The Bombay High Court on Thursday dismissed a plea by 1993 Mumbai serial blasts convict Abu Salem for emergency parole to visit his native place in Uttar Pradesh for his elder brother’s funeral rites [Abu Salem v. State of Maharashtra & Ors]..A Bench of Justices AS Gadkari and Shyam C Chandak held that there was no reason to interfere with the parole decision of the competent authorities.The Court recorded that Salem could be released on parole leave, but only with a high-security police escort, and that he must bear the escort expenses.Salem informed the Court that he could not afford to pay the fees. Accordingly, his plea was rejected. .For the State, additional public prosecutor Ashish Satpute said that the authorities had taken a balanced decision, considering the extradition treaty and an adverse police report on law and order concerns.He added that the rites Salem wanted to attend were already over and that if the escort travelled, the State would first have to incur substantial costs..Salem’s counsel, Advocate Farhana Shah, argued that the extradition arrangement with Portugal did not say that he had to be sent back there and could not be used to restrict his right to parole or furlough.She questioned the law and order apprehensions, saying that the Uttar Pradesh police report had no concrete material to show how his visit would disturb public peace.Shah said that Salem has been in custody for about 23–25 years and had earlier been sent out on three occasions for court cases without breaching any condition.She stressed that Salem was seeking release only to perform his brother’s rites, not for any celebration, and that he could not afford the high escort charges..The Court noted the imprisonment certificate showing over 23 years of incarceration, the Director General of Police’s affidavit on the serious offences Salem was convicted of, as well as the adverse police report warning that his presence could disturb peace.It observed that the authorities had already allowed parole with a high-security escort at Salem’s cost and found no ground to relax those terms or review the orders.Thus, it held that the petition lacked merit and dismissed it..Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.
