Shaikh (I.O. of Cr. No 78/2006), in his crossexamination states that on going through the case papers he realized that there were two eye-witnesses by name L. R. Pandey (PW-85) and Prabhakar Dattaram Sadekar and they had been injured. 529. On a question put to him as to whether he had informed PW186 ACP Patil that these two eye-witnesses (L. R. Pandey and Prabhakar Dattaram Sadekar) would be required to be called for identification parade, he answered that no planter was found in CR No. 78/06, therefore, he did not inform accordingly to ACP Patil. 530. PW-162 further states that ACP Patil did not call and inquire with the two witnesses in his presence. No planter was detected in CR No. 78/06 upto 13/10/06. He does not know whether these two witnesses were not called for identification parade. He had read the final report filed by ACP Patil it is true that it is written in the final report that as per his investigation in CR No. 78/06, the Indian and Pakistani accused in that CR were unknown and their total number was not revealed. Suresh Suvarna 531. He had read the final report filed by ACP Patil it is true that it is written in the final report that as per his investigation in CR No. 78/06, the Indian and Pakistani accused in that CR were unknown and their total number was not revealed. Suresh Suvarna 531. Suresh Suvarna, who was injured in the Borivali blast, in his statement dated 15.7.06 stated that he had seen a suspect, who was approximately 25 years old, wearing a pathani dress, sallow complexion, slim, 5'6” height, having a slight beard, hurriedly getting down from that train at Bandra. 532. Learned Counsel Ms. Roy submits that even though the IO PW174 PI Khandekar admits that he was an important witness, Suresh Suvarna was not called for TIP. 533. PW-174 Khandekar (I.O. of Cr. No. 156/2006) in his crossexamination states that on reading the statement of Suresh Suvarna, initially he felt that he was an important witness. It is not true that he had given facial description along with describing the wearing apparel, height and beard. He had described the suspects as wearing Pathani dress, approximate height and that they had beards. He had stated approximate age. He does not remember whether he had mentioned about sallow complexion and slim built. He denied that when they take description they inquire about description, they record only the height, built, complexion, average age and whether the suspect has beard. He did not record the supplementary statement of the witness Shri. Suvarna when he met him. He did not get any sketch prepared with his help. Only one statement of this witness was recorded. It was on 15/07/06. He was one of the injured in that case. He did not think it necessary to call him for identification parade. He further states that the reason for not calling Suresh Suvarna for identification parade, according to him is the statement given by him about the alleged suspect boarding at Bandra without any luggage and getting down at Andheri. Constable Santosh Prakash Khanvilkar 534. Santosh Prakash Khanvilkar was injured in the Borivali blast and gave his statement under Section 161 of Cr.PC on 22/07/2006. He described a suspect’s complexion, age, height and dress and that the suspect boarded the train at Bandra and rushed out at Andheri. 535. Learned Counsel Ms. Constable Santosh Prakash Khanvilkar 534. Santosh Prakash Khanvilkar was injured in the Borivali blast and gave his statement under Section 161 of Cr.PC on 22/07/2006. He described a suspect’s complexion, age, height and dress and that the suspect boarded the train at Bandra and rushed out at Andheri. 535. Learned Counsel Ms. Roy argues that IO PW-174 is unable to explain why Santosh Khanvilkar was not called for TIP despite giving a detailed description of a possible suspect. 536. PW-174 Khandekar in his cross-examination stated that he had gone through the statement of Santosh Prakash Khanwilkar. On going through his statement he did not think that he was an important witness. He did not think on going through his statement that he could fix the identity of the culprits. 537. PW-186 in his cross-examination, states that he does not remember whether we had got a witness by name Santosh Prakash Khanvilkar, claiming to be an eye-witness in the Borivali blast. He remember having discussion about witness Suresh Shekhar Suvarna, who was claiming himself to be an eye-witness in the Borivali blast. He was not found to be reliable. He denied that all these witnesses were deliberately not called for the test identification parades. Ramanand Marutirao Machchewar 538. Ramanand Marutirao Machchewar who was injured in the Mira Road blast, gave his statement on dt.12.7.06. Macheware described a suspect who boarded his bogie at Andheri Railway Station as 30-35 years, medium built, wheatish complexion, height about 5'.4'', clean shaven face, high cheek bones and hollow cheeks, appearing old and weak. He further stated that the suspect was holding a small green coloured bag when he boarded the train, kept the bag on the luggage rack, but left the train at Mira Road Station without the bag. 539. Learned Counsel Ms. Roy submits that though PW-150 API Shelke and PW-173 PI Agrawal both admit that he was an important and material witness, he was not called for TIP. Learned counsel further stated that PW-173 PI Agrawal claims that Ramanand Machewar was not called for TIP as the subsequent investigation revealed that the green bag that he had spotted belonged to an injured witness Kailash Mehta. He further states that it was subsequently returned to Kailash Mehta’s brother. The counsel further submits that there is no evidence of the fact that the person to whom the bag was returned was Kailash Mehta. He further states that it was subsequently returned to Kailash Mehta’s brother. The counsel further submits that there is no evidence of the fact that the person to whom the bag was returned was Kailash Mehta. This explanation given by PW-173 has come by way of omission and is wholly uncorroborated and without any contemporary record. 540. PW-150 API Shelke, who recorded the statement of Ramanand Machchewar on 15/07/06, in his cross-examination states that he cannot say when identification parades were arranged and who took the initiative for arranging them. As far as his knowledge is concerned, Ramanand Machchewar was an important and material witness so far as the blast is concerned. 541. PW-173 PI Agrawal (IO of Cr. No. 59/2006) in his crossexamination states that Ramanand Machchewar boarded the train at Bandra Railways Station, when the train came at Andheri Railway Station, he saw a person boarding the same bogie holding a small green coloured bag, which was passed through other commuters to be kept on the luggage rack; that he suspected this as he thought that the small bag could be held in hand and there was no necessity of keeping it on the luggage rack; that moreover, at Mira Road Station, the witness saw that person alighting from the train without the bag. He checked the unclaimed baggage and articles and found a small green coloured bag; that, on opening it was found to contain a telephone diary, bunch of keys and some money; that, the telephone diary showed that it was belonging to one Kailash Mehta who was admitted in Kasturi Hospital; that, he took that bag and came back to his office; that, he showed the bag to the witness and he confirmed that it was the same bag. He states that the four articles that were handed over to him as per the receipt are not the articles described at Sr. No. 24 in the panchnama. HE admits that bunch of keys, telephone diaries and cash amount of RS.80/- is not mentioned in the articles described at Sr. NO. 24 in the panchnama. He further admits that the articles described at Sr. no. 24 in the panchnama are not returned to Kailash Mehta as per the receipt (Exh.1838). Vijaykumar Babanna Rayappa 542. HE admits that bunch of keys, telephone diaries and cash amount of RS.80/- is not mentioned in the articles described at Sr. NO. 24 in the panchnama. He further admits that the articles described at Sr. no. 24 in the panchnama are not returned to Kailash Mehta as per the receipt (Exh.1838). Vijaykumar Babanna Rayappa 542. Learned counsel stated that PW 167 and PSI Umesh Kadam recorded S.161 statement of Vijaykumar Babanna Rayappa who was injured in the Jogeshwari blast on 05.08.06. He described two persons reading an Urdu newspaper whose movements were suspicious. However, he was not called for T.I.Parade. 543. PW-167 initially attempts to deny that Vijaykumar Rayappa was an eye witness and had travelled in the same bogie as where the blast took place. 544. PW-167, in his cross-examination, states that he had inquired with the witness. He denied that it was revealed that the witness was traveling in the same bogie in which the blast took place. He was traveling in the same train. It was revealed during his interrogation that he had seen two travelers, looking like Muslims having Urdu newspaper with them and whose movements were suspicious. He had given the description of those persons. He did not feel that the information given by the said witness was important. He had informed his superiors about the witness in the discussion with ACP Patil and ACP Tawde. They did not tell him to bring the witness before them for inquiry. They did not opine that he is not an important witness. He did not feel it necessary to take the identification parade with the help of this witness. 545. PW-186 stated, in his cross-examination, that they had a witness by name Vijaykumar Babanna Rayappa, claiming himself to be an eyewitness in the Jogeshwari blast. They had a discussion about him and they found that he was not reliable to be called for the identification parade of the arrested accused. Mohanlal Kumawat 546. PSI Yadav recorded statements on 28.9.06 of three shop keepers in Santa Cruz East, Arvind Umarshi Shah, Mahendrabhai Dedhia and Mohanlal Kumawat who state that two Kashmiri looking men had bought 8 pressure cookers and loaded them into a white Santro car in May 2006. These witnesses had given detailed descriptions of those two Kashmiris and their sketches were prepared. The witnesses stated that the suspects had made many calls. 547. These witnesses had given detailed descriptions of those two Kashmiris and their sketches were prepared. The witnesses stated that the suspects had made many calls. 547. PW-167 Shri. Wadhankar (I.O of Cr. No. 41/2006) states in his cross-examination that PSI Yadav recorded the statement of Mohanlal Kumawat, shop owner on 28/09/06, from whose shop the pressure cookers were purchased. It was revealed from this witness that the persons had kept the cookers in white coloured Santro car and he had given the description of the persons. Sketch was prepared. It was not circulated for finding that person. He had informed his superiors about the information that they gave. He did not think of calling them for the identification parade and they were not called. It was revealed from the statements of these three witnesses that eight pressure cookers were purchased and loaded in white Santro car. 548. The above referred explanations by the IOs go against the prosecution and show that till the confessional statements were recorded, there was no evidence worth showing the involvement and complicity of the accused. The prosecution has examined only two witnesses PW-60 and PW-85, who had given their statement under section 161 of Cr.PC within a short span of the incident, like the witnesses of sixth category. 549. These witnesses, who claim to have seen the suspects and gave their statement immediately after the incident, have given detailed description of the suspects in their S.161 statements. Their memory was fresh when the statement was given. If these statements are compared with the statements given by the accused, subsequent to the retraction of the statement, i.e. after 100 or more days of the incident, the statements of the witnesses of the sixth category appear to be more helpful to identify the accused. Despite the same, for no valid reason, they were not called for T.I. Parade or examined as prosecution witnesses. Therefore, we are of the opinion that an adverse inference needs to be drawn against the prosecution for not examining the material and important witnesses. 550. Now, we will proceed to the second category of evidence, i.e., recovery of RDX, detonators, granules, and other recoveries. RECOVERIES 551. We have examined and scrutinised the evidence of eyewitnesses. Therefore, we are of the opinion that an adverse inference needs to be drawn against the prosecution for not examining the material and important witnesses. 550. Now, we will proceed to the second category of evidence, i.e., recovery of RDX, detonators, granules, and other recoveries. RECOVERIES 551. We have examined and scrutinised the evidence of eyewitnesses. The other evidence, on which the prosecution has placed heavy reliance while trying to bring the guilt at home against the accused, is the recoveries made from the accused. 552. Following are the recoveries made from the respective accused. A) A.1 – Kamal (Exh.500) One Plastic bag containing 500gms black coloured powder. (As per CA Report: 1) Cyclonite (RDX - used as high explosive) and charcoal are detected in the exhibit. 