The long-pending trial in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack case against Abu Jundal will now move forward after almost seven years. The Bombay High Court on Monday quashed a 2018 trial court order that had halted proceedings.

A bench led by Justice RN Laddha allowed petitions filed by the Delhi Police, the Ministry of Civil Aviation, and the Ministry of External Affairs, who had challenged the trial court’s earlier direction to hand over confidential documents to Jundal.

“All petitions are allowed and the impugned order is quashed,” the High Court said, clearing the way for the trial to restart soon.

The case against Zabiuddin Ansari, also known as Abu Jundal, had been paused since 2018. Jundal, accused of being a handler for the ten Pakistani terrorists involved in the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks, was deported from Saudi Arabia in 2012.

He had requested certain travel-related documents from Indian authorities, claiming they would support his defence. The request was made under Section 91 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which allows the court to call for documents relevant to a case.

Jundal said the papers would prove that he was taken into custody in Dammam, Saudi Arabia, before being brought to India. However, the Delhi Police maintained that he was arrested outside Delhi airport upon his arrival in India.

In 2018, the trial court had directed the government departments to provide the documents Jundal asked for. The Delhi Police and the central ministries then moved the High Court, arguing that the trial court had misinterpreted Section 91 and given it a wider meaning than intended.

Representing the government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh, and advocates Aayush Kedia and D.P. Singh argued that Section 91 offers limited and guided power, not a free right to demand any record for “roving or fishing enquiries.”

They further said that national security, foreign relations, and public interest are valid reasons for keeping certain records confidential. The government also invoked the legal doctrine of Mala Captus, Bene Detentus, meaning “wrongly captured, but lawfully detained.”

Jundal’s lawyer, Wahab Khan, opposed the government’s petitions. He said the Sessions Court’s order was interlocutory in nature, meaning temporary, and could not be appealed.
He also argued that since the central ministries were not direct parties to the trial, their petitions before the High Court were not maintainable.

With this High Court order, the case will now enter the second phase of the 26/11 Mumbai attacks trial.

In the first phase, Pakistani terrorist Ajmal Kasab, the only gunman captured alive, was convicted and executed, while two Indian suspects were acquitted.

Abu Jundal, a resident of Beed, Maharashtra, is alleged to have acted as a handler and Hindi tutor for the Pakistani terrorists during the 2008 siege. He was earlier sentenced to life imprisonment in 2016 in the Aurangabad arms haul case, along with 11 others.

Following the Bombay High Court’s ruling, the special court hearing the 26/11 conspiracy case is expected to resume proceedings in the coming weeks, restarting one of India’s most high-profile terror trials after years of delay.