7/11 train blasts: Kin read out HC acquittal order at grave of man who died awaiting justice
Nagpur (PTI): The family members of Kamal Ahmad Vakil Ahmad Ansari, who died awaiting justice in the 2006 Mumbai train blasts case, have read aloud the Bombay High Court's acquittal order at his grave, publicly affirming that he was innocent.
Ansari's family members and community members visited his grave here on Sunday, asserting he was falsely accused of being involved in the blasts, and demanded accountability from the system.
Nineteen years after seven train blasts killed more than 180 persons in Mumbai, the HC last month acquitted all the 12 accused, including Ansari, saying the prosecution “utterly failed” to prove the case and it was “hard to believe the accused committed the crime”.
However, Ansari could not celebrate his acquittal as he passed away in a Nagpur jail in 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic. He was buried in Jaripatka Muslim Qabristan in the city.
Dr Abdul Wahid Sheikh, general secretary of Innocence Network, president of Jamiat-e-Ulama Nagpur Qari Sabir and Ansari’s younger brother were among those who visited his grave on Sunday.
Sheikh said they read aloud para 1,486 of the July 21 HC judgment at his resting place, affirming publicly what he had always maintained–that he was innocent.
“Ansari was from Madhubani, Bihar. He ran a small chicken shop, sold vegetables to survive, and worked tirelessly to provide for his five children and wife. Yet, his ordinary life was shattered when the Maharashtra ATS (Anti-Terrorism Squad) picked him up, falsely framed him, and branded him a terrorist,” Sheikh said.
“He languished in prison for 16 years, his dignity stripped, his family stigmatised, and his pleas unheard,” Sheikh said.
The acquittal, four years after Ansari’s death, is a “hollow victory” and a vindication that came too late, he said.
Ansari’s children grew up without a father, his wife carried the burden of stigma, and his family lived with humiliation, he said, adding the judgment cannot return the years he lost, or undo the pain inflicted on his loved ones.
Calling the gathering at Ansari’s grave an act of resistance, Sheikh said those present asserted his innocence, prayed for his soul, and demanded accountability from the system.
“Ansari’s story is not an isolated one but a chilling reminder of how countless innocents are branded as terrorists, locked away for decades, and sometimes die in prison before justice ever reaches them,” Sheikh added.
Seven blasts ripped through Mumbai local trains at various locations on the western line on July 11, 2006, killing more than 180 persons and injuring several others.
In a damning indictment of the prosecution’s case, the high court declared all confessional statements of the accused as inadmissible, suggesting “copying”.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