2) Exhibit contains about 85% RDX and 15% Charcoal.) B) A.2 – Tanveer a) Hospital Search (Exh.458) : Three bottles recovered from Tanveer’s hospital locker situated in ICU: i. One black plastic bottle having label of ‘Hydrogen Peroxide Solution’ of 500 ml, ingredients, manufacturer’s name etc. ii. One brown glass bottle having the label of ‘Acetone’ of 500 ml, ingredients, manufacturer’s name, etc. iii. One brown glass bottle having the label of ‘Sulphuric Acid’ of 500 ml, ingredients, manufacturer’s name, etc. b) House Search of his brother’s house (Exh.485) : i. 3 books having name Teherik-E-Milat: Atankvaad ka zimmedaar kon, ii. One book related to SIMI having name - ‘April 2004, Tehrik-E-Millat, Ashiya, Shaikh Ahmed Yasin sukoon se so gye, Israeli kabhi sukoon se nahi reh sakenge – Hamas, iii. One book named ‘Sahi Disha Me Shatra Shakti: SIMI Sangarsha Yatra Ke 25 Varsh’, iv. One book- related to SIMI, v. One local map of Mumbai wherein on the left side ‘Map of Mumbai’ and on the right side ‘Tourist map of Mumbai’ was written. (Some places were marked with green and red ink on the map), vi. One International Map - shows the countries - Iran, Afghanistan, India, Muscat, and Oman. This map is a Xerox copy. (Map has one telephone no. i.e. 00966507551451 and one email ID - gudu_sir@yahoo.com) c) Passport Agent Office Search (Exh.450): Passport of Tanveer Ansari recovered from travel agent C) A.3 – Faisal a) House Search (Exh.533): i. Cardboard box, ii. One International Map - shows the countries - Iran, Afghanistan, India, Muscat, and Oman. This map is a Xerox copy. (Map has one telephone no. i.e. 00966507551451 and one email ID - gudu_sir@yahoo.com) c) Passport Agent Office Search (Exh.450): Passport of Tanveer Ansari recovered from travel agent C) A.3 – Faisal a) House Search (Exh.533): i. Cardboard box, ii. a plastic bag in which there is cotton on which there is black powder-like substance (As per the CA Report: Cyclonite (RDX – used as high explosive) and charcoal are detected in the exhibit.), iii. A black coloured rexine pouch containing: - -A train ticket from Howrah to Mumbai dated 20/05/2006. - Two train tickets from Howrah to Mumbai dated 22/05/2006. - ATM Card of ICICI Bank - One learning licence and one driving licence, - Currency notes of Rs. 1000/ - 30 notes of denomination of 500 Saudi Riyals (15,000 Saudi Riyals) - A train ticket from Mumbai to Howrah dated 14/05/2006 iv. Letter of Oriental Insurance Co. in the name of insured Nizamoddin Abdul Siddhique, v. Motorcycle Documents. The registration book of Bajaj pulsar motor cycle no. MH-01-TA- 9542 in the name of Mohd. Muzamil Ataur. Certificate of insurance of New India Assurance Co. in the same name, vi. One leave and license agreement, vii. Two books titled ‘April 2004, Tehrik-E-Millat, Ashiya, Shaikh Ahmed Yasin sukoon se so gye, Israeli kabhi sukoon se nahi reh sakenge – Hamas’, and two books titled ‘TehrikE-Millat Atankwad ka jimmedar kaun’, viii. Four books, two having green cover and two having pink cover titled SIMI, Sangharsh yatra ke pachis varsha, ix. Xerox copy of the map of part India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran etc., (Some places were marked with green and red ink on the map), x. The receipt dated 10/01/05 of Bajaj choice center for Rs. 59500, xi. Key of the flat of Mohd. Faisal bearing the words china, xii. Motorola, reliance and Sony Ericson mobile handsets, sim cards, batteries, etc. b) Recoveries from Railway Track (Exh.1108): One Plastic bag was recovered which is copper-brown in colour, damaged and torn at some places measuring 30cm × 45 cm covered in mud. Inside the plastic bag, another thin white plastic bag torn at one place and covered in mud. That plastic bag contained: i. 7 black rubber gaskets labeled as ‘Kanchan’ in white colour and soaked in mud, ii. Inside the plastic bag, another thin white plastic bag torn at one place and covered in mud. That plastic bag contained: i. 7 black rubber gaskets labeled as ‘Kanchan’ in white colour and soaked in mud, ii. 5 pressure cooker whistles of stainless steel fitted with black plastic cap. Kanchan is marked on the surface of the plastic cap, iii. 5 pieces of electric wire with red and white coloured PVC insulation. The length of the pieces of wires are 12cm, 28 cm, 28 cm, 60cm and 82 cm, iv. Printed Circuit board with wire and other material. There also a black wire attached to the circuit with intermediate black switch with NOKIA marking - cylindrical in shape and terminating in a pin generally used for headphone connection of a mobile, v. Copper Brown and white coloured plastic bag (Cyclonite (RDX) is detected) D) A.6 – Mohd. Ali House Search (Exh.716): i. Plastic pouches and cotton swabs taken during house search, (As per CA Report, Cyclonite(RDX) and Charcoal are detected on the Blackish stained cotton swab in a polythene bag, and Ammonium Nitrate and traces of cyclonite (RDX) are detected on the cotton Swab in a polythene bag) ii. Pressure cooker of 5 litre with the lid, whistle and steam plate, the khaki wrapper with label, two seals and white thread. E) A.7 – Sajid Office Search (Exh.1480): i. One torn plastic bag with Priyagold and Magic-Gold written on it ii. One soldering gun- old & used of MAXGOLD Co. iii. 4 pieces of Soldering wire iv. Round metallic ‘dabbi’ of soldering paste of Quick fix company. v. One printed Circuit board, vi. One multimeter of UNI-T company, Model No. DT830D having two wires-one red & one black . On black of the sad multimeter 3030598732 is paste, vii. 2 tweezers made of steel. viii. 1 screwdriver with green handle, ix. One white packet- empty with title Easy Recharge Card-Airtel printed on front. On the backside a sticker is affixed with following particulars: Mob no. 9867244681SimNo. 899192000003206618F x. Electrical components consisting of - 22 resistors, 2 capacitors, 1 coil, 8 transistors, 9 LEDs, 6 Diodes. F) A.9 – Muzzammil House Search (Exh.534): i. Three CPUs ii. One hard disk iii. One mobile phone, sim card and battery. iv. One airtel company sim card v. one pouch containing 30 DVDs vi. one 80GB Hard Disk vii. Map of Mumbai, viii. F) A.9 – Muzzammil House Search (Exh.534): i. Three CPUs ii. One hard disk iii. One mobile phone, sim card and battery. iv. One airtel company sim card v. one pouch containing 30 DVDs vi. one 80GB Hard Disk vii. Map of Mumbai, viii. two books titled April 2004, Teherik-E-Milat, and Atankwad ka jimmedar kaun, ix. one book having green cover titled SIMI sangarsh yatra ke pachis varsh, x. the statement of marks and passing certificate in the name of Muzzamil,one driving licence, brown leather purse, identity card of Oracle Co.( Two pieces), a white blank plastic card, ICICI Bank card, the plastic bag with label, brown paper outer envelope, passport, blank identity card of ALL India Association of Unani Medical Colleges, two blank identity cards of Z.V.M Unani Medical College and hospital. G) A.10 – Suhail Shaikh House Search: i. Indian Passport of A.10, ii. 6 books - Two books were titled 'SIMI, Student Islamic Movement of India'. The address of SIMl's office of Delhi was at the bottom of the front cover. Two books were titled 'Millat-eTehrik, Atankwad Ka Jimmedar Kaun' and two books were titled 'April-2004 Tehrik-e-Millat'., iii. 4 audio cassettes (Art. 253 1 to 4) - Some cassettes were titled 'Al-Quran' and some were titled 'Beauty of Islam'. iv. Mobile phone of A.10 (Art. 252), v. One map of the Middle East showing half of India. (Art. 250). A route from Salet, Tehran in Iran up to Muzaffarabad in Pakistan was marked on this map. There were some numbers in handwriting and e-mail Ids. vi. One map (Art. 248) was titled ‘Map of Mumbai'. Certain spots in Mumbai - Veer Savarkar Marg, Dadar, Mahalaxmi Temple, Reserve Bank of India, etc. were marked in red ink encircled by green ink on this map. vii. ISD Rate Card (Art. 248B) H) A.11 – Zameer Shaikh House Search: i. One Passport (Art. 133) ii. One xerox map containing part of India, Pakistan & Afghanistan. There was a number, an email id and some other thing written on the map in Urdu. (Art. 134) iii. One Book titled Tehrik-e-millat, Atankwad ka jimmedar kaun (Art-135). iv. One book titled Tehrik-e-millat, Asia, April-2004 (Art-136). v. One map of Mumbai which had markings on it with red and green ink. (Art. 137) vi. A booklet titled ‘latest road map of Mumbai & Navi Mumbai’. (Art. 138) vii. A black leather purse. (Art. 134) iii. One Book titled Tehrik-e-millat, Atankwad ka jimmedar kaun (Art-135). iv. One book titled Tehrik-e-millat, Asia, April-2004 (Art-136). v. One map of Mumbai which had markings on it with red and green ink. (Art. 137) vi. A booklet titled ‘latest road map of Mumbai & Navi Mumbai’. (Art. 138) vii. A black leather purse. (Art. 139) viii. A driving license no. MH-01-97 50299 in the name of Zameer Ahmed Latif-ur-rehman Shaikh. (Art. 140), ix. An ATM Card of Canara Bank in the same name. (Art-141). x. An ATM of Canara Bank in the name of Mohd. Zubair Ansari NY. (Art-142) xi. A pocket diary (Art-143) xii. 3 visiting cards and two chits of Sun-n-Sand. (Art-144 1 to 5) xiii. Currency notes - 6 currency notes of Rs.100/-, 10 currency notes of Rs.50/-, 3 currency notes of Rs.10/- and 1 currency notes of Rs.5/-. total Rs.1135/-. (Art. 145 colly) I) A.12 – Naveed Khan Recovery of Car (Exh.641): Six packets were sealed by ATS in envelopes having labels containing the description of the contents: i. Three cotton swabs LÁn'khZr ^^v**] ^^v&1**] ^^v&2**? are described as cotton swabs from the back of the driver seat (As per CA Report, Cyclonite (RDX), Petroleum hydrocarbon oil and Charcoal are detected) ii. three cotton swabs L^^c**] ^^c&1**] ^^c&2**? from the dash board in the boot (dikki). (As per CA Report, Ammonium Nitrate and Nitrite radicals are detected) iii. Documents of car no. MH-01-V-9568: xerox copy of certificate of insurance issued by National Insurance Company valid from the period from 28/ 11/ 05 to 27/ 11/ 06, PUC certificate issued on 09/ 06/ 06 and bill of M/ s Sai Services dated 09/ 06/ 06). Three audio cassettes seized from the from dashboard of car no. MH01-V-9568. J) A.13 – Asif Khan House Search (Exh.665): i. An ash coloured rexine bag having the name ‘Hindustan ki Kasam’ - Art-279, inside a khaki wrapper with label - Art-279A and the outer wrapper with seals Art-279B. ii. Slight white powder inside a pouch - Art-280 iii. 20 white pieces wires - Art-281 colly, Aluminium pieces -Art-282 colly., small plastic pouch containing the aluminum pieces Art 282A, Pieces of red sticking tape Art-282B, The bigger pouch which contains above articles- Art-282C, Opened brown sealed packet which contains bigger pouch Containing seals on both sides- Art 282D iv. ii. Slight white powder inside a pouch - Art-280 iii. 20 white pieces wires - Art-281 colly, Aluminium pieces -Art-282 colly., small plastic pouch containing the aluminum pieces Art 282A, Pieces of red sticking tape Art-282B, The bigger pouch which contains above articles- Art-282C, Opened brown sealed packet which contains bigger pouch Containing seals on both sides- Art 282D iv. Plastic Pouch- Article 283A: The slight white powder inside the pouch Article 283 v. White granules(Article 284) vi. Twenty- two (22) books and the spiral binded book in Urdu- Art285 (1 to 23) Book in english - Article 286 Outer cover of Frontline weekly- Article 287, Pamplet of Vector Classes- Art- 288, Visiting card of Bombino-collection- Article 289 vii. A file containing educational and other documents in the name of Ansari Mohd. Imran of School and polytechnic of Indore and Bhopal - Art 290 (1 to 26), viii. Urdu Newspaper- Article 290A ix. Plastic Bag bearing the name Japan store, Lucknow containing Urdu and English newspapers, some magazines, four CDs- Art-292 colly. x. 2 CPUs from Article 293 to Article 294. xi. One printer - Art 295 xii. One monitor- Art 296 xiii. The application for NOC to society/information to police along with agreement of leave and license- Art- 297 colly xiv. Reliance energy bill- Article 298 553. From the above referred recoveries from the respective accused, it is evident that from five accused, i.e. A.1, A.3, A.6, A.12, and A.13 RDX was seized. From A.1, 500gms of RDX was allegedly recovered, whereas, from the other accused, the RDX was allegedly collected on cotton swabs. The other recoveries from the accused are books and maps (A.2, A.3, A.9, A.10, & A.11), detonators and granules (A.13), CPUs (A.9 and A.13), wires (A.3 and A.7), printed circuit board (A.3 and A.7), soldering gun (A.7), pressure cooker (A.6), a Maruti-800 car (A.12), etc. 554. Since recovery of RDX, white granules, detonators and electronic components and equiment are connected with the bomb blasts, we will deal with these recoveries first. As books, maps, computer CPUs, etc. are not directly connected with the bomb blasts, but such evidence is brought on record as circumstances connecting the accused with the bomb blast, we will discuss the same in later part of this section. RECOVERY OF RDX & ABSENCE OF PROPER SEALING A.1 - Kamal Ansari 555. A.1 was arrested on 20/07/2006 from Basupatti, Bihar. are not directly connected with the bomb blasts, but such evidence is brought on record as circumstances connecting the accused with the bomb blast, we will discuss the same in later part of this section. RECOVERY OF RDX & ABSENCE OF PROPER SEALING A.1 - Kamal Ansari 555. A.1 was arrested on 20/07/2006 from Basupatti, Bihar. As per the case of the prosecution, A.1 was one of the planters in the present case, who planted the bomb in 645DN Virar Fast train. After arresting A.1, PI Tajne (PW-161) took him for his house search on 20/07/2006. During the said house search, the police found one plastic bag containing 500gms black coloured powder. As per the CA Report, the powder was detected to be 85% Cyclonite (RDX - used as high explosive) and 15% charcoal. The police seized the powder. 