NewKerala.com

AFT Stays Army Officer's Retirement After Malegaon Blast Acquittal

The Armed Forces Tribunal has ordered that the retirement of Colonel Purohit Prasad Shrikant be kept in abeyance. This follows his acquittal in the 2008 Malegaon blast case after a 17-year trial. The tribunal found a prima facie case for him to be considered for promotions and benefits denied during his legal ordeal. The matter will be heard again in May after the government responds.

Key Points: AFT Stays Colonel's Retirement Post-Malegaon Acquittal

  • AFT stays officer's retirement
  • Ordered review of denied promotions
  • Acquitted after 17-year trial
  • Next hearing on May 22
2 min read

AFT stays retirement of Army officer acquitted in Malegaon blast case

Armed Forces Tribunal halts Colonel Purohit's retirement, orders review of promotion denial after his acquittal in the 2008 Malegaon blast case.

"Prima facie, we find that a case is made out where the applicant may be right in contending that he is entitled to be considered for the grant of promotion - AFT Bench"

New Delhi, March 18

The Armed Forces Tribunal has directed that the retirement of Colonel Purohit Prasad Shrikant be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken on his statutory complaint seeking consideration for promotion and other service benefits following his acquittal in the 2008 Malegaon blast case.

A Bench comprising AFT Chairperson Justice Rajendra Menon and Administrative Member Rasika Chaube passed the order while hearing a plea filed by the officer seeking promotion to the rank of Colonel and thereafter Brigadier at par with his juniors.

Invoking the jurisdiction of the tribunal under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, the applicant contended that his promotions were denied while he was facing a criminal trial after his arrest in 2008.

In its order passed on March 16, the AFT recorded that the officer remained under arrest from 2008 and was granted bail by the Supreme Court on August 21, 2017, following which he rejoined duties and has been serving since 2023.

During this period, the trial continued before a special court, which, by its judgment dated July 31, 2025, acquitted him in the 2008 Malegaon blast case after nearly 17 years.

"Prima facie, we find that a case is made out where the applicant may be right in contending that he is entitled to be considered for the grant of promotion and all other service benefits at par with his juniors, which were denied to him," the AFT observed.

It further said that the officer's claim that he was "implicated in the case in an illegal, fabricated manner" appeared to have been established by the criminal court while acquitting him.

Taking note of these circumstances, the AFT directed that "till decision on the statutory complaint, the applicant's retirement should be kept in abeyance".

The tribunal also issued notice to the Union government and other respondents, asking them to show cause as to why directions should not be issued to consider the officer's case for promotion and grant of all consequential service benefits at par with his batchmates or juniors.

The matter has been listed for further hearing on May 22.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priya S
This is a very complex case. While I'm glad the tribunal is ensuring due process, we must also remember the victims of the Malegaon blast. The legal process, though slow, must be respected by all sides.
R
Rohit P
The AFT order makes sense. If he has been acquitted, the principle of "innocent until proven guilty" should apply retrospectively to his service record. Denying promotion during trial is one thing, but not restoring status after acquittal is unfair.
S
Sarah B
As an observer, the timeline is shocking. 2008 to 2025 for a trial? That's a failure of the justice system itself, regardless of the verdict. It consumes lives.
V
Vikram M
The court said he was implicated in a "fabricated manner". That's a very serious finding. Who will be held responsible for that? Just letting him retire with benefits isn't enough. There must be consequences for those who framed an army officer.
K
Karthik V
Respectfully, I have a different take. While the officer deserves a fair hearing for his service benefits, the AFT should be cautious. The acquittal was by a trial court and could be appealed. Putting his retirement on hold pre-empts the finality of the criminal case.
M
Meera T

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50