Shashwati Chowdhury
Published on: July 11, 2022 at 19:25 IST
On July 11, the Supreme Court will issue its judgment regarding Abu Salem’s plea that his sentence of imprisonment cannot exceed 25 years in accordance with India’s undertaking to Portugal in the 1993 Bombay Blast case.
Salem’s attorney, Mr. Rishi Malhotra, appeared before the Bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh and made two major submissions.
- In view of the sovereign commitment that was given to the Portuguese authorities while extraditing Salem the sentence of life in prison imposed by the Trial Court (TADA Court) be altered or read down to 25 years; and
- The period of detention in Portugal (from the date of arrest until extradition), which was effected by the Red Corner Notice (RCN) issued by INTERPOL in accordance with the non-bailable warrant issued by the TADA Court in Mumbai, should be set-off against the sentence of life in prison.
A Special Terrorism and Disruptive Activities Act (TADA) Court found Abu Salem and five other convicts guilty of conspiring and carrying out a series of bombings in Mumbai in 1993 that resulted in the deaths of 257 people in June 2017. Abu Salem was found guilty of crimes covered by the Arms Act, Explosive Substances Act, and Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, as well as Sections 120B, 302, 307, 326, 427, 435, 436, 201, and 212 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3, 3(3), 5, and 6 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Rapid Protection Act, and Sections 3, 3(3), and 6.
Salem was consequently extradited on November 10, 2005.
The Union Government conceded that it is obligated by the sovereign pledge in an affidavit dated 18.04.2022. The affidavit further urged the Bench to rule on the merits of the appeal rather than debating the matter of the sovereign commitment, which the Government of India will uphold in accordance with the law and subject to the remedies available upon the expiration of the 25-year period.
In the following terms, the Bench stated at the hearing that it did not appreciate the tenor of the affidavit:
“We don’t appreciate the tenor of the affidavit. If a convict seeks to accept his guilt and conviction it cannot be said that the Court must hear the appeal on merits…”
