New Delhi: The Supreme Court Thursday dismissed gangster Abu Salem’s plea seeking immediate release from custody, terming his application “premature”. Salem is currently lodged in Nashik Central Jail serving concurrent life sentences in two separate cases—the 1993 Mumbai blasts case and a murder case dating back to 1995.
Salem argued before the top court that he had completed 25 years in jail in India as mandated under the terms of his extradition from Portugal.
However, the Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta rejected his argument, saying Salem was indulging in “double counting and overlapping custody”. It upheld the Bombay High Court’s April order rejecting his petition for early release.
The gangster was extradited from Portugal in November 2005 following a “solemn sovereign assurance” given on 17 December, 2002 by then Deputy Prime Minister L.K. Advani. Advani had promised that the Indian government would exercise its powers “to ensure that” upon extradition to India for trial, Salem would neither face the death penalty nor imprisonment exceeding 25 years.
Likely to walk free in 2030, Salem has already fought two rounds of litigation with the government and won both, relying on the 2002 extradition ‘assurance’ given by India to Portugal.
Salem, who was part of underworld don Dawood Ibrahim’s crime syndicate, argued before the top court that as of 30 June 2026, he had completed 26 years, 9 months and 22 days of incarceration. His counsel, senior advocate Rishi Malhotra, arrived at this figure by dividing his custody into three components.
First was his undertrial custody from his extradition arrest on 11 November 2005, to his conviction in the 1993 blast case on 7 September 2017—11 years, 9 months and 26 days.
Second was his post-conviction custody, starting from his earlier conviction in a 2006 TADA case on 25 February 2015, to 30 June 2026—11 years, 4 months and 4 days.
The third component was jail-earned remission, totalling 3 years, 6 months and 2 days.
The Supreme Court rejected this computation as “legally unsustainable and inconsistent”. It said that Salem had “overlappingly calculated the same period—between 25 February 2015, and 7 September 2017—as both undertrial custody for one case and post-conviction custody for another”.
The apex court stressed that Salem’s life sentences were explicitly ordered to run concurrently. In its 20-page judgement, the Bench said that “concurrent sentences operate simultaneously and cannot be notionally counted twice to secure an artificial double benefit”.
The court also reiterated its 2022 ruling fixing 12 October 2005 as the strict starting date for computing his detention. It stated that once Salem completes 25 years of actual detention, the government must advise the President under Article 72 or use its powers under Sections 432/433 of the CrPC to remit or commute his remaining sentence within one month, while respecting the principles of national commitment and comity of courts.
Addressing the core legal argument over his extradition, the Supreme Court detailed the interplay between executive assurances and judicial sentencing. It said that while the “sovereign assurance binds the Executive to an outer limit of 25 years, it does not convert a judicial sentence of life imprisonment into a fixed-term 25-year sentence”.
Citing the constitutional principle of separation of powers, the court explained that judicial power determines punishment for grave acts intended to destabilise the nation, while executive power handles extradition commitments.
Hence, Salem’s “jail-earned remissions” cannot be added to shorten the actual period of incarceration required to reach the 25-year mark, as doing so would grant a double benefit beyond the sovereign assurance, said the court.
(Edited by Chingkheinganbi Mayengbam)
Also Read: Out of jail in 2030 — how Abu Salem pushed India to honour its promise to Portugal