The 2008 Malegaon blast case, which has been marred by prolonged delays and judicial changes, faces renewed concerns over the recent transfer of the presiding judge as the trial nears its conclusion.
Special NIA Judge AK Lahoti, who had been conducting daily hearings in the Malegaon blast trial for the past few years and was nearing the conclusion of the case with most arguments already completed, has been transferred to Nashik.
In the last hearing on Saturday, Judge Lahoti had directed the prosecution and the defence to wrap up the remaining arguments by April 15 and was expected to reserve the matter for judgment the following day.
This development has intensified fears among victims and their families about the potential derailment of justice.
BJP MP Pragya Thakur, Lt Col Prasad Purohit, and five others are facing trial for their alleged roles in the 2008 Malegaon blast, which killed six people and injured more than 100 when a motorcycle-borne explosive detonated near a mosque on September 29 that year.
The accused are facing prosecution under provisions of the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The case was initially probed by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) before being handed over to the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in 2011.
Over the years, the case has witnessed multiple judicial transfers, contributing to its protracted nature.  
In December 2017, Special Judge S.D. Tekale was transferred to the Maharashtra Judicial Academy in Uttan. Before his transfer, Judge Tekale had ruled on the discharge applications of all accused, rejecting Sadhvi Pragya’s plea and emphasizing her connection to the case despite a clean chit from the National Investigation Agency (NIA). 
Following Judge Tekale’s transfer, the trial was presided over by Judge V.S. Padalkar, who framed charges against the accused. Judge Padalkar’s tenure also saw challenges, including observations from the Bombay High Court in February 2020 about the lack of effective progress in the trial. The court directed the NIA to explain the delays, highlighting concerns about the prolonged nature of the proceedings.  
In September 2023, after examining 323 witnesses, the NIA closed its evidence in the trial. However, the recent transfer of the current presiding judge has raised fresh apprehensions.
Victims and their families fear that this change could further delay the trial’s conclusion and are contemplating legal measures to address their concerns. 
Advocate Shahid Nadeem, representing intervener Nisar Ahmed Haji Sayyed Bilal, who lost his son in the blast, expressed deep frustration over the development. “Justice has already been delayed, and if the presiding judge is transferred, it will cause further delays,” Nadeem told India Today.
He highlighted that Judge Lahoti’s familiarity with the case, built over nearly three years, is irreplaceable at this stage. “He is well-versed in the case and should be given time to pass the judgment,” Nadeem added, noting that victims are now contemplating approaching the Bombay High Court to challenge the transfer.
The sentiment echoes a letter sent by Nadeem on behalf of Bilal and other victims to the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court in March, pleading to retain Judge Lahoti until the trial’s end. “Any change in the Presiding Officer may cause an unavoidable delay as the newly posted Presiding Officer would require to familiarise himself with the entire voluminous chargesheet along with exhibited documents and evidence,” the letter stated, as reported by The Indian Express.
Despite this preemptive appeal, the transfer list of 222 judges, including Lahoti, was finalized, leaving victims’ families feeling unheard.
For the victims, this latest twist is another blow in a saga of prolonged agony. “We are definitely considering approaching the High Court,” Nadeem affirmed, emphasizing that a decision would follow consultations with senior advocates.
