Bombay HC grants bail to 2012 Pune blasts accused, cites 12 years’ incarceration and trial delay

The Bombay High Court has granted bail to Farooq Shaukat Bagwan, an accused in the 2012 Pune blasts case, observing that his prolonged incarceration of over 12 years and the slow progress of the trial warranted relief. 

A Division Bench of Justices A.S. Gadkari and Rajesh S. Patil, in a judgment pronounced on Tuesday (September 9, 2025), said the constitutional right to a speedy trial under Article 21 could not be compromised.

“The possibility of the trial concluding in the near future appears to be remote. It is by now a well-settled principle of law that the right to a speedy trial of an accused is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India,” the Bench observed. 

On August 1, 2012, five low-intensity blasts occurred on Pune’s Junglee Maharaj Road between 7:25 p.m. and 11:30 p.m., injuring one person. Another live explosive device was recovered from a bicycle and later defused by the Bomb Detection and Disposal Squad. 

According to the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS), the blasts were carried out to avenge the death of Qateel Siddique, an alleged Indian Mujahideen operative, who was killed inside Yerawada Prison in June 2012. 

Mr. Bagwan, 39, was arrested on December 26, 2012, and has remained in custody since then. He is accused of preparing forged documents to procure SIM cards that were allegedly used by other accused in the conspiracy, and of allowing his shop premises to be used for planning the blasts. 

The court noted that, despite the passage of more than a decade, the trial court had examined only 27 of the 170 witnesses cited by the prosecution. 

Relying on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Union of India vs K.A. Najeeb (2021), the Bench held that statutory restrictions under laws such as the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) cannot override an accused’s constitutional rights when there is unreasonable delay. 

“Even where stringent provisions restrict the grant of bail, the rigours of such provisions melt down where there is no likelihood of trial being completed within a reasonable time and the period of incarceration has already exceeded a substantial part of the prescribed sentence,” the Bench said, quoting the apex court ruling. 

The court also considered parity in granting bail, noting that Munib Iqbal Memon, a co-accused arrested the same day as Mr. Bagwan, was granted bail by a Coordinate Bench in September 2024. The Bench found Mr. Bagwan’s alleged role “similar” to Mr. Memon’s, as both were linked to forged documents used to obtain SIM cards. 

The court also recorded that Mr. Bagwan has no other criminal antecedents and faces no murder charges under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

Setting aside the September 1, 2021 order of the Special MCOCA Court that had rejected Mr. Bagwan’s bail plea, the High Court ordered his release on a personal bond of ₹1 lakh with local sureties. 

Mr. Bagwan must report to the ATS Mumbai office on the first Saturday of every month between 10 a.m. and 12 noon until the trial concludes, the order said. He has been barred from leaving Mumbai and Pune without prior court permission, directed to surrender his passport, and instructed not to tamper with evidence or influence witnesses. 

The Bench noted that its observations are prima facie, and the trial court must decide the case on its own merits.