556. Learned Counsel Shri. Chaudhary submitted that, in the present case, there was a complete absence of sealing in seizures & recoveries of RDX. The seizures are eminently vulnerable to manipulation and tampering and therefore, must be closely scrutinized. 557. It is further argued that RDX was allegedly seized from five (5) accused persons. In the case of A.3 & A.6, DW-51 ACP Shengal was personally present and supervised the seizure of RDX. In the case of A.1, he received the black powder from Tajne, which he kept it with him and then after a few days sent it for FSL examination. So, DW-51 ACP Shengal is directly connected with three of the seizures i.e A.3, A.6 and A.1. It is argued that DW-51 Shengal has played a vital role in this case in falsely implicating the accused. The selection of the accused and the hoisting of evidence in this case has been done largely by him. 558. Learned SPP Shri. Thakare argues that it is not disputed that PW-161 visited Basupatti and if the seal is considered, the purpose is that no one should tamper this seal and the article seized. It is argued that the panchas to the seizure of RDX are from Bihar and it is not possible to take their signature after tampering, if any. It is thus, submitted that the argument raising a doubt about the sealing of RDX is baseless and has no substance. 559. It is argued that the panchas to the seizure of RDX are from Bihar and it is not possible to take their signature after tampering, if any. It is thus, submitted that the argument raising a doubt about the sealing of RDX is baseless and has no substance. 559. Upon considering the rival contentions, it can be seen that the challenge raised to the recovery of RDX mainly revolves around sealing of the same while it was recovered from the accused. Thus, before proceeding to consider the evidence as regards recovery of RDX from individual accused, it would be appropriate to refer to the relevant provisions under Bombay Police Manual and the law relating to sealing of seized articles. 560. Rule 148 (2) of the Bombay Police Manual, 1959 (Vol III, Appendix XXIV) reads as follows: “(B) Other precautions - Special care should be taken to avoid the following faults:- The integrity of exhibits and control samples must be safeguarded from the moment of seizure up to the completion of examination in the laboratory. This is best done by immediately packing, sealing and labelling and to prove the continuity of the integrity of the samples, the messenger or bearer will have to testify in Court that what he had received was sealed and delivered in the same condition in the laboratory. The laboratory must certify that they have compared the seals and found them to be correct. Articles should always be kept apart from one another after packing them separately and contact be scrupulously avoided in transport also.” 561. Rule 150 (3) of the Bombay Police Manual, 1959 (Vol III, Appendix XXV) reads as follows: “Rule 150 (3) - Instructions for sending material to the Director Forensic Science Laboratory… (6) All exhibits should be properly sealed with sealing wax and impressed with official device and not with a coin, buttons keys and other similar common device. Exhibits bearing only paper seals with or without Panchas signatures on them and those, which do not bear proper device on their seals, will not be considered as sealed samples. In addition to the Panchas paper seals, if any, there must be official seals with sealing wax.” 562. Rule 271 of Bombay Police Manual (Vol II, Chapter VIII) reads as follows: “271. In addition to the Panchas paper seals, if any, there must be official seals with sealing wax.” 562. Rule 271 of Bombay Police Manual (Vol II, Chapter VIII) reads as follows: “271. Muddemal Register: (1) All properly passing through the hands of the Police must be brought to account either in the "Register of property passing through the hands of the Police" commonly known as the "Muddemal Register" (Form No. PM. 8 1) or in the register known as the "Book of ornaments and wearing apparel taken from prisoners on admission to the lock-up," commonly called the "Lock-up Register" (Form No. P. M. 87). (2) (a) Property such as ornaments and wearing apparel, left on the person of a prisoner by the investigating Police Officer and taken from him as a preliminary measure by the officer in charge of the lock-up before the prisoner is put into the cell, must be entered in the "Lockup Register." (b) All other property received at the station must be entered in the "Muddemal Register." (3) (a) Columns 3 and 4 of the Muddemal Register should be filled in very carefully so as to enable each article to be identified easily with the help of information in those columns. (b) The register should be renewed at the commencement of each calendar year, the entries regarding property remaining undisposed of at the end of the year being carried forward to the new register for the following year. (c) The Sub-Inspector or Inspector-in-charge of the Police Station should check the entries in the register at the end of each month and sign it in token of his having satisfied himself about their correctness. (I.G.'s No. 9069-B, dated 16th August 1918)” 563. Thus, the standard procedure is that when articles are seized during investigation, its intergrity must be safeguarded from the moment of seizure upto the completion of examination in the labaratory. This be achieved by immediately packing, sealing and labeling and placing in the muddemal room. An entry is to be made in the muddemal register. 564. PW-140, Assistant IO, ATS, admits that the muddemal is required to be deposited in the muddemal room after taking entry in the muddemal register. The carrier collects the sample from the muddemal room in order to take the sample for FSL and corresponding entries are made in the register. An entry is to be made in the muddemal register. 564. PW-140, Assistant IO, ATS, admits that the muddemal is required to be deposited in the muddemal room after taking entry in the muddemal register. The carrier collects the sample from the muddemal room in order to take the sample for FSL and corresponding entries are made in the register. In this way a clear chain of custody can be established. 565. While stating the importance of sealing of seized articles, the investigating officers in the present matter deposed as under: - (i) PW-161 PI Tajne states that there was a prescribed procedure for sealing articles seized during investigation to rule out tampering. He also states that as a routine practice they carry lac seal with them whenever they go for search. (ii) PW-42 Sachin More (FSL Carrier) says that as a police officer, he knows that it is necessary that a packet is sealed with lac seal to prevent tampering. (iii) PW-140 PI Godbole says the purpose of sealing is to prevent the article from being tampered. (iv) PW-152 PI Bhavdhankar states that articles that are seized under panchanama are required to be sealed using lac seal and brass seal. (v) PW-189 Balu Daundkar, Dy. Director FSL, Kalina, also states that sealing is a necessary precaution to be taken to prevent tampering. 566. The Division Bench of this High Court, in the case of Ashraf Hussain Shah vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in 1996 Cri. LR (Bom) 206, has held as under: - “14. First of all we would like to observe that the learned trial judge was perfectly justified in rejecting the evidence of recovery of blood stained clothes and knife at the pointing out of the appellant, primarily on the ground that there was no evidence to indicate that after seizure these articles were sealed. A Division Bench of this Court to which one of us (Vishnu Sahai J) was a party in the case of Deoraj Deju Suvarna v. State of Maharashtra, reported in 1994 Cri LJ 3602, after considering a large number of authorities has held that not only should the prosecution adduce evidence that after seizure the articles were sealed but should also lead link evidence to the effect that till being sent to the Chemical Analyst they were kept throughout in a sealed condition. This is done to eliminate the suspicion that blood might not have been put on the articles subsequent to the recovery and prior to being sent to the Chemical Analyst.” 567. Then, in the case of Lalchand vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in (2000) 3 Mah LJ 438, the Division Bench of this Court has held as under: - “25. In this connection, it would be pertinent to refer to para 8 of the Division Bench decision of the Rajasthan High Court in State of Rajasthan v. Motia [State of Rajasthan v. Motia, 1953 SCC OnLine Raj 51 : AIR 1955 Raj 82 ] accused, wherein Wanchoo, CJ, (as he then was) observed thus: ‘… It is, therefore necessary for the prosecution to produce evidence that steps were taken at once to seal the articles, and that from the time the articles came into possession of the police to the time they were sent for identification before a Magistrate or for examination to the chemical examiner the seals remained intact. This evidence is missing in this case. It is, of course not difficult to sprinkle a few human bloodstains on articles recovered if somebody wants to do so. We do not say that this was done in the present case; but as precautions were not taken the argument raised on behalf of the accused that this might have been done remains unrefuted...’ 568. Then, in the case of Mohd. Iqbal alias Munna vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in (2016) 3 AIR Bom R(cri) 596, the Division Bench of this High Court has held as under: - “46. Though the query report was received on 13th of November, 2009, Muddemal articles like the clothes of the accused and the weapons were sent to Chemical Analyzer by Investigating Officer under requisition (Exh.107) on 2nd of February, 2010 vide Outward No. 246 of 2010. Now, from 13th of November to 2nd of February, 2010 where these articles were lying? Whether they were kept in proper sealed condition? Whether they were in proper custody?. There is no prosecution evidence to answer the aforesaid questions. The prosecution was obliged to adduce the evidence to show that after the articles seized were properly sealed and they were in proper custody and were kept throughout in a sealed condition i.e. right from the time of recovery till being sent to the Chemical Analyzer. There is no prosecution evidence to answer the aforesaid questions. The prosecution was obliged to adduce the evidence to show that after the articles seized were properly sealed and they were in proper custody and were kept throughout in a sealed condition i.e. right from the time of recovery till being sent to the Chemical Analyzer. The prosecution evidence is clearly wanting on the said aspect. Therefore, in our view, the learned Senior Counsel has rightly placed his reliance on dictum of this Court reported in 1995 Cri LJ 1432 (State of Maharashtra v. Prabhu Barku Gade) for extending benefit in favour of the appellants.” 569. Similarly, in Sanjay Devaji Ramteke vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in 2020 SCC OnLine Bom 431, the Division Bench of this Court has held thus: - “32..Contemporary document, recovery panchanama (Exh.-28) is conspicuously silent in respect of “sealing” of the clothes on the spot. Evidence of Fulchand (PW6) does not show that steps were taken by the investigating officer to seal the clothes of the appellant. Evidence of the investigating officer Sohansingh (PW4) is also silent on this aspect. He did not depose that after seizure, he applied seal to the bundle of clothes. Seizure form (Exh.-28A) regarding clothes of the appellant is also not having specimen of seal as given in format. Ultimately, during cross-examination, the investigating officer was required to admit that inadvertently it remained. Contemporaneous documents and evidence of the prosecution witness Fulchand (PW6) and even the evidence of investigating officer does not show that clothes of appellant were sealed after those were seized from the spot. In Tulshiram Bhanudas Kambale v. State of Maharashtra; reported in 2000 CRI.L.J. 1566 and Mohd. Iqbal alias Munna s/o Abdul Sattar v. State of Maharashtra, through PSO P.S. Lakadganj, Nagpur; reported in 2016 All MR (Cri) 4530, it is the direction of the Court that where evidence of the investigating officer shows that after effecting recovery of articles he did not affix the lac seals on them, no evidentiary value can be attached to said recovery. 33. Similarly, on earlier occasion also, in Lalchand Cheddilal Yadav v. The State of Maharashtra, reported in 2000 (3) Mh. L. J. 438, this Court discarded scientific evidence when it was noticed that articles stained with blood were not sealed.” 570. 33. Similarly, on earlier occasion also, in Lalchand Cheddilal Yadav v. The State of Maharashtra, reported in 2000 (3) Mh. L. J. 438, this Court discarded scientific evidence when it was noticed that articles stained with blood were not sealed.” 570. From the above referred observations of this Court, it is evident that the prosecution should establish that after effecting recovery of articles, the articles were sealed and they were kept throughout in sealed condition and were kept in proper custody till being sent to the chemical analyst. This is to be done to eliminate the suspicion that the articles were tampered. 571. Coming back to the facts of this case. A.1 – Kamal was arrested on 20/07/2006 from Basupatti, Bihar. 500 gms of RDX was allegedly recovered from his house. Let us examine the evidence in this regard. 