MUMBAI: A sessions court recently upheld the conviction of Ehtesham Siddiqui, 43, acquitted in the 7/11 Mumbai local train blasts of 2006, in a case related to his alleged membership of the banned terrorist outfit Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) and publishing and distributing books related to the terror outfit in prior to his arrest in September, 2006. The court upheld the decision of an additional chief metropolitan magistrate in Mazgaon that had sentenced Siddiqui to seven years in jail in 2016.
The sessions court’s decision comes seven months after Siddiqui and 11 others were acquitted in the 7/11 Mumbai train bomb blasts case of 2006 by the Bombay High Court (HC). Siddiqui, who was incarcerated for 19 years before his acquittal in July 2025, will, however, not return to jail to serve the imprisonment sentence, as he had already spent nine years in jail as an undertrial.
On October 21, 2016, an additional chief metropolitan magistrate had convicted Siddiqui in a case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act for allegedly being a member of SIMI and publishing and distributing books about the banned terror outfit to ‘threaten and disrupt the sovereignty of India’. The magistrate court had, however, acquitted four others in the case.
The magistrate had said that the books seized from Siddiqui’s house in Mira Road were being used by SIMI members “to create religious disharmony amongst people”. The books seized by the Anti-terrorism Squad (ATS) included Urdu and Hindi titles including Jihadi-Fi-Sabiullah, Jihadi Azgar, Islam ki Rooh, Tehrik-e-Millat-Atankwad Ka Jimmedar Kau and SIMI Sangharsh Yatra Ke Pacchis Varsh. He was accused of being a SIMI member despite the ban on it since 2001 and publishing the articles “to provoke people so that it will help in commission of terrorists’ acts”.
In its 2016 order, the magistrate noted that Siddiqui was also convicted in the 7/11 blasts case for planting a bomb on a local train and sentenced to death. “Therefore, there is sufficient evidence showing connection of A1 (Siddiqui) with SIMI and his active participation in the activities thereof,” the magistrate had said.
Siddiqui challenged the order in the sessions court in 2016. After his acquittal in the 7/11 case last July, he argued the matter himself. While he contended that his trial in the case amounted to ‘double jeopardy’, the sessions court said that the argument did not hold because Siddiqui was charged with different offences in this case and the 7/11 bomb blasts case.
Double jeopardy means when a person once convicted or acquitted by a court for an offence cannot be retried for the same offence or on the same facts for a different charge.
Additional sessions judge Mujibodeen S Shaikh said in his order of February 16, “The acquittal of accused (Siddiqui) in the bomb blast case cannot be considered as double jeopardy and cannot be made applicable to this case.”
Siddiqui, however, told HT that he will file a revision application in the HC challenging the sessions court order.