The first CoI, completed in September last year, had recommended dismissal of Lieutenant Colonel Purohit from service for his alleged involvement in the terror plot. Army had presented facts related to the CoI before the tribunal after which it was asked to reconvene the probe.
“The Court of Inquiry suffers from the vice of irregularity…. It would be just and proper to direct the Army to further convene the CoI from the state when the statements of the witnesses were recorded on September 1, 2010 in absence of Purohit,” said the tribunal headed by Justice S S Kulshreshtha
Army had examined some witnesses in absence of Purohit in violation of Army Rule 180 as the accused could not cross examine them. The findings of CoI were challenged by Purohit who cited violation of Army rule 180.
He had even complained that he was given extreme inhuman treatment and also named a Colonel R K Srivastava as the officer who subjected him to torture.
Purohit has been named as one of the main accused in the Malegaon case chargesheet along with swami Dayanand Pandey, sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur and another Army officer major Ramesh Upadhyay. They have been booked under Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA).
Purohit, was alleged to be part of a Abhinav Bharat which carried out attack in Malegaon in 2006 killing seven persons. The CoI had also gone into Purohit’s links with other Army officers and whether they were aware about his activities
The CoI had found merit in the allegations on the basis of which his termination was recommended. The Army had forwarded the recommendation to its legal branch for opinion.
Purohit was alleged to be part of a group called Abhinav Bharat which carried out attack in Malegaon in 2006 killing seven persons. The CoI had also gone into Purohit’s links with other Army officers and whether they were aware about his activities.