572. A.1 – Kamal was arrested by PI Shri. Tajne (PW-161). PW-161, deposed that after the serial bomb blasts, different teams were formed for making the investigations into the blasts. He was also assisting the investigating officer in Cr. No. 77/2006 of Mumbai Central Railway Police Station. He gathered information from a reliable source on 19/07/2006 that the user of mobile number 9934610679 namely Kamal, hailing from Basupatti, Bihar is having his complicity in Mumbai Central Railway Police Station. 573. Superiors, thereupon, directed PW-161 to proceed for investigation to Patna. He, along with API Kolhatkar and PSI Sachin Kadam, left Mumbai for Patna, Bihar. They along with PSI Rajan Singh arranged a trap near the Prasad Cinema Hall in Basupatti after preliminary inquiry. They noticed two persons at about 3:50 a.m. coming towards the city from outside. PSI Rajan identified one of them as the suspect Kamal. 574. A.1 was found in possession of Nokia make mobile handset during his personal search. PW-161 prepared a detailed panchnama and, after it was over, A.1 led them to his residence on foot. 575. During search, they noticed old clothes, empty oil boxes kept below the wooden cot. They noticed a plastic bag behind these articles. It was taken out and they found that the plastic bag was containing black coloured powder weighing about 500 gms. They suspected that the powder was an explosive substance. Hence, they took out about 10 gms. powder as sample in a small plastic bag, wrapped it in a khaki paper, remaining powder was kept in a plastic jar. It was taken out and they found that the plastic bag was containing black coloured powder weighing about 500 gms. They suspected that the powder was an explosive substance. Hence, they took out about 10 gms. powder as sample in a small plastic bag, wrapped it in a khaki paper, remaining powder was kept in a plastic jar. It was also packed in a khaki paper. It was tied with thread and a label containing signatures of panchas and PW-161’s signature was pasted on the jar. The sample was also tied with the thread and a label containing PW-161’s signature and that of the panchas was pasted on it. The packet containing the sample was sealed. The jar was marked as Exh.A and the sample was marked as Exh.A1. The jar was tied across the top and bottom by thread and a label was pasted across the lead covering the said part of the jar, so that it could not be opened. All the above articles were taken into possession under the panchnama (Exh.500). 576. PW-161 deputed API Kolhatkar to carry the seized explosive powder by road as they wanted to come back to Mumbai by air. He reported to the Chief IO ACP Shengal about their arrest on returning to the ATS office. 577. In cross examination, PW-161 deposed that API Kolhatkar came by road transport and reached on 22/07/2006. He handed over the black powder to the Chief IO ACP Shengal. No panchanama was drawn at that time about handing over the plastic jar and sample. 578. After the arrest of A.1, Jaijeet Singh, Addl. CP, ATS, Mumbai, Maharashtra wrote a letter to the S.P of District Madhubani, Bihar for transfer of offence for registration and investigation. And thereby a request was made for registration and investigation of the offence of possessing explosive powder by A.1, without any valid license, in contravention of Section 4 & 5 of Explosive Substances Act 1908 r/w S.5, 6, 9(B) of Explosive Act 1884, which falls in the jurisdiction of Basupatti Police Station. 579. Thereafter, in view of the order dated 05/04/2007 (Exh.2450(2)) of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, the FIR No. 102/2006 before the Basupatti Police Station, Dist. Madhubani, Bihar was transferred to the designated court constituted under the MCOC Act 1999 at Mumbai. 580. 579. Thereafter, in view of the order dated 05/04/2007 (Exh.2450(2)) of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, the FIR No. 102/2006 before the Basupatti Police Station, Dist. Madhubani, Bihar was transferred to the designated court constituted under the MCOC Act 1999 at Mumbai. 580. At the time of arrest of A.1 by PW-161, Rajan Prasad Singh, PSI attached to SPF Patna (PW-107) was present. In his oral evidence, he corroborates the evidence of PW-161 as regards arrest of A.1, his house search, seizure of black powder, drawing of sample and sealing of the same with the remaining powder. 581. In cross examination, PW-107 has deposed that the ATS police officers from Mumbai did not ask for the official seal on 20/07/2006. He said that he knew about the procedure of affixing official seal by lac seal when any article is sealed during investigation. He further states that Mumbai police did not ask for lac seal from him. They had brought their own seal they used their seal to seal the articles that they had seized. They used the seal at the house of the accused at the time of seizure of the articles. Mumbai Police had seized and taken away the polythene bag in which the black powder was found. The polythene bag with the powder in it was kept in a plastic jar. Mumbai police did not take the signature of any police officer of Bihar present there on the labels that were affixed. 582. A panch, in presence of whom the mobile phone, cash and RDX was seized, was examined at Exh.499 as PW-22. In cross examination, PW-22 states that the sample powder of approximately 10 gms was put in a polythene bag, then it was wrapped in a khaki paper, tied with a thread, and then sealed. 583. Shri. Tajne (PW-161), in his evidence, referred Shri. Shengal as the Chief Investigating Officer at the initial stage. The prosecution did not examine him though his name was shown as a witness in the list of witnesses in the chargesheet at Sr. no. 330. Therefore, the defence made an application for examining him as a prosecution witness which was opposed by the prosecution on the ground that it is the prerogative of the prosecution to whom to examine. The prosecution did not examine him though his name was shown as a witness in the list of witnesses in the chargesheet at Sr. no. 330. Therefore, the defence made an application for examining him as a prosecution witness which was opposed by the prosecution on the ground that it is the prerogative of the prosecution to whom to examine. The application to examine Shri. Shengal as a court witness was also opposed and ultimately, before the High Court, the prosecution conceded to examine Shri. Shengal as a defence witness. Accordingly, Shri. Kishan Narayan Shengal is examined as DW-51 at Exh.4342, who was declared hostile. And then he was cross examined by the defence. 584. In his deposition, DW-51 states that PI Tajne and PSI Kadam met him at Kalachowki ATS office at 9 pm when they returned. He states that they did not show brass seal to him. The sealed mobiles were produces. The lac seal was not affixed, but packets were sealed with labels of panchas. Kolhatkar (PW-18) produced articles that were pasted with labels of panchas and tied with white thread. He admits that there was no lac seal on the articles that were brought from Bihar. 585. DW-51 then states that the articles that were produced before him was in plastic jar and the sample was in a plastic pouch. He did not send the plastic jar to the FSL. He told the I.O. PI Rathod to take it in custody and keep it in the safe custody. He had sent the sample to the FSL through PI Rathod. PI Rathod did not tell him that he had got the lac seal affixed on it. As per him, lac seal was not affixed on the sample at the ATS office. 586. It is, thus, abundantly clear that 10 gms RDX powder sample was taken in a plastic bag, the same was wrapped in a khaki paper tied with threads and a label containing signatures of PW-161 and panchas, were pasted on it. Whereas, remaining powder was kept in a plastic jar tied with thread and label containing signature of panchas and signature of PW-161, was pasted on the jar. Thus, none of the witness speaks about use of any seal, whether lac or brass seal, while packing the 10 gms sample or the remaining RDX. 587. Whereas, remaining powder was kept in a plastic jar tied with thread and label containing signature of panchas and signature of PW-161, was pasted on the jar. Thus, none of the witness speaks about use of any seal, whether lac or brass seal, while packing the 10 gms sample or the remaining RDX. 587. At this stage therefore, it is imperative to find out whether the sample was put in a tamper-proof condition. 588. The prosecution examined one Mahadev Avati (Exh.595) as PW-41, a head constable who was asked by Tajne to take sealed packet and forwarding letter to FSL Kalina. PW-41 deposed that on 31/07/2006 he was on day duty. At about 9 am, PI Tajne called him and gave him a sealed packet and a forwarding letter and asked him to reach the same to the Forensic Science Laboratory at Kalina, Santacruz. He checked the lac seal and the brass seal on the packet and the signature on the letter and its copy. The packet was in a sealed condition. 589. In cross examination, he deposed that the ATS Malkhana, Muddemal room was in the ATS police station at Kalachowki. There were five units of the ATS in Mumbai. They are at different places. When he gave his statement, he did not state at which unit PI Tajne gave him the sealed packet and the forwarding letter. He further states that he did not take the packet from the muddemal room and he does not know since when it was with PI Tajne. He further states that, in July 2006, they were using the seal of Kalachowki police station because there was no seal for ATS. 590. DW-51, after perusing the Exh.2009 case diary entry dated 07/07/2006, admits that the Station Diary Entry shows that the constable has carried brass seal of the Kalachowki police station to the ATS office. He states that generally such type of entry is required to be made when the brass seal of a police station is given outside for use and is received back. He then claimed ignorance on what date the impression of lac seal was put on the letter Exh.596 (a forwarding letter of RDX seized from A.1, to FSL). He admits that the description in the column where the seal impression is put in Exh. He then claimed ignorance on what date the impression of lac seal was put on the letter Exh.596 (a forwarding letter of RDX seized from A.1, to FSL). He admits that the description in the column where the seal impression is put in Exh. 596 shows that the seal impression was used to seal a sample of 10 gms. He further admits that impression of brass seal that is used to seal an article is required to be sent to the FSL on the forwarding letter. The impression of the brass seal in Exh.596 has been used in his opinion as described in column above it. He further states that he does not know when the lac seal impression was put on the 10 gms. sample. 591. From the above referred evidence, the things which got clarified are that the RDX which was seized from A.1, was packed in Khaki paper and tied with thread and a label containing signatures of panchas and PW-161, was pasted on the sample of 10gms and remaining RDX packed in the jar separately. The evidence of PW-161, PW-107, and PW-22 do not refer about sealing of the above referred articles. It is, thus, evident that no brass seal or lac seal was used. 592. It is further evident from the evidence of PW-41 and DW-51 that PW-41 received the sealed packet from PW-161 Shri. Tajne with forwarding letter and not from Muddemal room. DW-51 admits the fact of having impression of brass seal on the samples sent to the FSL and further he showed ignorance when the lac seal impression was put on the sample. 593. PW-189 Balu Daundkar (Chemical Analyst), in his ocular evidence, admits that the impression of seal was of Kalachowki Police Station and it was tallying with the seal of the packet. 594. Before going further, let us see the seal to which PW-41 and DW-51 are referring to. The image of the relevant portion of Exh.596, which is a forwarding letter sent to FSL along with 10gms sample of RDX seized from A.1, is reproduced here under: - 595. From the above referred image, it can be seen that the lower portion of it relates with acknowledgment given by FSL. It is dated 31/07/2006. It mentions receipt of one sealed packet. The seal, which is referred in the acknowledgment, is in the middle portion of the image. From the above referred image, it can be seen that the lower portion of it relates with acknowledgment given by FSL. It is dated 31/07/2006. It mentions receipt of one sealed packet. The seal, which is referred in the acknowledgment, is in the middle portion of the image. The said seal depicts the copy of label and impression of seal on the sample. The seal is of Kalachowki Police Station. Whereas, the evidence of PW-161, PW-107 and PW-22 do not refer to such seal, on the contrary, they only state that the sample was kept in small plastic bag, wrapped in khaki paper, which was tied with thread. Thereupon, a label containing signature of panchas and PW-161 was pasted. 596. Admittedly, the sample was seized from A.1 on 20/07/2006, it was forwarded with the forwarding letter dated 29/07/2006 to FSL and received by the FSL on 31/07/2006. The prosecution has not brought on record any evidence to show where the sample was between 20/07/2006 to 30/07/2006 and in what condition, particularly whether it was in a tamper-proof condition. Whereas, the above discussion does not even slightly suggest that it was kept in proper custody and was in a tamper-proof condition throughout. 