NIA Clarifies Absence of Ambani Statements in Antilia Bomb Scare Chargesheet
The National Investigation Agency (NIA) has addressed the notable omission of formal statements from industrialist Mukesh Ambani and his wife Nita Ambani in the chargesheet for the 2021 Antilia bomb scare case. In a legal reply filed to oppose dismissed police officer Sachin Waze's discharge plea, the agency asserted that legally, some witness statements are not mandatory if the relevant facts can be conclusively established through other evidence.
Evidence from Security Personnel Deemed Sufficient
The NIA emphasized that there is no lack of evidence or prejudice to the prosecution's case due to the absence of statements from the Ambani family. Statements from the family's security personnel have already provided a conclusive link to the incident, according to the agency. It further stated that it reserves the right to call the Ambanis as witnesses later if necessary, but current evidence is ample to establish incriminating facts beyond doubt regarding the terrorist acts committed by Waze and his co-accused.
Background of the Antilia Bomb Scare Case
On February 25, 2021, an SUV laden with explosives was discovered near Antilia, the Ambani family's residence in south Mumbai. The prosecution alleges that Mansukh Hiran, the owner of the vehicle, was murdered on March 4, 2021, because he possessed knowledge of the conspiracy. Ten accused individuals, including Waze and other dismissed police officers Sunil Mane and Pradeep Sharma, have been named in the case. Waze, arrested in March 2021, moved the special NIA court in March of this year seeking discharge, arguing that the case was built on what he termed a comedy of errors and farcical investigative rituals.
NIA Defends UAPA Charges and Ministry's Decision
In its response, the NIA defended the Union home ministry's order from March 8, 2021, which invoked the NIA Act in this case. The agency stated that the ministry exercised proper application of mind and adhered to the intent of the Act. It highlighted that the threat note found alongside the explosives in the vehicle, which was planted by Waze himself on Carmichael Road, constituted an act of terror. The intention was to terrorize wealthy individuals and extort money by instilling fear, the NIA explained.
The agency pointed to specific evidence, including the phrase agle baar connect hokar aayega in the threat note, which it claims shows Waze's intention to continue terrorist acts and re-establish himself as a super cop by staging a fake encounter. Rejecting Waze's argument that charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) were inapplicable, the NIA asserted that the probe revealed heinous and serious offences that attract UAPA provisions. Additionally, it clarified that no sanction under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code was required to prosecute Waze, as the acts were not committed in the discharge of official duty.
The NIA's detailed reply underscores its commitment to pursuing the case based on substantial evidence, irrespective of the high-profile nature of the individuals involved.
