<p>Nanded in central Maharashtra on Saturday acquitted all nine surviving accused in a 2006 blast case. While the detailed order was not yet available, a defence lawyer said the prosecution could not establish that the incident was a bomb blast. Of the total 12 accused in the case, two had died in the explosion, while one died during the course of the trial. District and Additional Sessions Judge C V Marathe acquitted the remaining accused on Saturday. </p>.<p>An explosion took place on the intervening night of April 4 and 5, 2006, at the house of Laxman Rajkondwar, who was allegedly a Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh worker, in Nanded city. Rajkondwar's son Naresh Rajkondwar and Vishva Hindu Parishad activist Himanshu Panse were killed, allegedly while assembling the explosive device, the investigators claimed.</p>.<p> The case was initially probed by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) and later transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation. As per defence lawyer Nitin Runwal, as many as 49 prosecution witnesses were examined during the trial. But the prosecution could not prove that the incident was a `bomb blast' and not the explosion of a gas cylinder or some other inflammable object, he told PTI. </p>
<p>Nanded in central Maharashtra on Saturday acquitted all nine surviving accused in a 2006 blast case. While the detailed order was not yet available, a defence lawyer said the prosecution could not establish that the incident was a bomb blast. Of the total 12 accused in the case, two had died in the explosion, while one died during the course of the trial. District and Additional Sessions Judge C V Marathe acquitted the remaining accused on Saturday. </p>.<p>An explosion took place on the intervening night of April 4 and 5, 2006, at the house of Laxman Rajkondwar, who was allegedly a Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh worker, in Nanded city. Rajkondwar's son Naresh Rajkondwar and Vishva Hindu Parishad activist Himanshu Panse were killed, allegedly while assembling the explosive device, the investigators claimed.</p>.<p> The case was initially probed by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) and later transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation. As per defence lawyer Nitin Runwal, as many as 49 prosecution witnesses were examined during the trial. But the prosecution could not prove that the incident was a `bomb blast' and not the explosion of a gas cylinder or some other inflammable object, he told PTI. </p>