597. For the sake of convenience, we repeat that it is a settled position of law that the prosecution should establish that after effecting recovery of articles, the articles were sealed and they were kept throughout in sealed condition and were kept in proper custody till being sent to the chemical analyst. This is to be done to eliminate the suspicion that the articles were tampered. 598. In light of the above referred findings recorded and well settled principles of law, no evidentiary value can be attached to the said recovery of RDX from A.1. A.3 – Faisal Shaikh 599. A.3 – Faisal was arrested on 28/07/2006 in Cr. No. 77/2006. According to the prosecution, A.3 was the in-charge of the entire conspiracy and execution of the bomb blasts, acting under the instructions of the L-e-T commander, Azam Cheema (wanted accused). Additionally, the prosecution asserts that A.3 was the individual who planted the bomb on the DN 619 Borivali Slow train. 600. After his arrest, the police took A.3 for his house search on 28/07/2006. Additionally, the prosecution asserts that A.3 was the individual who planted the bomb on the DN 619 Borivali Slow train. 600. After his arrest, the police took A.3 for his house search on 28/07/2006. During the said house search, the police found black powder on the floor of the upper compartment of a cupboard, which was made of cardboard. The powder was wiped with the cotton swabs. As per CA Report, it was cyclonite (RDX – used as high explosive) and charcoal. These swabs and some other articles were seized. We will now examine the evidentiary value of the seizure of RDX from A.3. 601. Learned Sr. Counsel Nagamuthu submitted that it is the prosecution’s case that a few specks of black powder were seen in A.3’s cupboard and collected in 3 cotton swabs on 28/07/2006. ACP Shengal was present during the seizure (Exh.533). As per the seizure panchnama, the three swabs of black powder were put in a khaki envelope tied with a thread and sealed with a label containing the signature of the panchas and police officials. The panchnama does not mention the use of lac seal. It is an admitted position that FSL Kalina returned the swabs seized from A.3’s house on 03/08/2006, six days after it was seized, as they were not in a sealed condition. The same was then sealed and resent to FSL on 04/08/2006. This shows that from the date of seizure on 28/07/2006, till the date of dispatch to the FSL on 03/08/2006, the swabs were in an unsealed condition and vulnerable to tampering. 602. On the other hand, learned SPP submitted that it has already been clarified that in 2006 the ATS did not have its own seal and the panch witness has very candidly stated that the packing was done in such a manner that, after tying the thread, the label bearing the signatures of the Panchas and the police officer was affixed in such a manner that, without cutting the thread or without tearing the label, the substance inside cannot be tampered with. 603. In light of the rival contentions, let us see whether the evidence brought on record indicates that the RDX was sealed in a tamper-proof condition after being seized. 604. PW-176 PI Rathod IO of Cr. 603. In light of the rival contentions, let us see whether the evidence brought on record indicates that the RDX was sealed in a tamper-proof condition after being seized. 604. PW-176 PI Rathod IO of Cr. No. 77/2006, in his deposition, stated that on 28/07/06, he, ACP Shengal, PSI Kshirsagar and staff along with A.3 - Faisal and A.9 - Muzzammil went to the house of A.3 in Bandra. A.3 showed them a room on the right side and informed that he lives there. In the living room, there was a cupboard. On inspecting the upper compartment minutely, they noticed black powder on the floor of the compartment, which was of cardboard. The powder was wiped with the cotton swabs. The swabs were put in a polythene bag and the bag was put in a cardboard box that was there, the box was wrapped with a khaki paper, tied with thread and a label containing his and panchas signatures was affixed on the knot of the thread and taken in custody. 605. PW-31 Sanford Fernandes (Panch witness) deposed that in one corner of the upper compartment, there was black powder. The officer took the powder on the cotton bundle and put it in a plastic bag, put the plastic bag in a cardboard box, wrapped it with brown paper, tied the box with a thread and took their signatures on a piece of paper and pasted it on the box. 606. From the evidence of IO PW-176 and panch witness PW-31, it is evident that the swabs, by which black powder was wiped and subsequently certified by FSL as RDX, was kept in the box which was wrapped with khaki paper tied with thread and a label containing signature of PW-176 and panchas was affixed on the knot. 607. Thus, it is further evident that the swabs were not sealed. This fact is further fortified by the evidence that the packets containing these cotton swabs were returned by FSL on the ground that it was not in a sealed condition. The FSL asked to put the lac seal of any police station and send it back. 608. Thereupon, PC More was sent to Kalachowki on 04/08/2006 to put the lac seal on the said packet. The FSL asked to put the lac seal of any police station and send it back. 608. Thereupon, PC More was sent to Kalachowki on 04/08/2006 to put the lac seal on the said packet. He did as directed and took the sample with forwarding letter dated 03/08/2006 (Exh.598), signed by him on 04/08/2006 after making the suitable correction by mentioning that the seal of Kalachowki police station is affixed. 609. The above referred evidence sufficiently establishes that the swabs in question were not sealed and in proper custody to eliminate the suspicion that it was in a tamper-proof condition. 610. At this juncture, it is important to note that the swabs were collected on 28/07/2006 from a flat alleged to be in possession of A.3 on the date of house search. But as per the story of the defence, A.3 vacated the flat on 20/06/2006. This is evident from the leave and license agreement (Exh.537). No evidence is brought on record by the prosecution to show that on the date of house search, A.3 was in possession of the said flat on the basis of any legal document. Thus, it also creates doubt about the house search and recovery. 611. In light of the above referred findings recorded and well settled principles of law, no evidentiary value can be attached to the said recovery of RDX from A.3. A.6 - Mohd. Ali 612. A.6 was arrested on 29/09/2006. As per the case of the prosecution, bombs were prepared at his house in Shivaji Nagar, Govandi. After his arrest, the police took him for his house search on 29/09/2006. During the said house search, the police noticed black and white spots on the inner side of a bed, which was wiped with cotton swabs. As per CA Report (Exh.2383), cyclonite (RDX) and charcoal were detected on one swab and ammonium, nitrate and traces of cyclonite (RDX) were detected on the other swab. 613. As regards seizure of RDX from A.6, the learned counsel for the defence submitted that on 29/09/2006, while searching A.6’s house, ACP Shengal spotted black and white stains in the inner compartment of the bed and scraped the stains with two cotton swabs. PW-161 states that there was a black patch and a white patch each about 2-3 inches. PI Tajne PW-161 and stock panchas PW-58 and Mukesh Rabadiya were present for this seizure. PW-161 states that there was a black patch and a white patch each about 2-3 inches. PI Tajne PW-161 and stock panchas PW-58 and Mukesh Rabadiya were present for this seizure. Both the panch and PW-161 mention that the swabs were sealed with paper labels but do not mention that lac seal was used. Panchnama only mentions that it was sealed with paper labels containing the signature of the panchas and police. 614. Learned Sr. Counsel Shri. Nagamuthu submitted that the seizure of RDX from A.6’s house was done in the presence of ACP Shengal and PW-161, who assisted ACP Shengal in the Malegaon investigation, and hence, the possibility of tampering and fabrication cannot be ruled out. 615. Learned Sr. Counsel Shri. Nagamuthu further submitted that the panchas to the present seizure were PW-58 and Mukesh Rabadiya (PW-74 Vishal Parmar’s employer) who have both been used as panchas previously by ACP Shengal. This shows that the seizure is a charade enacted only to implicate the accused. Further, PW-72, the carrier who took the RDX seized from A.6’s house to FSL, has stated that PW-186 ACP Patil called him to his office and handed over the packet to him there. It is, therefore, clear that the sample was kept in the IO’s personal custody and not in the muddemal room, and hence, the possibility of tampering cannot be ruled out. 616. Learned SPP argued that the panch witness has clearly stated that the packing was done in such a way that, after securing the thread, the label with the signatures of the Panchas and the police officer was attached in a manner that prevented any tampering with the contents inside, unless the thread was cut or the label was torn. 617. Learned SPP further submitted that unnecessary criticism has been made by the defence about Mukesh Rabadiya (panch witness of A.6’s house search) only because he was the employer of PW-74 (the eyewitness who identified A.4 – Ehtesham). The defence’s argument is that it cannot just be a coincidence that the employer is the panch witness and the employee is the eyewitness in the same case and therefore, both of them are planted by police. The defence’s argument is that it cannot just be a coincidence that the employer is the panch witness and the employee is the eyewitness in the same case and therefore, both of them are planted by police. Learned SPP submitted that Mukesh Rabadiya has not been examined in this case because he was not alive at the relevant time, and therefore, it would not be just and proper to condemn Mukesh Rabadiya as he is not available to clarify under what circumstances and what reasons he was a panch witness in this case. 618. In light of the rival contentions, let us examine the evidence available on record regarding seizure of RDX from A.6’s house. 619. PW-161 PI Tajne (Assistant IO) deposed that he, along with panchas and A.6 Mohd. Ali, entered the house. They took the search of a wooden box that was in the hall and found it to contain old clothes, suitcase and one Kanchan pressure cooker, that it was taken out for inspection, that on further minute observation of the bed, they noticed black and white spots on the inner side of the bed. They suspected the spots to be of some explosive substance, therefore, they wiped those white and black spots with the help of clean and dry separate cotton swabs, put the cotton swabs in small plastic bags, wrapped the bags in khaki paper, affixed label containing their and panchas signatures and sealed it at the spot. The pressure cooker was kept in a plastic bag and seized. 620. PW-186 ACP Patil states that he sent the cotton swabs to the FSL for analysis under a forwarding letter (Exh.796) with PC-27844. The report of the CA (Exh.2383) reported that cyclonite (RDX) and charcoal are detected on one swab and ammonium, nitrate and traces of cyclonite (RDX) were detected on the other swab. 621. PW-58 Pritam Mhatre (Panch Witness) deposed that inside the wooden bed, the officer saw white and black stains, the officer scraped the stains by two separate cotton swabs, put the cotton swabs in separate plastic pouches, the cotton swabs were first wetted and then the stains were scraped. The plastic pouches were packed in khaki packets and sealed and their signatures were taken. 622. The plastic pouches were packed in khaki packets and sealed and their signatures were taken. 622. From the evidence of PW-161 and PW-58, it can be seen that during the house search of A.6, inside the compartment on the floor of the bed, police saw some white and black stains, which were scraped by two separate cotton swabs. The cotton swabs were put in separate plastic pouches, which were then wrapped in khaki paper, affixed label containing their and panchas signatures and sealed it at the spot. 623. From the evidence of above referred witnesses PW-161 and PW58, the swabs were put in separate plastic pouches which were wrapped in khaki paper and thereon label was affixed containing signature of PW-161 and panchas. There is no mention of sealing of the packet in which the swabs were put in. 624. In light of the above referred evidence, it cannot be said that the prosecution has established that the swabs which were sent to FSL for chemical analysis, were kept throughout in proper condition and sealed condition, i.e. in a condition to avoid tampering of the same. 625. For the sake of convenience, we reiterate a settled position of law that the prosecution shall establish that after effecting recovery of articles, the articles were sealed and they were kept throughout in sealed condition and in proper custody till being sent to the chemical analyst. This is to be done to eliminate the suspicion that the articles were tampered. 