Bombay High Court Seeks Abu Salem's Response on Parole Escort Charges Payment
The Bombay High Court on Wednesday directed the legal representative of convicted gangster Abu Salem to clarify whether her client can bear the expenses for police escort if granted a four-day emergency parole. This development came during a hearing on Salem's plea for parole following the death of his elder brother.
Background of the Case
Abu Salem, arrested on November 24, 2005, and convicted in the 1993 Mumbai blasts case in September 2017, has been serving a life sentence. He was also previously convicted in Portugal for using a fake passport. The current plea stems from his request for emergency parole to visit his family in Uttar Pradesh's Azamgarh district after his brother's passing in November last year.
Government's Opposition and Conditions
The Maharashtra prison authorities have strongly opposed granting Salem a 14-day parole, citing significant risks. They argued that his release could lead to him absconding and potentially create serious diplomatic tensions between India and Portugal, from where he was extradited in 2005. In response, the government proposed a limited two-day parole with police escort, emphasizing that Salem must cover the escort charges himself.
The government highlighted that Saraimir village in Azamgarh is a communally sensitive area, adding to their concerns about security and stability.
Salem's Financial Claims
During the hearing, advocate Farhana Shah, representing Salem, submitted that her client is not in a position to pay the escort charges. She explained that Salem had previously clarified this in response to the parole rejection order from prison authorities, citing financial constraints due to his prolonged custody. Shah noted that the escort charges are substantial, far exceeding nominal amounts like 10 or 20 thousand rupees, especially for a 14-day period.
Shah further argued that other inmates have been granted 14-day parole in the past, and the state government has not specified the exact problems that would arise if similar relief were granted to Salem.
Court's Intervention and Questions
The division bench of Justices Ajey S Gadkari and Shyam C Chandak raised pointed questions during the proceedings. They queried why a 14-day parole would pose a risk while a two-day release would not, challenging the state's stance. The court suggested a compromise, orally advising Salem's lawyer to consider a four-day parole instead, with the condition that escort charges must be paid.
The bench indicated it would invoke provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) to exclude travel time, but insisted that Salem must travel with a police escort party.
Next Steps and Hearing
The court has asked Salem's lawyer to consult with her client and provide a clear response on whether he can afford the escort charges. This response is expected during the next hearing scheduled for Monday, February 2. The outcome will be crucial in determining the feasibility of Salem's parole request under the imposed conditions.
This case underscores the ongoing legal and diplomatic complexities surrounding high-profile convicts like Abu Salem, balancing humanitarian considerations with security and financial practicalities.
