Calcutta High Court urges State to consider premature release of Bowbazar bomb blast convict after 31 years in jail

The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday ordered the West Bengal Sentence Review Board (SRB) to consider the premature release of Mohd Khalid, a terrorist who has been in jail for the last 31 years after being convicted in the infamous Bowbazar bomb blast case of 1993 [Md Khalid v. State of West Bengal]..Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya noted the reports submitted by the Superintendent of Medinipur Central Correctional Home and the Chief Probation-cum-after-care Officer, both of whom recommended premature release of Khalid, highlighting his 'good conduct' in prison."What is evident from such reports is that the petitioner has been reformed beyond recognition over the last three decades in incarceration. It would be an unwarranted stigma on the petitioner if the shadow of his past is permitted to loom large over his present. It cannot be over-emphasized that the primary object in modern penology is reformation and correction and the objective of punishment is to reform the convict and bring him back to society, assisting him in reintegration and not to wreak vengeance on him due to his past conduct," the judge observed in the order..The SSRB had also cited the fact that the petitioner was a close aide of Rashid Khan, who was the mastermind of the blasts, which claimed the lives of at least 69 persons. However, Justice Bhattacharyya opined,"The association of the petitioner with a criminal mastermind (who himself is in custody for as long) thirty-one years back cannot be a reasonable basis whatsoever for automatically assuming that the petitioner would merrily jump back into criminal activities the moment he is released. It is next to impossible for a person to continue to pretend to be a good man for over thirty years within the extremely restrictive confines of a prison, under constant supervision, scrutiny and monitoring of the jail authorities."The Court, therefore, rejected the argument that the petitioner would continue to indulge in similar offences if released..Two buildings were gutted in Central Kolkata's Bowbazar on March 16, 1993, killing 69 persons. The blast took place after the explosives were stocked in the two buildings by Rashid Khan..The Court was hearing a petition filed by Khalid, sentenced to life in prison, seeking premature release after three decades in jail. Khalid moved court after the SRB refused to entertain his representation primarily on the ground that he was a close associate of Rashid Khan, who was the mastermind of the bomb blast.Khalid had argued that his good conduct during incarceration, chances of rehabilitation and the acceptance of his family ought to be considered for his premature release, rather than the severity of the offence..Citing a Supreme Court judgment, the Court said that to deny premature release of a convict based entirely on the nature of crime committed in the distant past, would be to crush the life force out of such individual altogether."Thus, it defies logic as to why such past antecedents should cast a cloud on the present release of the petitioner."The Bench refused to accept the apprehension that the petitioner could resort to similar activities after being released."The very premise of the apprehension that the petitioner has not lost his potentiality is vitiated, since antecedents and associations of three decades back lose relevance in the teeth of utter disconnect of the petitioner with such antecedents and associations during the long incarceration and his good conduct throughout the period of custody. Thus, it defies logic as to why such past antecedents should cast a cloud on the present release of the petitioner," the Court held.Urging the authorities to reconsider Khalid's premature release, the judge concluded,"Not only will such act contribute another reformed citizen to the mainstream society, the same will set a good precedent for other convicts in prison to attempt emulation and shall act as a deterrent for them to be less than perfect in their conduct in prison.".Advocate Somali Mukhopadhyay appeared for the petitioner.Additional Government Pleader TM Siddiqui along with Advocate Amrita Panja Moulick represented the State..[Read order]