626. Having held that the prosecution failed to prove swabs were not kept in proper custody and sealed condition, no evidentiary value can be attached to the alleged recovery of RDX from A.6. A.12 - Naveed Khan 627. A.12 – Naveed was arrested on 30/09/2006 in Cr. No. 156/2006. As per the prosecution, A.12 was one of the bomb planters in the present case. During his police custody, on 22/10/2006, A.12 allegedly volunteered to disclose the location of A.3’s Maruti-800 car, which they used for transferring the bombs from A.6’s house to A.3’s house on the night of 10/07/2006. Accordingly, a Maruti-800 car was recovered by the police, in which they saw blackish spots in the boot compartment, and in between the driver seat and the rear seat. These spots were wiped with cotton swabs. As per the CA Report (Exh. Accordingly, a Maruti-800 car was recovered by the police, in which they saw blackish spots in the boot compartment, and in between the driver seat and the rear seat. These spots were wiped with cotton swabs. As per the CA Report (Exh. 2391), cyclonite (RDX), petroleum hydrocarbon oil and charcoal were detected on three cotton swabs taken from the backside of the driver seat, and ammonium, nitrate and nitrite radicals were detected in the other three swabs taken from the boot (dikki), and cyclonite (RDX), ammonium, nitrate, nitrite, petroleum hydrocarbon oil and charcoal were detected in the car. 628. Learned Sr. Counsel Nitya Ramakrishnan argued that ATS claims that A.12 led them to a place in a block of flats where the car was found parked and told them that the key would be found with one Rizwan Khot. Upon going to Rizwan Khot and getting the key from him and opening the car, the ATS claims that some black spots in the boot and between the front and back seats were found, of which smears were taken, later found by FSL to be smears of RDX. It is submitted that the car was standing in public place and these recoveries were shown to be made after more than three months. Therefore, much weightage cannot be given to the recoveries. 629. On the other hand, learned SPP submitted that the evidence of recovery of Maruti 800 car has been criticized on the ground that 1) it was found parked in an open public space and therefore it will not come within the ambit of recovery under Section 27, and 2) the key of the car was found with Rizwan Khot who was not examined. However, it is submitted that what is relevant is the fact that A.12 took the police upto that car. And the house of Rizwan Khot being pointed by A.12 from where the key of the car was taken. 630. In light of the rival contents, let us examine the evidence regarding the recovery of car from at the instance of A.12. 631. PW-168 PI Khanvilkar in his deposition states that A.12 led them to the compound of Al Hatim Building and pointed out to a white Maruti 800 car amongst other cars that were parked by the side of the south compound wall and said that it was the car of A.3 - Faisal. 632. 631. PW-168 PI Khanvilkar in his deposition states that A.12 led them to the compound of Al Hatim Building and pointed out to a white Maruti 800 car amongst other cars that were parked by the side of the south compound wall and said that it was the car of A.3 - Faisal. 632. The car was opened with the key that was given by Rizwan Khot. He searched and minutely examined the vehicle and in the boot compartment he saw blackish spots, that similar spots were there in between the driver seat and the rear seat, that he wiped the spots from three places in the boot with the help of cotton swabs that were in the investigation kit, put them in three separate plastic pouches wrapped them in separate khaki papers, affixed labels containing the description of the contents of the pouches and his and panchas signatures and sealed them with the ATS seal, marked the pouches on the labels as Ex. A (v), A1(v1) and A2 (v2) in Marathi. 633. PW-50 Pawale (Panch witness for recovery of car) stated that police inspected the car by torch, they saw some black spots on the back side of the driver seat; the black spots were wiped by three cotton swabs out of the cotton that was, with the police in the stationery articles, that they put the cotton swabs in separate plastic bags, that there were similar black spots in the boot, they wiped the black spots by three cotton swabs and put them in separate plastic bags, put all the plastic bags in separate khaki covers, covers were pasted close and their signatures were taken on the labels that were pasted on the khaki covers, that police seized the car and took the keys. 634. PW-157 Mahesh Digambar Bagwe (FSL Carrier), in his deposition, stated that on the instructions of ACP Patil on 26/10/2006 he went to the FSL, Kalina taking with him a letter address to the FSL, Kalina, six sealed packets from the muddemal section and Maruti 800 car no. MH-01-V-9568, which was in the compound of the ATS office at Kalachowki. He deposited the six sealed packets, obtained acknowledgement on the copy of the letter, office copy of which is at Ext, 1686. 635. PW-186 ACP Patil, in his deposition, states that the report of the FSL Ext. MH-01-V-9568, which was in the compound of the ATS office at Kalachowki. He deposited the six sealed packets, obtained acknowledgement on the copy of the letter, office copy of which is at Ext, 1686. 635. PW-186 ACP Patil, in his deposition, states that the report of the FSL Ext. 2391 was received and the contents of the report show that cyclonite (RDX), petroleum hydrocarbon oil and charcoal, were detected on three cotton swabs and ammonium, nitrate and nitrite radicals were detected in the other three swabs and cyclonite (RDX), ammonium, nitrate, nitrite, petroleum hydrocarbon oil and charcoal were detected in the car. 636. As per the prosecution’s case, A.12 parked the car from where it was seized on a public road on 10/07/2006. Admittedly, the search was made on 22/10/2006, i.e. after more than three months. The car was accessible and visible to anyone since it was parked on the public road. Moreover, keys were with one Rizwan Khot, who has not been examined in this case. 637. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Himachal Pradesh vs. Jeet Singh (1999) 4 SCC 370 , has held thus: - 638. “26. There is nothing in Section 27 of the Evidence Act which renders the statement of the accused inadmissible if recovery of the articles was made from any place which is “open or accessible to others.” It is a fallacious notion that when recovery of any incriminating article was made from a place which is open or accessible to others, it would vitiate the evidence under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. Any object can be concealed in places which are open or accessible to others. For example, if the article is buried in the main roadside or if it is concealed beneath dry leaves lying on public places or kept hidden in a public office, the article would remain out of the visibility of others in normal circumstances. Until such article is disinterred, its hidden state would remain unhampered. The person who hid it alone knows where it is until he discloses that fact to any other person. Hence, the crucial question is not whether the place was accessible to others or not but whether it was ordinarily visible to others. If it is not, then it is immaterial that the concealed place is accessible to others.” [Emphasis Supplied] 639. Hence, the crucial question is not whether the place was accessible to others or not but whether it was ordinarily visible to others. If it is not, then it is immaterial that the concealed place is accessible to others.” [Emphasis Supplied] 639. In the present matter, it is not the case of the prosecution that the car was not visible to the others. Since the car was on a public road, it was visible to everyone. Furthermore, considering the period lapsed in between, which is more than three months, such recovery creates doubt about its genuineness. 640. The arguments made by the defence that in the panchnama there is no mention of lac seal, however, it has first time came in the evidence of PW-161, is contrary to record. 641. However, from panchnama, it can be revealed that the panchas have stated that after the signature of them were taken, a seal was put on the same. The panchas might not have said it in clear terms that the seal was a lac seal, but the statement in the panchnama suggests that it was the same seal which has been referred in the oral testimony of PW161. 642. However, in light of the above referred findings recorded and well settled principles of law as regards the recovery under section 27 of Indian Evidence Act and a recovery made from a place which is easily visible, no evidentiary value can be attached to the said recovery of RDX from A.12. A.13 - Asif Khan Bashir Khan 643. A.13 was arrested on 03/10/2006 in Cr. No. 156/2006. As per the prosecution, he was the planter who planted bomb in DN 621 Virar Fast train. During his police custody, on 09/10/2006, he volunteered to show the place where he had hidden some remaining articles used for preparing the bombs. 644. Learned Counsel Chaudhary states that neither the panch, nor the investigating officer mentions the presence of any ‘black oily lumps’, RDX or any powder in their oral substantive evidence. PW-55 Panch witness states that he had seen the rexine bag from inside but does not mention seeing any ‘black oily lumps’. It is submitted that whereas in the CA Report there is a mention of black oily lumps. Mentioning of black oily lumps were found. This creates doubt about the recovery of bag having black oily lumps. 645. PW-55 Panch witness states that he had seen the rexine bag from inside but does not mention seeing any ‘black oily lumps’. It is submitted that whereas in the CA Report there is a mention of black oily lumps. Mentioning of black oily lumps were found. This creates doubt about the recovery of bag having black oily lumps. 645. It is further argued that the sealed packets were handed over to the carrier PW-164 by ACP Patil (PW-186) and not from muddemal room. It is further pointed out that the malkhana is at Kalachowki whereas, packets were handed over to PW-164 at Bhoiwada police station, which shows that it was not in proper custody and in tamper proof condition. 646. The bag having alleged black oily lumps, granules and detonators were seized by putting label on it to the signature of panchas and PW-16. It is argued that no lac seal was used. It is, therefore, argued that on the ground of not having proper seal and not keeping the above referred articles in proper custody, this seizure cannot be relied upon. 647. Learned SPP submitted that, as regards the allegations that the material recovered from A.13’s flat was planted by the investigating agencies, states that 23 Books, wires, granules, detonators were found at the Mira Road flat. If we think of all these items collectively, we can imagine its link to the case. Further Learned SPP argues whether it can even occur to anyone that we must collect such-such things and plant them at the flat so that it will look like the residing people were planning a bomb blast. Learned SPP submits that if at all the materials were planted, they would have been planted in such a manner that would provide a concrete link furthering the case of the prosecution. Irrelevant things would not have been planted. Further, Learned SPP states that as the Panch witness has been examined, the theory of planting is not tenable. 648. Further, Learned SPP states that no case is perfect. There is always some or the other lack in the procedure. Little allegations such as ATS officials did not visit Mira Road flat, the key maker was not called, the panchanama was not recorded, the panch witnesses were not with them, etc. will not go to the root of the matter of this stature. 649. There is always some or the other lack in the procedure. Little allegations such as ATS officials did not visit Mira Road flat, the key maker was not called, the panchanama was not recorded, the panch witnesses were not with them, etc. will not go to the root of the matter of this stature. 649. Shri. Tajne (PW-161), in his deposition, stated that he was interrogating A.13 along with ACP Tawde, PSI Kadam and staff on 09/10/2006. A.13 expressed his desire to make a voluntary disclosure. 650. PW-161 further states that, after reaching to his flat, A.13 took them and the panchas to the bedroom and took out one rexine bag (Art.279) that was kept below suitcase and other bags in the bedroom. A.13 opened the zip of the rexine bag and took out one white plastic bag (Art.284A). On examining the contents of the plastic bag, they found white granules (Art.284) in it. It was weighing about 2.7 kgs. They asked the accused about the granules, but he did not give any reply. The smell of the granules was strong. They suspected them to be explosive, hence they took out two samples of 10 gms each and put them in small separate plastic pouches. Thereafter, A.13 took a blue coloured plastic bag from the other side of the rexine bag. It was containing 10 aluminium tubes to which wires were joined. On examination, they found them to be electronic detonators. They carefully kept those detonators in plastic bottles. PW-161 pasted labels containing his signature and Panchas’ signature on the samples of the granules and the plastic bottles containing detonators and sealed them. The rexine bag was also seized. 651. PW-55 then narrated the story after reaching the flat of A.13. He states that A.13 took them inside to a bedroom on the left side. An attache and a rexine bag were in the room. The accused opened the rexine bag and took out articles that were in a transparent bag. There was white powder in the transparent bag. In the corner of the rexine bag, there was a blue carry bag. From the carry bag, he produced 20 pieces of white wire, each about 5-6 inches long, two of which were attached to an aluminum head that was about one and half inches long. The powder was weighed and found to be 2.700 kgs. In the corner of the rexine bag, there was a blue carry bag. From the carry bag, he produced 20 pieces of white wire, each about 5-6 inches long, two of which were attached to an aluminum head that was about one and half inches long. The powder was weighed and found to be 2.700 kgs. Two 10 gm samples were taken from the powder in separate bags. The remaining powder was packed in a khaki paper seal and their signatures taken. The wires were wrapped in cotton, put in plastic bottle that was in the kitchen, a label was pasted on it, and they were asked to sign. The samples were in khaki papers, sealed, and their signature were put on label. The rexine bag was ash colored, having chain, and the words ‘Hindustan ki Kasam’. PW-55 had seen the bag from inside. 