INDIA BUSINESS WORLD - FEBRUARY 1st - FEBRUARY 15st - 2008
SC DISMISSES ’93 MUMBAI BLASTS CONVICTS’ BAIL PLEA
The Supreme Court has rejected the bail plea of Rubina Suleiman Memon and three other convicts sentenced to life imprisonment in the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts case. A bench comprising Chief Justice KG Balakrishnan, Justice RV Raveendran and Justice JM Panchal refused to grant bail to Rubina, the sister-in-law of absconding Tiger Menon, Sardar Shahwali Khan, Muzamil Umar Kadri and Zamir Sayed Ismail Kadri, who were held guilty under TADA for abetting the terrorist act.
“She (Rubina) did not appear to be a normal housewife as projected,” the court observed. “Your car was used (in the serial blasts) and you had a Pakistani passport,” court said dismissing her plea that she was not involved in the conspiracy.
In the case of Yusuf Abdul Razak Memon, related to the blasts mastermind Tiger Memon, who was also sentenced to life imprisonment, the court said his bail plea would be decided after receiving a report on his mental state from a medical board.
The court, however, provided relief to seven others — Khalil Ahmed Sayed Ali Nazir, Shahnawaj Hajwani, Sikkander Hajwani, Issak Mohammad Hajwani, Mujib Sharif Parkar, Sudhanwa Sadashiv Talavedkar and Ehsan Mohammed Tufel Qureshi — who were sentenced to lesser terms. The court imposed identical bail conditions on all of them asking them to furnish a personal bond of Rs 25,000 each and two sureties of equal amount. All the convicts have to deposit their passports with the authorities and have to appear at the CBI-STF station, Mumbai, once a month, the court said.
While dismissing the bail applications, the court said, “for a conspiracy do you expect direct evidence. Anybody sitting abroad can make arrangement for a conspiracy. One need not come from far away and supervise directly. What is the difficulty for a person sitting abroad and instructing on telephone”.
It rejected the submission of senior advocate Abhishekh Manu Singhvi that Rubina was in Dubai before the blasts and she was not aware that her father-in-law had transferred in her name a Maruti van alleged used for carrying explosives.
“The car was transferred to your (Rubina’s) name in 1990. You came to Mumbai several times after that,” court said adding that the car was used in a nefarious activity.
“No court will accept this defence,” court observed.
|
