The Bombay High Court on Wednesday discharged four men accused in the 2006 Malegaon bomb blasts case, quashing all charges against them, including those under stringent anti-terror laws. The decision came nearly two decades after the attacks, which killed 31 people and injured over 300 in Malegaon, a town in Maharashtra’s Nashik district.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Shyam Chandak allowed appeals filed by Rajendra Chaudhary, Dhan Singh, Manohar Ram Singh Narwaria, and Lokesh Sharma. These appeals challenged an order by a special National Investigation Agency (NIA) court, which had framed charges against them in September 2025.

The 2006 blasts involved four bombs detonated near the Hamidia Mosque, Bada Kabrastan, and Mushawarat Chowk during Friday prayers, causing significant casualties. The initial investigation was conducted by Maharashtra’s Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS), which arrested nine Muslim men and alleged involvement of the banned organization SIMI. The ATS charged these individuals based on confessions obtained during the inquiry.

However, over time the investigation shifted hands. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) took over in 2007, largely endorsing the ATS findings. In 2011, the probe was transferred to the NIA, which reversed earlier conclusions, attributing the attack to Hindu extremist groups. The agency based this theory largely on a confessional statement by Swami Aseemanand, an accused in other terror cases, who implicated the now-deceased right-wing activist Sunil Joshi in orchestrating the blasts.

Between December 2012 and January 2013, the NIA arrested the four men subsequently discharged by the High Court and filed a chargesheet against them in 2013. Meanwhile, the original nine Muslim men arrested by the ATS were discharged by an NIA special court in 2016, a decision currently under appeal by the ATS before the High Court.

During the proceedings, the defence contended that the primary evidence against the four men rested on Aseemanand’s confession, which special courts in Hyderabad had previously rejected in other cases due to coercion and duress. They further pointed out an absence of incriminating material recovered from the accused. The High Court had granted bail to these men in 2019, noting that they had been jailed for more than six years without trial, and had questioned the validity of identification evidence.

The NIA, in contrast, maintained that the blasts were intended to provoke communal tension, emphasizing the timing of the attacks on a Friday in a predominantly Muslim area. Despite this, the High Court found merit in the defence’s arguments and held that the charges did not stand on the available evidence, leading to the discharge of all four accused.

This ruling leaves unresolved the central question of who was responsible for the 2006 blasts. The case has undergone multiple investigations with shifting narratives, but after nearly 20 years, definitive conclusions remain elusive.