Ansari was convicted primarily on the basis of fingerprints found on a cylinder pipe at one of the blast sites, which matched his own. The 12 accused, who were also tried by Judge S M Deshmukh, include an engineer of the Indian Institute of Technology and a lecturer.

Special Public Prosecutor Kalpana Chavan said Ansari wasarrested by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on January 13, 1994, and explosives like detonators, firearms and ammunition required to fabricate bombs were seized from his house.

In all, seven cases were tried by the designated TADA court. These pertained to the bomb explosion at the Shiv Sena office, branch No 216 at Mulund on February 10, 1992, where one person had died and three others were injured; a bomb explosion at Regal cinema, Colaba, on February 7, 1993, in which a woman sustained severe injuries; a bomb explosion at Satya Narayan Hotel in the compound of the Azad Maidan police station, in which two police constables were injured on February 3, 1994; a bomb explosion inside the Gamdevi police station on September 2, 1993, in which one constable was seriously injured; bomb explosions near the Parel police chowky, where a constable was injured on August 14, 1993; a bomb was detected near Gol Dev police chowky located in the limits of the V P Road police station; and another bomb in the Senaoffice, branch no 52, at Bhoiwada on September 17, 1993.

Chavan had told the court that Ansari had instructed his accomplices to plant bombs at strategic places as part of a conspiracy to strike terror in the minds of Hindus. He had also been arrested in connection with a bomb explosion on the Rajdhani Express and others at various Hindu temples. She had also pointed out that some of the conspirators had visited Pakistan and Bangladesh for training in arms and ammunition. While sentencing the accused, the judge also came down heavily on the prosecution with regard to the manner in which the identification parade was conducted. He termed the evidence as weak and ``not trustworthy'' while rejecting it. ``The special executive magistrates have totally neglected the guidelines issued by the high court for arranging identification parades and the evidence found that all the parades were controlled by the investigating officers and consequently material evidence could not be proved,'' he observed.

``In future,the government may consider empowering law graduates who have not obtained sanath from the bar council or notaries to record identification parades,'' he said. However, Ansari's fingerprints, which was found on an iron pipe immediately after the blasts in front of Sena shaka at Bhoiwada were accepted by the court. The CBI also took a lot of stick from the judge. ``The office of the CBI has totally neglected the importance of the selection of panchas with one pancha absconding after his examination-in-chief and another turning hostile to the prosecution case,'' the judge said.

The confessional statements of the accused were also rejected as the police officers who recorded the statements had not confirmed that the accused at the relevant time were free from any compulsions and was giving the statement voluntarily, he said. ``The police officers have also neglected the guidelines in the Criminal Manual for recording confessional statements. It would have been better if the officers could have referred theaccused to the magistrate concerned for recording confessional statements,'' he pointed out. The accused acquitted were: Junaid Ahmed Ansari, Shakil Shaikh, Mohammed Riyaz Danewala, Mussadique Kadri, Rafiq Ayub, Abdul Latif Chaudhari, Shamim Rehman, Abdus Ansari, Ashfaq Rindani, Abu Bakar Teli, Mohammed Laik Ansari and Mohammed Amin Ansari.