Bombay High Court: No parole for 1993 blasts convict

Bombay High Court (Express Photo by Pradeep Kocharekar/File)

THE Bombay High Court recently refused to grant parole to a convict in the 1993 serial blasts case. Accused Mohammed Rafiq Usman Shaikh had sought parole on the ground that his wife was ill and she needed to undergo a surgery.

Dismissing the petition, a bench of acting Chief Justice V K Tahilramani and Justice M S Karnik pointed out that if a person had committed a serious offence for which he was convicted, it also had to be seen if it was the only crime he had committed. “In his case, however, consideration should be as to whether he is showing the signs to reform himself and become a good citizen or there are circumstances which would indicate that he has a tendency to commit the crime again or that he would be a threat to the society. The present petitioner is not involved in just one offence, but he is involved in more than one offence,” said the bench.

Besides the bomb blast case, there were three there cases against the convict, including one registered at the Tardeo police station. “Moreover, in jail, the conduct of the petitioner is also not satisfactory as he is not doing the work allotted to him in the jail and he is also not following the rules and regulations,” said the court while referring to the jailor’s report.

Taking into consideration a Supreme Court decision on granting of parole cited by Shaikh’s counsel, the court said even according to the order “care has to be taken to ensure that kindness to the convicts does not result in cruelty to the society”. “Naturally enough, the authorities would be anxious to ensure that the convict who is released on furlough does not seize the opportunity to commit another crime when he is at large,” said the court.

Shaikh, convicted for conspiracy and obtaining arms training, had filed an application for parole in 2016 too, which was rejected in November the same year. He had then filed another appeal that was dismissed in February 2017. According to a government notification of August 2016, he could not be released on parole as he is a terrorist and a convict in a bomb blast case.

The counsel for Shaikh had, however, argued in the High Court that the notification could not be made applicable to him as he had applied for parole prior to that. “No doubt there is much merit in this submission and we find it to be a correct view. However, the fact remains that the petitioner is involved in terrorist activities and the authorities apprehend that there will be a law and order problem if the petitioner is released on parole,” said Justice Tahilramani.

According to the doctor’s report, the wife of the petitioner is suffering from prolapse of uterus and had to be undergo surgery but the same was not dangerous to life.

“In the present case also, the police report of December 11, 2017, states that if the petitioner is released on parole, law and order situation will arise. We also cannot be unmindful of the fact that in the bomb blast case in which the petitioner has been convicted 188 people died and 828 people were injured,” added the bench.
The court also said the sister of Shaikh’s wife was working in the same hospital where she was undergoing treatment and could take care of her.