Mumbai, Aug 12 A special court here on Wednesday granted bail to an accused in the 2011 Mumbai serial bomb blasts case, citing his prolonged incarceration of nearly 15 years and the principle of parity with co-accused who were previously released.
Special judge, hearing cases filed under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA), Satyanarayan R Navander, asserted that the court was "conscious that the allegations are "extremely serious" and has refrained from "expressing any opinion on the merits of the prosecution evidence".
Accused Zainul Shaikh's plea was "considered exclusively on the constitutional ground of prolonged incarceration and on the principle of parity with the co- accused already released on bail", the judge stated.
Shaikh has been in judicial custody since 2012.
At 6.54 pm on July 13, 2011, a powerful bomb exploded outside the Prasad Chambers near the Opera House in south Mumbai. It was part of three coordinated evening rush-hour serial blasts (including Zaveri Bazaar and Dadar) that killed 27 people and injured over 130 others.
Advocate Wahab Khan, appearing for the accused, pressed for the bail primarily on the grounds of parity and long incarceration.
The defence pointed out that two co-accused -- Naquee Ahmed Wasi Ahmed Shaikh and Haroon Rashid Abdul Hameed Naik -- were already granted bail by the court on April 10 this year due to the delayed trial and prolonged imprisonment.
Khan further submitted that there was no substantive evidence to establish the involvement of the accused in the blasts.
Special public prosecutor Ajay Misar opposed Zainul Shaikh's plea, contending that there is ample material against him, including confessional statements and CCTV footage.
Misar also highlighted that the trial has substantially progressed with 227 witnesses already examined.
The grounds of prolonged incarceration no longer hold the same force due to the likelihood of an early conclusion to the trial, the prosecution submitted.
Judge Navander noted that the progress of the trial deserves due appreciation.
"However, this circumstance by itself cannot obliterate the fact that the applicant has already undergone nearly fifteen years of incarceration as an undertrial prisoner," the court remarked.
The judge added the constitutional consideration regarding prolonged deprivation of personal liberty remains unchanged.
The ground on which co-accused were "enlarged on bail was not the stage of evidence alone but the extraordinary length of incarceration undergone by them", the judge said.
"Merely because 24 additional witnesses have been examined after the earlier order does not create any distinguishing circumstance sufficient to deny the benefit of parity to the present applicant," the judge concluded.
While granting bail, the court directed the accused to execute a bond of Rs 1,00,000 with one or more solvent local sureties of the like amount.
The applicant must not directly or indirectly tamper with prosecution evidence or attempt to influence any witness, the court said.
His other bail condition includes not the court's jurisdiction without prior permission.
