A special court has called the application of an accused in the 2008 Malegaon blast case as ‘premature’ after he sought that the case be transferred to a court in Nashik, claiming that proper sanction was not secured by the prosecution to charge the accused persons under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA)
Offences under the UAPA are conducted by a special court. Accused Sameer Kulkarni thus claimed that it be conducted by a court in Nashik, which has jurisdiction since the offence took place in the district. The plea was made after a witness testified in the case who had granted the sanction order for the prosecution under UAPA. Special Public Prosecutor Avinash Rasal had argued against the plea and, calling it premature, had sought its rejection.
Issue can be decided only after taking into consideration the entire evidence, says court
Special Judge AK Lahoti of the special NIA court said in the order that the issue of sanction has been raised repeatedly before the special court as well as before higher courts and courts have from time observed that the issue or sanction can be considered during the trial.
The court said the issue can be decided only after taking into consideration the entire evidence. It pointed out that the evidence of prosecution witnesses is not over and there being two sanction orders, only one sanctioning authority is examined and another, who is a scheduled witness, is yet to be examined.
Judge Lahoti said in the order, “I find substance in the point raised by the special public prosecutor that before completion of all evidence, point of sanction cannot be decided separately. In a piecemeal manner, the issue of sanction cannot be considered..”
The court however added that the plea has not been decided on merits and that the accused persons are at liberty to raise their grievance with respect to sanction at the time of the final hearing. It has kept the legal contention open while disposing of the plea.
