Police stand guard outside the MCOCA court during the hearing in the 2006 Aurangabad arms haul case, on Thursday. (Photo: PTI)
A special Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) court in Mumbai on Thursday convicted alleged LeT operative and key plotter of 26/11 terror attacks case Zabiuddin Ansari, alias Abu Jundal, and 11 others in the Aurangabad arms haul case, but acquitted eight others for want of evidence. At the same time, the court held that the prosecution had failed to prove charges under provisions of MCOCA and acquitted all the accused from charges under the Act.
The special judge Shrikant Anekar, however, convicted eight accused under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, Arms Act, Explosives Substance Act and Explosives Act, as per the roles played by the various accused.
The judge will hear arguments on the quantum of punishment on Friday; and since the conspiracy was not executed, the convicted accused face a maximum punishment of life imprisonment. All the convicts, on Thursday, requested the court to show them leniency while awarding the sentence considering the hardships faced by them and their family members due to their arrest. Their lawyers and special public prosecutor Vaibhav Bagade will argue their cases on Friday.
Though the judge held that though the car carrying arms and explosives being driven by Jundal to Malegaon was not part of conspiracy, when the vehicle reached the spot, some of the accused had helped conceal boxes containing weapons and hence they were convicted under the Arms and Explosives Act.
Though 10 accused had confessed, the judge discarded seven such confessions and accepted the statements of Amir Shaikh, Sayed Akif and Faisal Shaikh only. The judge held that the convicts were members of SIMI and LeT and visited places like Kashmir, Nepal and Pakistan to procure training weapons. The judge observed that the accused had used mobile and Internet facilities to conspire and the call data records of cellphones had helped the prosecution prove that they were in contact with each other.
