‘German Bakery blast accused was trained to assemble explosives in Colombo’

December 06, 2010 04:53 pm | Updated November 28, 2021 09:39 pm IST - Pune

Police inspects the scene of the  explosion outside the German bakery in Pune, on Feb. 14, 2010.

Police inspects the scene of the explosion outside the German bakery in Pune, on Feb. 14, 2010.

The alleged mastermind of the February 13 German Bakery attack, Himayat Baig, was trained to assemble explosives in Colombo by two of the co-accused in the case when they visited the Sri Lankan capital in March 2008, the Maharashtra ATS has contended in the chargesheet submitted to the Judicial Magistrate in Pune.

A copy of the 2500-page chargesheet, which was filed by the ATS in the court of Judicial Magistrate S. Bose on Saturday, was handed over to Baig who was produced in the court on Monday.

According to certain details of the document shared by Defence Counsel A. Rahman with the press, Baig is charged with designing the German Bakery terror attack along with Faiyaz Kagzi and Sayyad Ansari, two of the six co-accused named in the case, who are absconding.

Baig, who ran a cyber cafe in Udgir, later finalised the plan to attack the eatery in the last week of January 2010 and went to Mumbai along with two other accused — Mohasin Choudhary and Bhatkal — to purchase a sack to keep the bomb and a Nokia mobile, the prosecution has alleged as quoted by Mr. Rahman.

The bomb that was planted in the Pune eatery at 17:00 hours went off killing 17 persons including some foreigners and injuring over 60.

The six other co-accused charged along with Baig are — Yasim Bhatkal, Mohsin Choudhary, Riyaz Bhatkal, Iqbal Bhatkal, Faiyaz Kagzi and Sayyad Ansari——— all stated to be absconding.

Mr. Rahman took instructions from Baig, who was brought to the court without a shroud.

ATS officer Vinod Satav told the Magistrate that names of some witnesses had been deleted from the chargesheet to protect their identity.

Baig is charged under various sections of IPC, Explosives Substances Act and Unlawful Activities Prevention Act.

The Defence Counsel said he would contest the omission of witnesses’ names in higher court. The Counsel also said that Baig had denied all charges mentioned by the ATS.

The Magistrate committed the case to the Sessions Court where a special judge will hear it.

The massive chargesheet is kept in custody of the judge and its details were not made public.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.