1993 Mumbai blasts: Bombay HC rejects gangster Abu Salem’s early release plea

Abu Salem approached the high court after a special court designated under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), in December 2024, rejected his claim that he had already served his 25-year term.

Advocate Farhana Shah, who represented Salem, sought a tentative date for his release from jail from the high court.

Salem, who was transferred last year from Taloja Central Prison in Navi Mumbai to Nashik Central Prison, was extradited to India from Portugal on November 11, 2005, placed under arrest on November 24, 2005, and tried for the offences with which he had been charged.

In September 2017, Abu Salem was convicted in the Mumbai serial blasts case. In 2015, he was awarded a life term for the murder of Mumbai-based builder Pradeep Jain, who was killed in 1995.

What Supreme Court, MHA said

On July 11, 2022, the Supreme Court stated that the Centre was obligated to advise the President to exercise his/her powers of remission to release Salem after he had served 25 years in prison, in line with the sovereign assurance given by India to Portugal, from which he was extradited. However, the Supreme Court had declined to grant any special privilege to commute or limit the sentence.

In October last year, Salem stated before a special court that he had spent 23 years and eight months in jail. He said authorities were also required to factor in the total period of incarceration, including his jail term as an undertrial and then as a convict, as well as nearly three years’ remission to which he would be entitled under prison rules. He had sought directions to the prison authorities to provide a tentative release date.

On the other hand, Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh, for the Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), sought rejection of the “baseless” plea and claimed that honouring the assurance of a 25-year period would arise only when the said period expired, on November 10, 2030.

MHA claimed Salem was incorrectly attempting “to combine two separate conviction periods undergone in separate cases to arrive at a conclusion” to show that he had completed a 24-year-and-nine-month sentence on December 31, 2024. However, as per the MHA’s May 2025 affidavit, he had served 19 years, 5 months, and 21 days as of March 31 that year.

In July last year, the Justice Gadkari-led bench had, prima facie, observed that Salem had not completed 25 years of incarceration to qualify for remission, given that his date of arrest was October 12, 2005. This prompted Salem to approach the Supreme Court.

On February 16 this year, the apex court allowed Salem to withdraw his plea and noted it was open for him to approach the Bombay High Court for early listing and disposal of the pending matter.

The Bombay High Court then heard the parties, concluded the hearing on March 26, and reserved its order.