NIA unlikely to appeal against Samjhauta verdict

NEW DELHI: NIA is unlikely to appeal against the acquittal of the accused in the Samjhauta blast case, sources said adding that the agency’s investigations into “Hindu terror cases” are over and there was possibility of any fresh evidence cropping up.


NIA’s investigators and legal team had decided not to go on appeal against the acquittal of the accused, including

Swami Aseemanand

, in Ajmer and Mecca Masjid blast cases in 2017 and 2018 respectively as evidence in all the cases was similar. The agency is likely to take the same stand over the Samjhauta blast case, sources said.

Sources said two accused persons — Ramchandra Kalsangra and Sandeep Dange — in these cases are still absconding but there is no aspect of alleged “Hindu terror probe” is pending any more.

The Panchkula court’s verdict also means that Swami Aseemanand, who was once described as the mastermind of three blasts carried out by ‘

Hindu

’ extremists, is now a free man.

BJP has repeatedly claimed that the term “Hindu terror” was coined by Congress and false cases were registered under the UPA government.

In all the three blasts in 2017 — at Mecca Masjid in Hyderabad, Samjhauta train and Ajmer Sharif, there was similar evidence and chargesheets were filed based on the confessional statement of Aseemanand, who retracted in court later. In fact, while acquitting him in the Mecca Masjid blast case last year, the court had observed that the confession was not voluntary.

NIA decided against appeal in Ajmer and Mecca Masjid blasts as there was no fresh evidence which would have helped secure a conviction. All the officers related to the cases — including the public prosecutor, investigating officer, SP, DIG, IG, legal advisor of NIA and DG, had opined that there was no need to appeal.

The agency feels since the charges are based on identical evidence in Samjhauta too, and accused has retracted from his confession or most of the witnesses have turned hostile, going to a higher court to challenge the acquittal in this case too would be non-productive.