'Collect evidence by ATS, the topic of concern', the NIA Court has important remarks about the Malegaon case -The NIA court made important comments on the case of Malegaon Blast

The special judge of the NIA Court, AK Lahoti, in the decision of Malegaon explosion expressed on Thursday, expressed concern about the torture of witnesses to gather evidence by the Anti -terrorism Squad (ATS), the first investigation agency of the case. In the full copy of the decision that came out, Judge AK Tahoti writes that it is necessary to point out the fact that two major investigative agencies were involved in this case. Perprakash Tiwari, Mumbai. The special judge of the NIA Court, AK Lahoti, in the decision of Malegaon explosion expressed on Thursday, expressed concern about the torture of witnesses to gather evidence by the Anti -terrorism Squad (ATS), the first investigation agency of the case. The two agencies wrote an independent investigation into the full copy of the ruling on Friday, and Judge AK Lahoti writes that it is necessary to show that two major investigations were involved in the case. These agencies were ATS and NIA. Both agencies conducted independent investigations and submitted independent complaints. But allegations of misconduct, torture and the likes of non -leaks in custody are not equal to ATS officials, so NIA officials did not. Therefore, the behavior of the Witnesses by the ATS officials is sufficient to make the credibility of the evidence they have gathered. I saw all the evidence of Judge Lahoti Judge Lahoti further writing that I saw all the testimony. Studied all cases. But it is also necessary to say that it is not enough to just register or submit references. Until the prosecution case corresponds to the facts. Therefore, I would like to say respectfully that the details given in the reference list differ from the actual facts. He further said that the judicial examples presented by the prosecution are not useful to them in such circumstances. Please tell that Judge Lahoti made this strict comment while releasing seven accused in the Malegaon Blast case. The court expressed dissatisfaction with the lack of evidence of important witnesses. He said that advocates of the accused and accused series (himself submitted) said that the prosecution did not produce very important witnesses in court. If the prosecution does not clear why important witnesses are not set, the judge must adversely estimate. Some witnesses have not been deliberately submitted, the court says that in cases of murder and other serious crimes, it is mainly the responsibility of the prosecutor, who submit witnesses who can bring the truth of the whole case to the fore, and which would help the court to reach the right decision. If the fact during the hearing appears that some witnesses are not deliberately produced, or that they are left, the court may adversely estimate against the prosecution. There is a reliable and legally acceptable evidence, so I have come to the conclusion after I have all the evidence that the prosecution has failed to confirm that it has legitimate, reliable and legally acceptable evidence. The faults of the accused, beyond all doubt, weaken such contradictions the prosecution case, and the mistakes of the accused cannot prove beyond any doubt.