Ahmedabad: Serial blasts accused turns approver
TNN | Updated: Apr 4, 2019, 06:48 IST
AHMEDABAD: After being imprisoned at Sabarmati Central Jail for more than 10 years, one of the persons accused in the 2008 serial blasts case has turned an approver, and the special court has pardoned him in the case.
The accused, whose identity the court has ordered be kept secret, was arrested in 2008 and has been in jail ever since.
He wrote a long confession on March 11 and sent it to the court, which read it on the same day. On March 14, the court inquired into and ascertained whether the confession had been voluntarily written. He urged the court to accept his confession and grant him pardon in the case. He told the court, “I should have written the confession earlier, but there were ideas in my mind.” The accused also told the court that he was aware that he and his co-accused can be convicted on basis of his confession. He showed willingness to state all facts on oath, if he were called to the court in Navrangpura, on the condition that nobody except his lawyers should be in courtroom so that his identity is not revealed. “If my identity is revealed, there is danger from other accused and their relatives,” he told the court.
The court sought the state government’s reply to the confession. The government conveyed to the court on March 18 that the confession could be accepted, and the accused could be pardoned only on the condition that he is ready to confess on oath.
The court re-verified with the accused that he had not written the confession under duress. To this, he insisted that he did it of his own volition. The court said, “The accused can be granted pardon on a condition that he should tell the court truthfully all the facts and circumstances.”
After determining that the accused had confessed voluntarily, special judge A R Patel on March 27 granted him pardon in the 2008 serial blasts case under the provisions of Section 306 and 307 of the CrPC.
For this forgiveness, the court has laid down certain conditions including that the accused “will have to appear before the court as a witness and testify about what he has written in his confession on oath before the court”.
The court said that the accused-turned-approver’s statement would be recorded in-camera. The government and defence lawyers have been ordered not to reveal the accused’s identity.
The court has ordered that the accused be separated from the co-accused in Sabarmati jail. The court has also ordered police protection for the accused and his family members.
Nineteen bombs had rocked the city on July 26, 2008, in which 56 persons lost their lives and over 200 persons suffered injuries. This approver is one of the 80-odd accused persons arrested in this case so far. The trial in this case has been on for the last ten years. More than 1,000 witnesses have been examined by the court in this case.
Exactly two weeks after the court received the confession, the state government requested the court to prohibit people from attending court proceedings. The court ordered an in-camera trial on March 25. Two days later, it pardoned the approver.
The accused, whose identity the court has ordered be kept secret, was arrested in 2008 and has been in jail ever since.

He wrote a long confession on March 11 and sent it to the court, which read it on the same day. On March 14, the court inquired into and ascertained whether the confession had been voluntarily written. He urged the court to accept his confession and grant him pardon in the case. He told the court, “I should have written the confession earlier, but there were ideas in my mind.” The accused also told the court that he was aware that he and his co-accused can be convicted on basis of his confession. He showed willingness to state all facts on oath, if he were called to the court in Navrangpura, on the condition that nobody except his lawyers should be in courtroom so that his identity is not revealed. “If my identity is revealed, there is danger from other accused and their relatives,” he told the court.
The court sought the state government’s reply to the confession. The government conveyed to the court on March 18 that the confession could be accepted, and the accused could be pardoned only on the condition that he is ready to confess on oath.
The court re-verified with the accused that he had not written the confession under duress. To this, he insisted that he did it of his own volition. The court said, “The accused can be granted pardon on a condition that he should tell the court truthfully all the facts and circumstances.”
After determining that the accused had confessed voluntarily, special judge A R Patel on March 27 granted him pardon in the 2008 serial blasts case under the provisions of Section 306 and 307 of the CrPC.
For this forgiveness, the court has laid down certain conditions including that the accused “will have to appear before the court as a witness and testify about what he has written in his confession on oath before the court”.
The court said that the accused-turned-approver’s statement would be recorded in-camera. The government and defence lawyers have been ordered not to reveal the accused’s identity.
The court has ordered that the accused be separated from the co-accused in Sabarmati jail. The court has also ordered police protection for the accused and his family members.
Nineteen bombs had rocked the city on July 26, 2008, in which 56 persons lost their lives and over 200 persons suffered injuries. This approver is one of the 80-odd accused persons arrested in this case so far. The trial in this case has been on for the last ten years. More than 1,000 witnesses have been examined by the court in this case.
Exactly two weeks after the court received the confession, the state government requested the court to prohibit people from attending court proceedings. The court ordered an in-camera trial on March 25. Two days later, it pardoned the approver.
Making sense of 2019
#Electionswithtimes
View Full Coverage
All Comments ()+^ Back to Top
Refrain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks, name calling or inciting hatred against any community. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines by marking them offensive. Let's work together to keep the conversation civil.
HIDE