Prison department seeks legal opinion after High court grants parole to blast convict

AURANGABAD: The prison department has sought legal opinion on the order received by them from the Bombay high court, granting furlough to a 1998 serial blast convict.

The state government sometime back issued a circular banning the release of convicts — facing serious charges including terror cases — on parole and furlough.

DIG (prisons) Rajendra Dhamne told TOI, “We have sought legal opinion on the orders of the HC granting furlough to a convict serving life term on charges of 1998 bomb blast and murder.”

He added that opinion has been sought as convicts in 1993 blast case have been denied furlough and parole.

Setting aside the decision of additional director general of police (prisons), Pune, the Aurangabad bench of high court has granted furlough to the convict serving life term.

Delivering the order, the HC pointed out that the case of this convict is different from other blast accused that are facing charges under Terrorism and Disruptive Acts (

TADA

).

The HC, in its judgement in its judgment delivered on November 24 this year, went on to state that merely because the appeal filed by the petitioner is pending before the Supreme Court, challenging his conviction is no ground to reject his application for furlough.

56-year Jafar

Abdul Haq Shaikh

, along with 10 others was convicted in June 2004 on charges of carrying out five blasts between January 23 and February 27, 1998 at spots various sports in Mumbai, killing four people and injuring 30 others.

The decision was upheld by the Bombay high court in July 2013 following which the convicts challenged the decision before the Supreme Court.

The government resolution (GR) dated August 26, 2016 passed directives stating that if a convict sentenced for offence such as dacoity, terrorist crimes, mutiny against state, kidnapping for ransom, smuggling of narcotic or psychotropic substances, rape or rape with murder in that case furlough cannot be granted.

After the blast,

Jafar

made an application for furlough earlier this year, but deputy inspector general of police (prison) turned down his plea on February 15. Following this, the convict challenged the decision before additional director general (prison), but he also turned down the plea on August 19. Eventually, Jafar filed a writ petition before the high court.

The prisons department contested before the HC that in the said case, the petitioner is convict of an offence related to terrorist activities, therefore, as per the GR issued in August 20116, prison authorities have rightly rejected his plea.

The prison department also contested before the HC that the amendment presently carried out by the state of Maharashtra in prison manual, the present petitioner is not entitled for furlough /parole as he is a convict related to the terrorist crimes.

Passing the judgement, the division bench comprising justices SS

Shinde

and Mangesh Patil ruled: “It is true that the petitioner is convicted for the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code in a bomb blast case. However, the respondents (prisons department) have not disputed assertion of the petitioner (convict) that he is not convict for the offence under TADA.”


Stay updated with the latest news on Times of India. Don't miss daily games like Crossword, Sudoku, and Mini Crossword.