HYDERABAD: The Nampally criminal court on Friday granted bail to Mecca Masjid blast case accused Bharat Mohanlal Rateshwar alias Bharat Bhai.
While granting bail to Bharat Bhai, the court asked him to submit two sureties of Rs 10,000 each. Bharat Bhai is currently lodged in Chanchalguda Central Prison in a special barrack. He was shifted to the city on Prisoner Transit (PT) warrant.
The National Investigation Agency (NIA) brought Bharat Bhai to the city in December for the first time and produced him before the court. He was arrested in connection with a bomb blast case in Ajmer. Bharat Bhai had earlier offered to become a prosecution witness for Rajasthan Anti-Terrorist Squad in Ajmer bombing case but went out of police radar after the arrest of Swamy Aseemanand.
However, he was later arrested Earlier, counsel for the accused Rajavardhan Reddy urged the court to grant bail to Bharat Bhai. The NIA counsel opposed it contending that the two prime accused in the Mecca Masjid blast case- Sandeep Dange and Ramchandra Kalsangra were yet to be arrested and the release of Bharat Bhai might hamper investigation.
As involvement of Bharat Bhai in the criminal conspiracy behind the bomb blast is prima facie established, the court had issued a Prisoner Transit warrant authorising the NIA to take the accused from Jaipur jail and produce him before the court.
Earlier, the investigating agency in its remand case dairy said as per investigation done and evidence collected, the main part of criminal conspiracy took place at the residence of Bharat Bhai in Valsad, Gujarat. They had also extended financial and logistic support to other accused to execute blasts targeting Muslims in India, with an intention to cause terror among people.
Earlier, the accused was produced through a video linkage on November 22 last year and the Nampally court had granted custody of the accused on a petition filed by the NIA.
The counsel for Bharat Bhai had challenged the court order in High Court observing that, “The respondent, National Investigation Agency is at liberty to take custody of the petitioner after following due process of law. But the order does not preclude the respondent for taking police custody of the accused in accordance with law.”