652. PW-55 further states that they went back to the ATS office at Kalachowki, that the officer told them that he would have to call the dog squad for examining the articles that were seized. The packet of 10 gms. white powder was opened and it was placed before the dog, that when the dog smelt it, it started barking, the dog squad police said that the powder is explosive. The dog squad police lighted the powder which caught fire and gave a bad odour and it was cracking, that the remaining powder was kept in the packet and resealed. 653. PW-161, in cross examination, admits that there used to be a station diary entry when seal was taken out. There is no such entry on 09/10/2006 about taking the seal outside. There is no entry about he or his staff depositing the seal and sealing material at the Kalachowki unit on that day. No separate seal movement register was maintained. 654. PW-150 Assistant IO, who was present for the recovery panchanama of A.13, in cross examination, deposed that only one brass seal was provided to the ATS and it was at Kalachowki. He personally did not take the seal out of the office at any time. He had not seen anyone taking out the seal from the office. He had not seen any one bringing the seal at the spot when any panchanama was in progress. 655. He personally did not take the seal out of the office at any time. He had not seen anyone taking out the seal from the office. He had not seen any one bringing the seal at the spot when any panchanama was in progress. 655. From the cross examination of PW-161 and PW-150, it is evident that there is no evidence brought on record by the prosecution that at the time of seizure of bag having black oily lumps, granules and detonators, lac seal was with PW-161. In these circumstances, the only conclusion about the word ‘seal’ used in the panchnama can be drawn as a seal by label affixed on the packets in which the articles were put in and such label was signed by the panchas and PW-161. 656. Moreover, it has come in the evidence that A.13 was taken from Bhoiwada police station, whereas, admittedly the seal was available at Kalachowki police station. No evidence is brought on record to show that the seal was taken from Kalachowki while going for house search of A.13. 657. PW-161, in his evidence, stated that lac seal was used while sealing the packets of articles recovered from the house of A.13. The FSL report also corroborates the same. However, as we have observed that there is no evidence to carry seal to the house of A.13, the question arises when such seal was put on the packets. 658. In the above referred backdrop it is also important to note here that PW-164 was handed over a forwarding letter for FSL along with the packets by PW-186 ACP Patil. The packets were not collected by PW-164 from malkhana, which was at Kalachowki. There is nothing to show that when the said packets which were handed over to PW-164, were taken out from the malkhana and brought to Bhoiwada police station. Thus, it is difficult to say that the articles were in proper custody and in a tamper-proof condition. 659. In light of the above referred findings recorded and well settled principles of law, no evidentiary value can be attached to the said recovery of RDX from A.13. 660. As regards the recovery of printed circuit boards. It is pertinent to note that there is a technical report of the circuit board recovered from A.7 – Sajid. 659. In light of the above referred findings recorded and well settled principles of law, no evidentiary value can be attached to the said recovery of RDX from A.13. 660. As regards the recovery of printed circuit boards. It is pertinent to note that there is a technical report of the circuit board recovered from A.7 – Sajid. The report reads thus “the electronic circuit in exhibit (4) contains Dual Tone Multi-Frequency (DTMF) receiver integrated circuit (IC) MT8870DE along with mobile wire, power wire and other components. These type of ICs are commonly used in the telephone circuits. It converts DTMF (tone) signal into its equivalent Binary Coded Decimal (BCD) code. A mobile phone or a specially built receiver circuit must be used along with the electronic circuit in exhibit (4) to provide the necessary trigger for the detonator. Any action in the mobile phone like call form other phone (landline or mobile), alarm feature of mobile phone... etc can trigger the detonator. Also most mobile phones can be set to emit a special ring tone when a call comes in from a specific phone number. The ringing of that tone can trigger the detonator.” 661. However, the prosecution has not brought on record what type of bombs were used in the present case. There is no evidence to show that the above referred circuit board was required for type of bomb used in the present case. Therefore, the recovery of circuit board will be dealt with in the second category of recovery, i.e. recovery other than the RDX, granules and detonators. Recoveries Other Than RDX, Granules, & Detonators 662. The relevance of the recoveries other than RDX, granules, detonators and circuit boards, and its evidentiary value will be dealt with and considered at the end of the part relating to the confessional statements. CONFESSION Prior Approval To Invoke MCOCA 663. In this case, the prior approval was granted by Addl. C.P. Shri. Jaiswal for invocation of provisions of MCOCA on a proposal of Shri. Khandekar (PW-174). 664. It is the case of the prosecution that, Shri. Khandekar (PW-174) was informed by Jaijeet Singh, Addl. C.P., ATS Mumbai, that, the DGP has transferred the investigation of the bomb blasts to ATS and ordered him to conduct the investigation of Crime No. 156 of 2006. 665. Then, PW-174 conducted the investigation parallel with investigation in the other crimes. 664. It is the case of the prosecution that, Shri. Khandekar (PW-174) was informed by Jaijeet Singh, Addl. C.P., ATS Mumbai, that, the DGP has transferred the investigation of the bomb blasts to ATS and ordered him to conduct the investigation of Crime No. 156 of 2006. 665. Then, PW-174 conducted the investigation parallel with investigation in the other crimes. Thereupon, PI Agrawal and PI Kadam received an information that Asif Khan Bashir Khan (A.13) is an active member of SIMI and he is involved in the railway blasts. 666. PW-174 also got to know from his sources that Asif Khan (A.13) had played a vital role in the Borivali Blast. He then passed on this information to DCP Bajaj, who thereupon, directed PW-174 to gather more information from his sources and other IOs and make a comprehensive report about it. 667. Subsequently, PW-174 came to know that there were some cases filed against A.13 at Jalgaon. He, therefore, asked ACP Tawde to collect information about those cases. ACP Tawde, accordingly, deputed an officer viz. PSI Padmakar Deore (PW-180) to collect the information regarding whereabouts of A.13 and cases, if any, lodged against him. 668. Whereupon, PW-180 along with PC Santosh Chorge went to Jalgaon, where they went to the SP office and met the concerned officers who were handling the cell of SIMI activists. There, they found the photograph of A.13 in the record and the information that he was the President of Jalgaon Unit of SIMI and there were two crimes registered against him with MIDC Police Station, Jalgaon, namely, (1) CR. No.178/1999 for the offences punishable under Sections 153-A(1) of IPC read with section 34 of IPC, and (2) CR No.103/2001 for the offences punishable under Section 153-A(1) of IPC read with Section 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and Section 120-B of IPC, investigated by Local Crime Branch, Jalgaon. 669. PSI Deore (PW-180) and PC Chorge collected the photocopies of the FIR and other papers of both the crimes from the Police Station. To obtain further information, they went to the CJM Court and submitted an application seeking copies of the relevant papers of the above referred crimes against A.13. 670. PSI Deore (PW-180) then called PW-174 on phone and informed him the information he gathered, i.e., two crime numbers, sections of the offences, the date of order of conviction, etc. To obtain further information, they went to the CJM Court and submitted an application seeking copies of the relevant papers of the above referred crimes against A.13. 670. PSI Deore (PW-180) then called PW-174 on phone and informed him the information he gathered, i.e., two crime numbers, sections of the offences, the date of order of conviction, etc. PW-174, thereupon, wrote down all the given information, upon which he realized that A.13 had more than one offences registered against him during the last 10 years. 671. PW-174 at the same time was also convinced that the A.1, A.2 & A.4 were involved in the commission of the crime that he was investigating. 672. This information, according to PW-174, disclosed to him that though SIMI was banned, it was operating as an illegal criminal organization, i.e., an organized crime syndicate and the accused A.2, A.4, and A.13 were continuing with the unlawful activities under that syndicate and promoting insurgency and obtaining pecuniary gains. 673. PW-174, therefore, prepared a proposal for invocation of provisions of MCOCA to the Crime No. 156/2006, which he was investigating. 674. On 18/09/2006, PW-174 sent the proposal for prior approval to DCP Naval Bajaj, ATS, Mumbai for onward submission. DCP Bajaj forwarded the proposal to Additional CP/ DIG Moffusil Shri S.K. Jaiswal. 675. Addl. CP Shri. Jaiswal granted prior approval on 24/09/2006 by recording his satisfaction that A.4 and A.2 are the active members of an organized crime syndicate/unlawful association, of which A.13 is a key member and they had been indulging in continuing unlawful activities which have been prohibited by the law for the time being in force. And which are cognizable offences punishable with the imprisonment of three years or more and have continually conspired for promoting insurgency to overawe the Government by criminal force. 676. The defence has raised challenge to the prior approval on numerous grounds. And after hearing both the parties, the following points emerged, which need to be discussed and answered. The points are namely: - (1) Whether Shri. Jaiswal, who granted prior approval, had jurisdiction to grant prior approval to invoke MCOCA? (2) Whether there was proper proposal seeking the prior approval? / Whether relevant documents and material were available before the sanctioning authority to reach a subjective satisfaction? (3) Whether the authority has applied its mind while granting prior approval? (2) Whether there was proper proposal seeking the prior approval? / Whether relevant documents and material were available before the sanctioning authority to reach a subjective satisfaction? (3) Whether the authority has applied its mind while granting prior approval? (4) Whether the fact that Shri. Jaiswal did not enter into the witness box, invalidate the prior approval on the ground that the same is not proved? (5) PW-174 identified the signature of Shri. Jaiswal, whether such identification of the signature will be sufficient to prove the contents of prior approval? (6) Whether a presumption under section 114 illustration (e) of Indian Evidence Act that the official acts performed by the public servants have been regularly performed will be applicable to the prior approval in question? (7) Whether the two chargesheets against A.13, which have been relied upon for grant of prior approval, satisfy the prerequisites to constitute ‘continuing unlawful activity’? 677. Let us now proceed to deal with each of the points referred herein above raised in respect of validity of prior approval. Point no. 1: - Whether Shri. Jaiswal, who granted prior approval, had jurisdiction to grant prior approval to invoke MCOCA? 678. It is argued that as Shri. Jaiswal was working as an Additional CP Moffusil, and hence he did not have authority to grant prior approval as all the seven blasts took place within Mumbai City and not within his jurisdiction. 679. The Station Diary Exh.2546 shows that, on 18/09/2006, proposal for obtaining prior approval under Section 23(1)(a) of the MCOCA to invoke the provisions of MCOCA to Borivali Railway Police Station Crime No.156 of 2006 was submitted through DCP (Mumbai), ATS to the Additional CP, ATS, Mumbai and the prior approval was accorded by Additional CP, ATS, Moffusil. Thus, it is submitted that Shri. Jaiswal had no jurisdiction to grant prior approval in the present matter. 680. It is submitted that Shri. Jaiswal, being Addl. CP Moffusil, granted prior approval for the Malegaon Blast Case within Nashik district. It is submitted that a classification is created through separate posts, and therefore, there are two separate posts, one is having jurisdiction over Mumbai and another will have jurisdiction over rest of the Maharashtra. It is stated that rank of ‘Addl. CP’ is equivalent to the rank of ‘DIG’. It is submitted that Shri. Jaijeet Singh was Addl. CP, ATS for Mumbai City, whereas, Shri. Jaiswal was Addl. It is stated that rank of ‘Addl. CP’ is equivalent to the rank of ‘DIG’. It is submitted that Shri. Jaijeet Singh was Addl. CP, ATS for Mumbai City, whereas, Shri. Jaiswal was Addl. CP, ATS for Moffusil/ rest of Maharashtra. Therefore, Shri. Jaiswal had no authority in this case to grant prior approval. 