Court refuses in-camera trial in Malegaon blast case

A special court here on Tuesday refused an in-camera trial in the 2008 Malegaon blast case, in which BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur is one of the accused, saying it wants to conduct the proceedings in a "transparent manner". The court rejected an application filed by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in this regard.

An in-camera hearing is conducted in private with only the judge, lawyers, accused and witnesses concerned in attendance. The proceedings of such hearing are not made known to the media or the public. Special NIA judge V S Padalkar said conducting the trial in a "transparent manner" is among the reasons for rejecting the NIA's plea.

He allowed media to cover the case with "certain restrictions". He said mediapersons need to submit true copies of their identity cards issued by their respective media houses.

There should not be use of any electronic device and the matter be reported according to factual position, the court said. It further said that there should not be any editorial, personal opinion or discussion of any kind until the end of trial.

Interaction with the parties concerned is permitted subjected to restrictions that the record copy of conversation be placed with an affidavit of mediapersons immediately before the court. In case of breach of provisions, legal action will be taken according to provision of law, the judge said.

The NIA had earlier moved a plea before the court, saying while it is in favour of freedom of press, the trial should be held in-camera as it is a "sensitive matter". In its plea, the prosecuting agency said it wanted to ensure there was communal harmony and also claimed there was a threat to the witnesses.

However, the court observed that the NIA did not submit any information before it on any "internal security threat or communal disharmony". There was no letter received from the NIA on threat to witnesses, the court said.

The court relied on provisions of the Maharashtra Witness Protection and Security Act 2017, and said till date, nobody, including witnesses, appeared before it with any grievance and applied for protection. The judge observed that the media's role is very clear and they being the main pillar of democracy are bent upon to publish the matter according to actual events that took place in the court.

Though it was pointed out that some defamatory matters were published in the newspapers, the court said, till date, no legal action has been taken for incorrect publication either by Lt Col Prasad Purohit and Thakur, who were in favour of in-camera trial, or NIA. Had it been a fact that on account of incorrect publication, the person's dignity, honour, is defamed, then a legal remedy was available to prosecute the person who published it.

But not a single notice has been forwarded against media by accused or NIA for calling upon explanation, the court observed. Earlier, some journalists had filed an intervention application challenging the NIA's plea, saying it should be an open trial to ensure transparency, and that there were enough safeguards to protect witnesses under the NIA Act.

The journalists also said there was no instance of any threat to the witnesses. Six people were killed and nearly 100 others injured when a bomb strapped to a motorcycle went off near a mosque in Nashik district's Malegaon town, located about 200 km from here, on September 29, 2008.

The trial in the case began in October last year after the special court framed charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against Purohit, Thakur and others. Thakur and other accused are currently out on bail. The trial court has examined around 130 witnesses, out of the 475 that are listed.