DC Edit | Questions Arise After All Are Acquitted in Mumbai Blasts

The acquittal of 12 individuals accused in the 2006 Mumbai train blast case by the Bombay High Court, including five who were on death row, has reignited an often painful debate on India’s criminal justice system. On one side stand 12 people who have spent a significant portion of their lives — nearly 20 years — behind bars, now declared innocent. On the other side are the 187 victims who lost their lives and the 824 who were injured. For their families, the long-awaited closure remains elusive.

The Bombay High Court’s decision to discharge all 12 men previously convicted by the trial court was accompanied by a scathing indictment of the investigation. It is expected that the state will challenge the high court verdict before the Supreme Court and therefore, we may not have reached the final conclusion of the case as yet. However, the entire discourse of this case so far, from the initial investigation and trial court conviction to the high court’s acquittal, has cast a long shadow over the efficiency and integrity of the justice system and particularly of its investigating agencies.

On July 11, 2006, seven high intensity, highly sophisticated explosive devices ripped through the first class compartments of seven suburban trains during the evening peak hours. It was one of the deadliest terrorist attacks in India. The explosions were so powerful that they ripped through the double-layered steel roofs and sides of each of the seven compartments, throwing bodies out of the compartments.

The initial investigation by the ATS resulted in a charge sheet against 13 arrested individuals and 15 wanted, mostly Pakistani, accused. The trial court’s 2015 verdict had seen five men sentenced to death and seven to life imprisonment. Yet, nearly a decade later, the high court has effectively dismantled that verdict. It found the prosecution heavily relied on confessional statements extracted through torture, unreliable witnesses and did not follow procedures while recovering articles such as RDX.

If the acquitted individuals were indeed innocent, it is a painful reminder of how easily lives can be derailed by flawed investigations, prolonged incarceration, and the social stigma attached to terror charges. Conversely, if the actual perpetrators remain unpunished, this raises concerns about national security and justice for the victims’ families, who have waited years for closure.

The case underscores the need for accountability in investigation and judiciary.

If the high court’s ruling is correct, it unequivocally means the trial court erred in evaluating the evidence. It also exposes the misplaced priority of Indian investigating agencies, which often focus on closing cases rather than truly solving them.

Legal procedures are paramount for impartiality. When these are not rigorously followed, it points to either untrained personnel or, more concerningly, outright dishonesty. India’s investigative agencies need reforms — they need not only advanced training in technology but also on ethical conduct.

Justice delayed is justice denied, not only for the accused but also for the victims and society at large. The Mumbai train blast case demands a deeper societal introspection to ensure justice, in its fullest sense, is served for all.