By A Mirsab, TwoCircles.net
Aurangabad (Maharashtra): Hafeez Abdul Qadir, the original complainant in the Parbhani masjid blast case and Imam of Mohammadiya Masjid where a blast took place in 2003, has challenged the acquittal of all four accused from the case before Aurangabad bench of Bombay High Court.
Maharashtra state has not filed appeal against acquittal so far, even though time limit of 90 days after the judgment for filing such appeal expired recently.
On November 21, 2003 a bomb exploded at Mohammadiya Masjid, Rehmat Nagar, Parbhani killing one person and injuring 34 others. Nearly three years later, on August 18, 2016 the Parbhani sessions judge M S Jawalkar acquitted all four in the case citing lack of evidences.
The acquitted included Rakesh Dhawade who is currently an under trial in the Malegaon 2008
blasts case.
The revision petition was filed on Wednesday with a prayer of ‘denovo trial’ meaning a re-trial as Abdul Qadir alleged that prosecution did not carry out the trial with full strength and crucial evidences were not brought before trial court.
The petition alleges that in addition to the dubious conduct of prosecution agency trial court also remained a mute spectator and did not utilize its powers to call upon any person or document which was likely to be affecting the outcome of trial.
“However, in the instant matter several witnesses, crucial documents including F.S.L. report etc neither called upon (by trial court) nor examined (by prosecution)”, the petition reads.
Surprisingly, Maharashtra state has not challenged acquittal of all the accused from case due to which Abdul Qadir, being a complainant in the case was forced to file revision petition.
“Looking at the prosecution’s conduct during trial I knew state will not appeal against acquittal and therefore I approached Jamiat Ulama-e-Maharashtra to provide legal aid so that justice can be provided to the victims of the blast. I wish to get justice from high court”, Abdul Qadir said.
As reported earlier, various orders of the previous judge recorded during the trial shows the complicity of public prosecutors, coupled with a lethargic attitude of the Maharashtra state in prosecuting the accused.