MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Thursday rejected a petition filed by gangster Abu Salem, a convict in the March 1993 Mumbai serial bombings case, seeking a 14-day emergency parole to attend the 40-day prayer ceremony following his brother’s death in November last year.
A division bench of Justices A.S. Gadkari and Shyam Chandak dismissed the plea after Salem informed the court that he was unable to bear the cost of a police escort, estimated at ₹17.60 lakh. Salem had sought a modification of the authorities’ order to allow parole without police escort, citing his financial constraints.
During the hearing on Thursday, highlighting the apprehension of the authorities that Salem will abscond if granted parole without an escort party, additional public prosecutor Ashish Satpute told the court that his purpose of parole is to attend his brother’s rites, for which the dates have already passed. “He has to bear the expenses if he wants to go”, he said, adding that Salem was also convicted by a Portuguese court on September 18, 2002, for travelling on a fake passport, which makes him an “international criminal”.
Replying to this, advocate Farhana Shah, appearing for Salem, stated that only one passport case was registered in Portugal. However, she said, no where it’s mentioned that he is an international gangster. “He is not an original conspirator in the blast case. He was only named for delivering the consignment to Sanjay Dutt, who was also released. There is nothing apart from that where his name is mentioned. This repercussion is only there because of Salem’s big name”, Shah said.
Shah further informed the court that Salem is unable to pay any amount towards the escort charges. Citing that the other accused in the same case, including Essa Abdul Razak Memon, one of the brothers of Yakub and Tiger Memon, have been granted parole earlier, Shah questioned the grounds on which Salem was being denied the benefits.
“He is very much entitled to be granted parole leave. He has abided by all the conditions”, Shah said, adding that Salem has been released on parole without any escort party on two occasions earlier, when his mother and his foster mother had passed away. “He spent over 23 years in incarceration. Only one year remains to be served. For this one year, where is he going to abscond?” Salem’s counsel stated.
On the other hand, counsel for CBI cited the adverse report submitted by Sayamir police station against Salem. “Considering Salem’s background and the gravity of the matter, his parole should not be considered without an escort party. If released without police escort, there will be a problem”, he concluded.
Considering the arguments, the court refused to intervene, noting that earlier reports submitted by the Director General of Police had flagged the risk of Salem absconding if released without escort. The bench observed that Salem had been convicted of serious offences and that the competent authorities had already permitted parole only under strict security conditions.
“We do not see any reason to interfere with the orders issued by the competent authorities. We find no merit in the petition, and it is accordingly dismissed,” the bench said.
Salem, currently lodged in Nashik Central Jail, sought an emergency parole to attend the last rites of his brother, Abu Hakim Ansari, who died on November 14, 2025, seeking emergency parole to attend the funeral, 40th-day prayers, Quran Khwani and other religious ceremonies. The application was rejected on November 20, stating that the surety proposed by him was not appropriate, following which Salem approached the additional director general of police. On December 5, the deputy inspector general of prisons directed jail authorities to grant him a two-day parole under escort, with strict conditions, including a prohibition on meeting anyone or consuming food from outside.
Challenging this order, Salem, through advocate Farhana Shah, approached the high court on December 18, contending that he was unable to bear the escort charges as he had been incarcerated for over two decades and had no source of income. During a hearing on January 13, the court directed the state government to submit an explanation as to why Salem cannot be released on parole without an escort and also asked the authorities to specify the escort charges that Salem would be required to pay.
The state government, referring to a report received from the Uttar Pradesh police, stated that Salem’s native place, Saraymir, was a communally sensitive area, and releasing him could potentially disturb the peace and tranquillity of the region, adding that it is ready to grant the four-day parole leave, provided he pays for the escort party.
On January 28, a division bench of justice AS Gadkari and justice Shyam C Chandak told Salem that the court was inclined to grant him a 4-day parole leave, excluding travel time, under police escort and that he will have to pay the escort charges.
Advocate Shah opposed the condition, stating that Salem was not in a financial position to pay the escort charges, as he had no source of income and sought time to find out if Salem would be in a position to pay for the escort charges or not. Considering this, the court then posted the matter for further hearing on February 2.
Subsequently, during the hearing on Monday, Salem informed the court that he cannot bear the charges for the escort.