The apex court halts the Delhi High Court order, observing that Rashid Khan’s role in the blast was different from that of another convict who was released earlier
NEW DELHI — The Supreme Court has stayed the premature release of a convict in the 1993 Bowbazar blast case in Kolkata that claimed 69 lives and left hundreds injured, overturning a Delhi High Court order.
Rashid Khan — who had been in jail for more than 33 years — was on June 5 allowed to be released by the Delhi High Court in view of his long period of incarceration, prison conduct and the reformative philosophy underlying premature release of convicts
The Supreme Court’s interim order was passed on Monday by a bench comprising Justice P K Mishra and Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva while hearing a petition filed by the Government of West Bengal challenging the high court’s decision.
The Supreme Court also issued notice on the state’s appeal and put the high court’s order on hold until further consideration of the matter.
Appearing for the West Bengal government, Additional Solicitor General S V Raju argued that the state’s Sentence Review Board had opposed Rashid Khan’s premature release.
According to the state government, despite the board’s objections, the Delhi High Court directed that Khan be released before completing his sentence.
The state also argued that the seriousness of the offence should be taken into account. The blast resulted in the deaths of 69 people and injuries to hundreds more, making it one of the deadliest explosions in Kolkata’s history.
Government lawyers questioned whether considerations such as good conduct in prison and the reformative principle of punishment could by themselves justify early release in a case involving such a large loss of life.
Senior Advocate M R. Shamshad, appearing for Rashid Khan, told the court that his client had spent more than 33 years in custody.
The defence argued that another convict in the same case, Pannalal Jaiswara, had been granted remission and released in March 2014.
Based on that precedent, Khan sought similar relief.
However, the Supreme Court observed that the two convicts could not automatically be treated alike because their roles in the case were different.
During the hearing, the court noted that Rashid Khan had been identified as the principal figure behind the offence, making his case distinct from that of the co-convict who had earlier secured release.
Khan was convicted on 31 August 2001 under provisions of the Indian Penal Code, the Explosive Substances Act and the now-repealed Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA).
The defence maintained that after spending more than three decades behind bars, he had satisfied the conditions for consideration of early release.
In seeking his release, Rashid Khan informed the courts that he is now 77 years old and suffering from several age-related health problems.
He argued that he had already spent more than 33 years in judicial custody and therefore deserved consideration for remission and premature release.
The defence also pointed out that the West Bengal Sentence Review Board had, at one stage, recommended his release.
According to court records cited during the proceedings, the board reportedly recommended remission on 25 March 2015. However, the matter was reviewed again later that year and the recommendation was subsequently withdrawn.
With the Supreme Court now staying the Delhi High Court’s order, Rashid Khan will remain in custody until the matter is decided.
The case has once again brought attention to the difficult balance courts often face between the reformative principles of criminal justice and the gravity of offences involving large-scale loss of life.
The Supreme Court is expected to examine whether the circumstances of Khan’s case justify premature release and whether the high court’s decision was legally sustainable in light of the nature of the crime and the findings recorded during the original trial.
