Malegaon Blast Case: Witness Says He Was Pressured by ATS to Name Yogi Adityanath, Pragya Thakur
The NIA Special Court, in its recent order regarding the 2008 Malegaon blast case, has acknowledged serious concerns over the credibility of the initial probe carried out by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS). This follows crucial testimony from Prosecution Witness (PW) 220, Milind Joshirao, reportedly affiliated with Abhinav Bharat.
Joshirao informed the court that ATS officials forced him to make a false statement, pressuring him to falsely accuse prominent right-wing figures like Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, Indresh Kumar, Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, Kakaji, Aseemanand, and Professor Deodhar in connection with the Malegaon blast.
In his detailed statement, Joshirao revealed that he had been illegally detained by the ATS from October 28 to November 7, 2008—well beyond the permissible custody period of seven days. During this detention, he said he was repeatedly told that he would be freed only if he agreed to name the five individuals listed by the officers. However, he said he refused to comply with their demands.
The ATS reportedly attempted to obtain specific information from Joshirao regarding a supposed “Raigad meeting”, where a pledge was allegedly taken to establish a “Hindu Rashtra” (Hindu nation). But their efforts were unsuccessful. The Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) later obtained court permission to cross-examine Joshirao. Yet, even under sustained questioning, his responses did not support the prosecution’s claims. Joshirao firmly stated that he had never attended such a meeting at Raigad Fort, nor had any oath-taking ever occurred there.
Instead, Joshirao turned the spotlight on the ATS itself. He accused the agency of treating him like an accused, detaining him unlawfully and pressuring him with threats and intimidation. He named senior officials DCP Shrirao and ACP Parambir Singh, claiming they warned him of torture if he refused to comply with their instructions. Joshirao also denied giving any confession, saying the so-called statement was completely drafted by ATS officials without his consent.
After reviewing the testimony, the court stated it found strong merit in Joshirao’s claims, concluding that he was indeed “compelled to give the statement,” making it involuntary. The court added that even if an investigating officer believes such a statement to be factually accurate, it loses credibility if it is proven to have been obtained through coercive methods.
