In an achievement for the Central Bureau of Investigation, the Supreme Court of Justice (Portugal) has admitted India’s appeal challenging verdict of the high court of Lisbon which had terminated the extradition of gangster and 1993 Mumbai serial blasts accused Abu Salem.
The Supreme Court of Portugal will soon pronounce its judgment on India’s plea.
Sources in the agency said, “India’s plea challenging verdict of the high court of Lisbon was admitted by the Supreme Court of Portugal on Monday. Now the Portuguese Supreme Court will soon pronounce its judgement over it.”
Earlier, the Portugal high court in its order on September 20, 2011 terminated its government’ s authorisation of the extradition of Abu Salem to India in November 2005 to face trial in around eight cases. Cancelling the extradition, the Portuguese court accused Indian probe agencies (including the CBI) of violating the conditions under which he was permitted to be taken to India in November 2005 to face trial in eight cases.
“India in its appeal before the Portuguese Supreme Court said the interpretation of the Lisbon high court about the trial related to Salem in various courts of the country was not correct,” sources said.
The high court had said that in view of the new/additional charges against Salem which entail death penalty, the authorisation granted for his extradition has terminated as it violated the “rule of speciality”.
The extradition of Salem, who is also wanted in various cases, including the murder of noted film producer Gulshan Kumar, came after an assurance by the Indian government to Portugal that he would not be given death penalty, an important requirement in extradition proceedings in Europe.
“The CBI, probing the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts case, in its appeal categorically said ‘there is no violation of rule of speciality’ as available in the laws of the US, the UK and Portugal and the India Extradition Act,” sources said.
Sources further said, “Since the additional charges framed against Salem are made out from the same facts, which were considered for his extradition and provide lesser sentence as compared to the sentence provided for the offences for which his extradition was granted, therefore there is no question of violation of Rule of Speciality at all. This was clearly mentioned in the appeal.”