The Bombay High Court has rejected a plea from gangster Abu Salem, who is serving a life sentence for his involvement in the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts. Salem sought early release based on the argument that he had already completed a 25-year term as stipulated in the extradition agreement between India and Portugal. The decision was made by a bench comprising Justices Ajey S Gadkari and Kamal R Khata.
Remission refers to a reduction in a prisoner’s sentence, which can be granted based on various factors, including the nature of the crime, good behavior, or specific government initiatives.
Salem’s appeal followed a December 2024 ruling by a special court established under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), which had dismissed his assertion regarding the completion of his 25-year term.
His attorney, Farhana Shah, requested the court to establish a provisional release date for Salem. Last year, Salem was transferred from Taloja Central Prison in Navi Mumbai to Nashik Central Prison. He was extradited from Portugal on November 11, 2005, arrested shortly afterward, and subsequently tried for the charges against him.
In September 2017, he was convicted in connection with the Mumbai serial blasts and, in 2015, received a life sentence for the 1995 murder of Mumbai builder Pradeep Jain.
The Supreme Court had previously indicated that the Indian government was obliged to recommend to the President the exercise of remission powers for Salem after he completed 25 years in prison, in accordance with the assurance given to Portugal. However, the Supreme Court did not grant any special privileges concerning the commutation of his sentence.
In October of the previous year, Salem claimed in court that he had been incarcerated for 23 years and eight months. He argued that his total time served should include his period as an undertrial and also account for nearly three years of remission he was eligible for, requesting the court to instruct prison officials to give him a tentative release date.
Conversely, Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh, representing the Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), dismissed Salem’s claims as unfounded, asserting that the commitment to acknowledge a 25-year term would only arise once that period concludes, which is set for November 10, 2030.
The MHA contended that Salem was erroneously trying to merge two separate sentences from different cases to argue that he had completed a 24-year-and-nine-month term by December 31, 2024. However, according to an affidavit submitted by the MHA in May 2025, as of March 31 of that year, Salem had served only 19 years, 5 months, and 21 days in prison.
In July of the previous year, the bench led by Justice Gadkari noted that Salem had not yet completed 25 years of jail time necessary for remission, as his arrest date was recorded as October 12, 2005. This prompted Salem to approach the Supreme Court.
On February 16 of this year, the Supreme Court permitted Salem to withdraw his petition, noting that he could seek an expedited hearing at the Bombay High Court regarding his ongoing case.
The Bombay High Court subsequently conducted hearings, concluding on March 26, and reserved its judgment on the matter.
