4 min readNew DelhiJun 18, 2026 01:43 PM IST
First published on: Jun 18, 2026 at 01:43 PM IST
The West Bengal government has approached the Supreme Court challenging the Delhi High Court order directing the premature release of Mohammed Rashid Khan, convicted in the 1993 Bowbazar blasts in Kolkata that killed 69 people.
The state’s counsel mentioned the plea before a bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice V Mohana, saying it involves a “very serious offence” and urged that it be listed for hearing on Monday (June 22). The CJI said he will look into the request.
The counsel told the bench that the State Sentence Review Board (SSRB) had recommended not to release Khan, but the high court on June 5 ordered his release.
Khan was convicted on August 31, 2001, under provisions of the Indian Penal Code, the Explosives Act, and the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, for the blasts which ripped through a crowded area on the night of March 16, 1993.
Khan pleaded for remission, saying he has been in judicial custody for a period of more than 33 years. He said he is now 77 years old and is suffering from ailments such as chronic metabolic disease, diabetes, hypertension, benign prostatic hypertrophy, left eye cataract, and other age-related ailments.
He also pointed out that co-convict Pannalal Jaysoara was granted premature release on March 5, 2014. Khan said the SSRB had recommended his release on March 25, 2015, but it was reviewed and rejected subsequently in September 2015.
The state opposed his request, saying he was the mastermind of the 1993 blasts.
It pointed out that Jaysoara was released in March 2014 on the basis of the December 9, 2013, recommendation of SSRB, before the Supreme Court in the case of a convict in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case stated that “all States were restrained from exercising their power to remit sentences imposed upon inmates incarcerated in Correctional Home/ Jail custody and the procedure of Premature Release, especially of Convicts sentenced under Central Laws”.
The state added that SSRB decided to review and reject its earlier decision to release Khan in view of the Supreme Court order.
‘Reformation not retribution’: Delhi High Court
Allowing his plea, the Delhi High Court had said, “There has been a reformative approach taken with respect to convicts in cases of remission rather than a retributive approach. In such a case, to keep the petitioner in jail, when he has already spent over 33 years in prison, may not be fruitful in any manner. The punishment undergone by the Petitioner has sufficiently fulfilled the deterrence sought to be induced in a convict who has committed such grave offence. Finally, considering the age, conduct and ailments suffered by the Petitioner, it may be considered that there would not be a recurrence of such offence by the Petitioner.”
The high court said, though the case “has had an impact on society at large. However, in the entire Remission Policy, the emphasis is on reformation, rather than retribution.”
The high court also took into account that co-convict Jaysoara had already been granted remission. “Though in the matter of remission, no parity can be claimed for remission as individual conduct has to be seen, but this fact is significant, in the context of the gravity of offence. If for the same offence, co-convict could be granted remission, gravity of offence cannot be a ground to deny the benefit to the Petitioner, if he satisfies all the criteria.”
The high court said there was no change of circumstance between the time the SSRB recommended his release and recalled it subsequently.
Supreme Court sources said the man hailed from Etawah in Uttar Pradesh, adding that it was not clear what his grievance was. (File Photo) 
Share