681. Learned SPP submits that the prior approval granted by Shri. Jaiswal is under section 23(1)(a) of MCOCA wherein the expression ‘rank’ is used, which means a class or category which encompasses multiple posts. It is, therefore, argued that since there is no dispute that Shri. Jaiswal is of the rank of DIG, the arguments about the jurisdiction of Shri. Jaiswal as made by the defence are contrary to the law and liable to be rejected. To buttress his arguments, he has placed reliance on Zakir Abdul Mirajkar v. State of Maharashtra, (2023) 20 SCC 408 . 682. PW-174 in his oral evidence states that there were two Additional CPs in the ATS at that time. One was Jaijeet Singh, who had the charge of Mumbai and one was Jaiswal who had the charge of remaining Maharashtra. 683. The Government Order dated 8th July 2004 (Exh.1611) relates to constitution of Anti-Terrorist Squad (ATS). By the said notification, 26 posts were created under the ATS. Two posts out of the same were for Deputy Inspector General. One Deputy IG for Mumbai and another for rest of Maharashtra/Moffusil. 684. PW-186 states that, for the sake of convenience, one Additional CP was looking after the work of Mumbai and other was looking after the work of Moffusil. 685. Admittedly, Shri. Jaiswal granted prior approval under section 23(1)(a) of MCOCA which says that no information of the commission of an offence of organised crime, shall be recorded by a police officer without the prior approval of the police officer not below the rank of Deputy Inspector General of Police. 686. Thus, from the language of section 23(1)(a) of MCOCA, the police officer who is competent to grant the prior approval shall not be below the rank of Deputy Inspector General of Police. It is to be noted that the expression used is ‘rank’. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India had an occasion to deal with the scope of the expression ‘rank’ in the case of Zakir Abdul Mirajkar (supra). The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held thus: - “70. It is to be noted that the expression used is ‘rank’. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India had an occasion to deal with the scope of the expression ‘rank’ in the case of Zakir Abdul Mirajkar (supra). The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held thus: - “70. It is our view that the expression “rank” must be understood as a class or category which encompasses multiple posts. The posts of SP, Additional SP, and DCP all fall within the same rank as they exercise similar functions and powers and operate within similar spheres of authority. Every person within a particular rank will not be of the same seniority. Officers of the same rank may have been in service for a different number of years. At times, this may even bear on the post to which they are appointed but their rank remains undisturbed. A difference in the seniority of a particular officer is not the same as a difference in their ranks. The insignia on officers' uniforms denote, in this case, their seniority as well as their designations.” 687. From the above referred exposition of law, it is evident that the expression ‘rank’ must be understood as a class or category which encompasses multiple posts. Every person within a particular rank remains undisturbed while exercising similar functions and powers. Thus, in absence of any dispute that Shri. Jaiswal was of the rank of Deputy Inspector General of Police, we do not find any merit in the argument that merely because he was not Addl. CP of Mumbai, but of Mofussil, the prior approval will vitiate. PW-186 has rightly pointed out that it is for the sake of convenience that one Addl. C.P. was looking after the work of Mumbai and other of Mofussil. In the circumstances, we reject the submission of the defence and it is held that Shri. Jaiswal had authority to grant prior approval to invoke MCOCA in the present matter. Point No. 2 to 6 688. Before discussing points no. 2 to 6, it will be beneficial to reiterate the law as regards prior approval. We have considered hosts of authorities on this point, namely, Fuleshwar Gope ..vs.. Union of India, reported in 2024 SCC OnLine 2610, Central Bureau of Investigation ..vs.. Ashok Kumar Agrawal, reported in (2014) 14 SCC 295 , Prakash Singh Badal ..vs.. Before discussing points no. 2 to 6, it will be beneficial to reiterate the law as regards prior approval. We have considered hosts of authorities on this point, namely, Fuleshwar Gope ..vs.. Union of India, reported in 2024 SCC OnLine 2610, Central Bureau of Investigation ..vs.. Ashok Kumar Agrawal, reported in (2014) 14 SCC 295 , Prakash Singh Badal ..vs.. State of Punjab, reported in (2007) 1 SCC 1 , State of Karnataka ..vs.. S. Subbegowda, reported in (2023) SCC OnLine SC 911, Vijay Rajmohan ..vs.. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2023) 1 SCC 329 , State of M.P. ..vs..Harishankar Bhagwan Prasad Tripathi, reported in (2010) 8 SCC 655 , State of Punjab ..vs.. Mohd. Iqbal Bhatti, reported in (2009) 17 SCC 92 , Mohd. Iqbal M. Shaikh ..vs.. State of Maharashtra, reported in (1998) 4 SCC 494 , State of Bihar ..vs.. P.P. Sharma, reported in 1992 Suppl. (1) SCC 222, Mansukhlal Vitthaldas Chauhan. ..vs.. State of Gujarat, reported in (1997) 7 SCC 622 . The principles which could be culled out from the above referred authorities are as under: - A) The validity of sanction, which decides the competence of the Court trying the accused, is based on the process followed while granting of sanction. The process of grant of sanction is not an idle formality or acrimonious exercise, but a solemn and sacrosanct act. Sanction is a weapon to ensure discouragement of frivolous and vexatious prosecution and is a safeguard for the innocent but not a shield for the guilty. Therefore, independence of the authority granting approval/sanction is sine-qua-non, without which, it would have lost its entire purpose. B) Invalidity of sanction, where sanction order exists, can be raised on diverse grounds like (1) non-availability of material before the sanctioning authority or all the relevant material was not placed before the authority, (2) the authority has not applied its mind to the material placed before the Authority, (3) insufficiency of material, (4) the order of sanction having been passed by an authority not authorized or competent to grant such sanction, (5) bias of the sanctioning authority. The list is only illustrative and not exhaustive. C) The validity of the sanction would depend upon the material placed before the Sanctioning Authority and the fact that all the relevant facts, material and evidence have been considered by the Sanctioning Authority. Consideration implies application of mind. The list is only illustrative and not exhaustive. C) The validity of the sanction would depend upon the material placed before the Sanctioning Authority and the fact that all the relevant facts, material and evidence have been considered by the Sanctioning Authority. Consideration implies application of mind. The order of sanction must ex facie disclose that the Sanctioning Authority had considered the material placed before it. It is desirable that the facts should be referred to on the face of the sanction. D) Where the sanction order does not speak for itself, and in case the facts constituting the offence charged are not shown on the face of the sanction, it shoul Whether there was proper proposal seeking the prior approval? /d be proved by leading evidence that all the particulars and facts were placed before the Sanctioning Authority for due application of mind. In case the sanction speaks for itself, then the satisfaction of the sanctioning authority is apparent by reading the order. E) So long as the sanction is by a Competent Authority and after applying its mind to all materials and the same being reflected in the order, the sanction would hold to be valid. When an order does not so indicate, it would not render the order of approval or sanction to be invalid unless the prosecution fails to adduce evidence aliunde of the person who granted the sanction and that would be sufficient compliance. The Court would then look into such evidence to arrive at a conclusion as to whether application of mind was present or absent. F) In every individual case, the prosecution has to establish and satisfy the Court by leading evidence that the entire relevant facts had been placed before the Sanctioning Authority and the Authority had applied its mind on the same and that the sanction had been granted in accordance with law. G) As regards the grant/non-grant of sanction, it is what sets in motion, the machinery of strict laws, such as MCOCA or UAPA. Given the severity of these laws and the nature of activities with which they are associated, the effect that they have on the person accused thereunder is not only within the realm of law, but also drastically affects social and personal life. Therefore, the procedure qua sanction provided in the legislation are meant to be followed strictly, to the letter more so to the spirit. Therefore, the procedure qua sanction provided in the legislation are meant to be followed strictly, to the letter more so to the spirit. Even the slightest of variation from the written word may render the proceedings arising therefrom to be cast in doubt. H) The stages of proceedings at which an accused could raise the issue with regard to the validity of the sanction would be the stage when the Court takes cognizance of the offence, the stage when the charge is to be framed by the Court or at the stage when the trial is complete, i.e., at the stage of final arguments in the trial. Such issue could be raised before the Court in appeal, revision or confirmation. 689. In light of the above referred well settled law, we now proceed to deal with each of the points referred herein above raised in respect of validity of prior approval. Point No. 2: - Whether there was proper proposal seeking the prior approval? / Whether relevant documents and material were available before the sanctioning authority to reach a subjective satisfaction? 690. Learned Sr. Counsel Nitya Ramakrishnan submitted that the prior approval cursorily refers to pre-existing chargesheets against A.13 without even mentioning the crime numbers. Prior approval is said to be based on ‘documents’. No documents have been listed, and there is no record of any documents being sent apart from the proposal. As per PW-174, apart from the 2.5 pages long proposal, no documents were sent with the proposal. PW-174’s proposal was based only on a telephonic conversation with PSI Deore (PW-180), who had gone to investigate A.13’s antecedents at Jalgaon Police Station, and was made without reading the chargesheets. 691. Learned Sr. Counsel Nitya Ramakrishnan further stated that there is no case diary entry regarding PW-174 receiving copies of FIR, order on charge, etc. or sending it forward to Addl. CP Jaiswal, though he claims that he sent these documents ‘subsequently’. Moreover, as per PSI Deore (PW-180), who had been tasked with obtaining the chargesheets from Jalgaon, received copies of documents relating to Crime No. 103/01 only on 29/09/2006, i.e. five days after the issuance of prior approval and thus, these could not have been perused by Shri. Jaiswal while issuing his order. 692. Moreover, as per PSI Deore (PW-180), who had been tasked with obtaining the chargesheets from Jalgaon, received copies of documents relating to Crime No. 103/01 only on 29/09/2006, i.e. five days after the issuance of prior approval and thus, these could not have been perused by Shri. Jaiswal while issuing his order. 692. It is argued that, at the stage of grant of prior approval, the material which was collected by the prosecution did not justify the grant of prior approval. 693. On the other hand, learned SPP Shri. Thakare submits that there is no format laid down for the manner in which the prior approval has to be given. It is submitted that PW-174 PI Khandekar has categorically deposed that, after sending the proposal, he has personally discussed the material with Shri. Jaiswal giving details of the information he received about the crimes pending against A.13. It is argued that Shri. Jaiswal relied upon such information which was procured through public servant. 694. It is further argued that the material taken into consideration by Shri. Jaiswal is fortified by the record produced in evidence and it is not contradicted. Therefore, even if physically, the certified copy of the previous charge-sheet against A.13 was not before Shri. Jaiswal, it does not vitiate his subjective satisfaction to grant prior approval. 695. In light of rival contentions on above referred point no. 2, it will be appropriate to first refer to the letter of prior approval issued by Shri. S.K.Jaiswal, DIG/Addl.C.P., ATS, Mumbai, which reads thus: - “No.1490/Addl.C.P./ATS/2006 Office of the Dy. Inspector General of Police & Addl. Commissioner of Police, Anti Terrorism Squad, Mumbai. Date: 24/09/2006 PRIOR APPROVAL Reference: 1) Papers of investigation in Borivali Railway Police Station, Mumbai C.R. No. 156/2006 U/secs. 302, 307, 326, 436, 427, 120 (B), 121 (A), 123, 124 /w 34