A special National Investigation Agency (NIA) court in Kochi found on Wednesday six of the 11 accused guilty in the sensational 2010 case in which Prof TJ Joseph’s hand was chopped off.

NIA court Judge Anil Bhaskar found that second accused Sajil, third Nasar, fourth Najeeb, eighth Noushad, the eleventh Moitheen Kunju, and the twelfth accused Ayoob guilty of attempted murder, conspiracy and serious other offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in the second phase of the trial in the case.

Some of the accused were also held guilty of offences under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The court, however, acquitted five other accused – Aseez Odakkali, Muhammad Rafi, Subair, Shefieq and Mansoor – for want of evidence in the case.

The sentencing of those found guilty would be pronounced on Thursday.

The right hand of T J Joseph, professor at Newman College in Thodupuzha of the Idukki district, was chopped off allegedly by activists of now-banned Popular Front of India (PFI) while he was returning home with his family after attending a Sunday mass at a church in Muvattupuzha in Ernakulam district on July 4, 2010.

According to the investigation agency, it was the reference to Prophet Muhammad in one of the question papers for B Com exams in 2010 March set by Prof. Joseph that provoked the accused to attack the teacher.

In the first phase, 31 accused had faced trial and of them, the court had in April 2015 convicted 10 for offences under the UAPA as well as the Explosive Substances Act and the IPC and found three others guilty of harbouring the offenders.The court had acquitted 18 other accused  in the case then.

The main accused in the case, Ashamannur Sawad, who is said to have chopped off the professor’s hand as per the NIA chargesheet, is still absconding.

The case was initially investigated by the Kerala Police, and was subsequently taken over by the NIA on March 9, 2011

Responding to the verdict, Prof TJ Joseph said the verdict by the NIA court that convicted six persons was not an instance of personal justice for him.

“Victims never get any personal justice from the verdict in any case. The verdict is the assertion of the country’s law. It may act as a deterrent for others from committing such crime,” he said.

He said the attackers were themselves the victims of a centuries-old tribal belief system and that the real perpetrators who ordered them to chop his hands off have not been brought before the law.