MUMBAI: The 2006 train blasts case remains controversial due to the claims of the Maharashtra ATS that the blasts were carried out by SIMI with the support of LeT while a subsequent claim two years later by the Mumbai crime branch said it was the handiwork of an Indian Mujaheeddin module which it had busted.In court, the ATS chargesheet only mentioned household utensils were used in the blasts, and the use of pressure cookers surfaced only during the trial.The ATS theory that pressure cookers were used also raised some questions since the shopkeeper from where eight of these were purchased was not called for a test identification parade and no sketches of the suspect were prepared and circulated based on his description. Besides recovery of some pressure cookers and related accessories at the instance of the accused, there is no mention of these in his statement, according to the Bombay high court judgment acquitting the accused. Another accused mentioned the use of RDX and timers for the blasts, but there was no mention of pressure cooker.In 2008, the crime branch, headed by Rakesh Maria, arrested Sadiq Shaikh, an alleged member of the IM, for the Delhi and Ahmedabad blasts, along with others. Shaikh allegedly told officials of the crime branch that the IM was responsible for all the blasts, including the train blasts. The trial court while convicting the accused rejected the defence claim of IM module involvement.An investigation by the Delhi police’s special cell, alongside the interrogation of Yasin Bhatkal of th IM, too had found that the train bombings were carried out by IM operatives. The IM had claimed responsibility for the Mumbai blasts along with three other strikes in an email sent to media houses in Nov 2007, said sources.The Delhi police even came on record to state this after the arrest of IM’s shadowy co-founder, Abdul Subhan Qureshi, also known as Tauqeer, on Jan 20, 2018. Tauqeer was the one who used to sign off as ‘al-Arabi’ on the emails sent by the IM after every blast. The Delhi police said both Yasin Bhatkal and Shaikh disclosed the role of Atif Amin, who went to Mumbai specifically for this task along with other members who were later found at Batla House in Delhi in 2008. The module, comprising Shaikh, Amin, and Bhatkal, met once again in Mumbai at a McDonald’s restaurant in Andheri before the Ahmedabad blasts, an officer said. “The use of pressure cooker bombs was another IM signature style at the time,” he said.In Mumbai, though, some senior police officers said the LeT claim by the ATS and the differing, IM claim by the crime branch may have been a case of one-upmanship. After the train blast, the then Mumbai police commissioner A N Roy stated at a press conference that bombs were planted in pressure cookers and were the handiwork of LeT.At the time — Vilasrao Deshmukh was the Maharashtra chief minister and R R Patil the deputy chief minister, who also held the home portfolio — the Mumbai crime branch was not connected to the case, but after the 2008 blast in Ahmedabad, a suspicious vehicle stolen from the Mumbai region became part of the case when it was found parked outside a civil hospital in Ahmedabad. Through CCTV footage, the vehicle thief, Afzal Usmani was traced and it was found that he had stolen four vehicles from Navi Mumbai which were used in the blast in Ahmedabad. It led to the arrest of Shaikh and his other IM group members.Shaikh had claimed that he, along with Riyaz Bhatkal, Arif Badruddin Shaikh, Amin, Shahnawaz, with the help of other members, carried out the blasts on the instruction of Amir Raza at Mominpura in Delhi, Sankatmochan Mandir in Varanasi, on the Shramjeevi Express, and on Mumbai train from Feb 2005 to Sept 2008.He had claimed in his initial statement that Raza sent explosives and materials for this purpose with help from Riyaz Bhatkal or his men, while Arif Badar prepared the clock timer circuit. He, Badar, Bhatkal and Amin knew how to prepare bombs and circuits. The trial court found the statements “vague”. (With inputs from Rajshekhar Jha in Delhi)
