Source: The Indian Express 

Introduction

The 2006 Mumbai train blasts case reached a significant milestone as the Bombay High Court concluded hearings on 31st January 2025, regarding death sentences awarded to five convicts. This development comes more than nine years after the special court's initial conviction. The case, which involved one of the deadliest terror attacks on Mumbai's suburban railway network, saw the High Court examining both the state government's death confirmation pleas and appeals by the accused against their conviction. The proceedings represent a crucial step in ensuring justice for the 189 victims who lost their lives and 824 others who were injured in this devastating attack. 

What Were the Verdicts in the 2006 Mumbai Train Blasts Trial? 

• On 11^th July, 2006, multiple bombs exploded in seven Western Suburban Railway coaches in Mumbai. 
• The attacks resulted in 189 deaths and 824 injuries. 
• The Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) conducted the investigation. 
• After an eight-year trial, the special MCOCA court delivered its verdict in 2015. 
• Five convicts were sentenced to death for planting bombs. 
• Seven others received life imprisonment. 
• One accused was acquitted after spending nine years in jail. 
• The death row convicts were Kamal Ansari, Mohammad Faisal Ataur Rahman Shaikh, Ehtesham Qutubuddin Siddiqui, Naveed Hussain Khan and Asif Khan. 

What Caused the Delays in the Death Sentence Confirmation Hearings? 

• Initial notices to convicts failed to mention pending death confirmation pleas. 
• Multiple judges had to recuse themselves or were transferred.. 
• Several benches couldn't complete hearings due to judges' impending retirement. 
• The state government delayed appointing a Special Public Prosecutor. 
• Overburdened benches led to multiple adjournments. 
• Transfer of judges to different benches caused further delays. 
• The case required formation of a special bench in July 2024 for expedited hearings. 

Why is High Court Confirmation Mandatory for Death Sentences? 

• Death sentence is reserved for "rarest of rare" cases. 
• Section 366 of CrPC mandates High Court confirmation of death sentences. 
• No death penalty can be executed without High Court confirmation. 
• High Courts must handle confirmation pleas expeditiously. 
• This requirement continues under the new BNSS 2023 (Section 407). 
• The process ensures additional judicial scrutiny of capital punishment. 
• It serves as a safeguard against wrongful executions.

What is the Status of The Special Bench's Review of the Death Sentence Case? 

• Special bench formed with Justices Anil S Kilor and Shyam C Chandak 
• Conducted over 75 sittings in six months 
• Examined 92 prosecution witnesses and 50+ defence witnesses 
• Reviewed evidence spanning 169 volumes 
• Death sentence judgments comprised nearly 2,000 pages 
• Defence claimed confessions were obtained through torture 
• State argued for death sentence confirmation citing "rarest of rare" category 
• Final verdict pending, with option for Supreme Court appeal 

What is Section 407 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023? 

• Subsection (1): When the Court of Session passes a sentence of death, the proceedings shall forthwith be submitted to the High Court, and the sentence shall not be executed unless it is confirmed by the High Court.  
• Subsection (2): The Court passing the sentence shall commit the convicted person to jail custody under a warrant. 

Conclusion  

The conclusion of these hearings marks a pivotal moment in one of India's most significant terror attack cases. While the judicial process has been lengthy, it reflects the careful consideration required in cases involving capital punishment. The upcoming verdict will not only impact the lives of the convicts but also provide closure to the victims' families who have waited nearly two decades for final justice. The case states the complexity of terror-related trials and the importance of thorough judicial review in death penalty cases.