On December 17, 2002, that Government of India had given an assurance to the Government of Portugal that if Salem is extradited for trial in India, he would neither be given the death penalty nor would he be subjected to imprisonment for a term beyond 25 years, Salem’s plea stated.
It was argued that regardless of the fact that the TADA Court had held that it was not bound by the assurances of the government, the top court indeed has the power to rule on the same and grant relief.
The plea was opposed by the Central government through Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, who submitted that the period undergone by Salem as an undertrial in Portugal for a case related to passport fraud cannot be considered for computation of 25 years of imprisonment.
After a long-drawn extradition battle with Portugal, Salem was brought to India in 2005 and sentenced to life imprisonment for his role in the 1993 blasts that rocked Mumbai.
Last year, the Supreme Court had refused to entertain a plea filed by the gangster claiming that his extradition to India was illegal.
The apex court had in April this year taken a stern view of an affidavit filed by the Union Home Secretary in the case, noting that it was completely superfluous and an attempt to lecture the judiciary.
“Home Secretary seems to tell us we should decide the appeal. It is not for him to tell us. Please understand this. What we have to do, we will do. He should not be telling us after two opportunities to file the affidavit. I don’t take it very kindly,” Justice Kaul had said.
The Central government had informed the Supreme Court that it was bound by the assurance it gave to Portugal and would abide by it at an appropriate time, but the plea by Salem was premature. Salem’s attempt to club the merits of the case with the assurance was legally untenable, it was stated in the affidavit.
Source: Barandbench
