Critics argue that the promotion seems premature, given the gravity of the allegations; the acquittal raises questions about the investigation's integrity, with many wondering if justice was served
NEW DELHI – The recent promotion of Lt Col Prasad Shrikant Purohit to the rank of colonel has sparked controversy given his role and acquittal in the 2008 Malegaon blast case. Purohit, along with six others, including former BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur, was cleared of all charges by a special NIA court on July 31, 2025, due to lack of evidence.
The court’s verdict highlighted that “mere suspicion cannot replace proof” and emphasised the prosecution’s failure to provide reliable and cogent evidence beyond reasonable doubt.
Purohit’s promotion comes after a 17-year career freeze due to the Discipline and Vigilance ban imposed after his arrest in the blast case. Critics argue that the promotion seems premature, given the gravity of the allegations. The acquittal raises questions about the investigation’s integrity, with many wondering if justice was served.
The NIA court’s decision has been challenged by the victims’ families, who have filed a petition in the Bombay High Court. But the Maharashtra government, presently ruled by a coalition espousing the cause of Hindutva, chose not to appeal the verdict in the Supreme Court. Oddly, the same government filed a review petition in the Supreme Court immediately after the high court’s July 21 acquittal of 12 Muslims who had been convicted in the 2006 Mumbai train bombings that killed 187 people and injured more than 800.
Trial courts had in 2015 sentenced five of the accused to death and the remaining seven to life imprisonment.
The clear support of the saffron lobby to the Hindutva terror suspects emerged soon after Purohit’s promotion. Union Minister Giriraj Singh and BJP spokesperson Pradeep Bhandari congratulated Purohit on his promotion, with Bhandari criticising Congress for allegedly denying Purohit his rightful rise to the rank of major general.
Critics note that despite acquittal, the court’s observations in related decisions (such as rejecting parts of his official duty defence) leave open questions about institutional accountability.
Purohit was commissioned into Maratha Light Infantry in 1994. Between 2002-2005, he served in the counter-terrorism operations unit in Jammu and Kashmir before being shifted to Military Intelligence.
On September 29, 2008, two bombs fitted on a motorcycle exploded, killing seven Muslims and injuring over 100 in Maharashtra’s Malegaon. Initial investigations brought a Hindutva group, Abhinav Bharat, under the scanner and led to several arrests, including Purohit’s.
Purohit allegedly floated Abhinav Bharat, collecting huge funds to procure arms and explosives, and organised meetings where the Malegaon attack was planned.
The origins of the Abhinav Bharat are shrouded in mystery. It is named after and said to be inspired by the secret society of students that Hindutva ideologue VD Savarkar started in 1905 while studying at Fergusson College in Pune. He believed in revolutionary violence, in turn drawing its name and inspiration from the Young Italy movement of the Italian revolutionary Giuseppe Mazzini.
But when Savarkar got a scholarship for higher education in England in early 1906, he left India. The Abhinav Bharat remained inactive for decades, and in 1952, five years after Independence, the Hindu Mahasabha leader disbanded it.
The NIA had maintained in court that there was evidence in the form of audio and video recordings, call data records, and the statements of the witnesses, which proved Purohit’s involvement in the case.
“Purohit was the one who prepared a separate ‘Constitution’ for ‘Hindu Rashtra’ with a separate saffron colour flag. He also discussed taking revenge for the (alleged) atrocities committed by the Muslims on Hindus,” NIA said in its report.
A collapse in cases involving Hindutva militant groups has coincided with the Bharatiya Janata party’s rise to power in 2014 when the pace of these investigations slackened, and many witnesses turned hostile.
In 2015, NIA’s former special public prosecutor, Rohini Salian, disclosed that she had been asked to “go soft” on the 2008 Malegaon investigations after the BJP-led government came to power.
Col Purohit is slated to retire next year.
Six family members of the explosion’s victims have appealed to the Bombay High Court to reverse the Special NIA court’s decision calling the acquittal in the blast case as “wrong and bad in law.”
The court has issued notices to all seven acquitted people, including Sadhvi Pragya, the NIA, and the Maharashtra government in the blast case.
Now as the Bombay High Court agreed to hear the review petition of the aggrieved members of victim families, it will be seen as how the future hearings will unfold the case. Since the retirement of Col Purohit is due next year observers are keenly awaiting the verdict of the high court.
