Ahmedabad: Gujarat High Court has turned down a petition filed by a former member of the Abdul Latif gang, Mohammed Umar Majid Pathan alias Mohammed Fighter, seeking premature release from the life sentence imposed on him for the murder of former Rajya Sabha member Rauf Valiullah.In 2007, a TADA court sentenced seven persons, including Mohammed Fighter, to imprisonment of 20 years, while three others were given the benefit of the doubt for the MP’s murder in 1992. This was after the politician had threatened to expose the activities of Latif’s gang.In Oct 2024, the state home department rejected Fighter’s request for premature release, prompting him to approach HC for remission and a long parole. His counsel submitted that Fighter had accrued remission of 802 days and he had served 18 of the 20-year term of life imprisonment. He even approached SC for a speedy hearing of his remission petition.Fighter’s counsel submitted that the TADA court had not specified that he was not entitled to any remission. If the trial court had intended to disentitle him from remission benefits, it would have observed so in its sentencing order.State govt opposed the petition and submitted that jail advisory committee had unanimously recommended against Fighter’s premature release, considering the gravity of the offence and the fact that he had absconded on several occasions when released on parole in the past. His remission requests were considered several times earlier.State govt also cited the case of a co-accused, Sajid Ali alias Danny, whose petition of a similar nature is pending in the apex court after he was refused release from jail despite having completed his sentence.After the hearing, Justice M R Mengdey took note of various instances of Fighter absconding after being released on parole. He had absconded even when the present petition was pending. SC was moved without disclosing the fact of his absconding. He surrendered only after HC ordered him to do so as a condition for hearing his remission petition. “Thus, this conduct on the part of the petitioner in itself is sufficient to dismiss the petition,” the court said.HC further said, “The fact that the trial court had imposed the punishment of life imprisonment for 20 years upon the petitioner in itself indicates that the learned trial court intended the petitioner to undergo actual imprisonment for 20 years.”HC also rejected Fighter’s request for long parole.
