On Monday(10th June), The Bombay High Court permits Mohammed Sajid Marghoob Ansari, a convict in the 7/11 train blasts case, to appear for one paper of his second-semester law examination from Nashik Central Prison, modifying an earlier order allowing him to attend the entire exam. Ansari faced challenges in attending all scheduled papers due to logistical reasons.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
MUMBAI: On Monday(10th June), The Bombay High Court has granted permission to Mohammed Sajid Marghoob Ansari, a convict in the 7/11 serial train blasts case, to appear for one paper of his second-semester law examination from Nashik Central Prison. The convict had initially sought permission to attend the entire second semester law examination held by Siddharth Law College in South Mumbai, scheduled from May 3 to May 15.
In May, the court had allowed Ansari to physically appear for the exams, directing the Nashik Central Prison authorities to produce him at the college on the exam dates. However, Ansari faced challenges in attending all the scheduled papers.
On May 10, Ansari filed an application stating that-
“He was unable to take some of the exams because he could not be brought to the college promptly.”
The jail authorities explained that despite their “genuine efforts,” they could not produce Ansari at the college in time for his exams.
Following this, the High Court requested Mumbai University to consider allowing Ansari to appear for the exams online. On Monday, Rui Rodrigues, the advocate representing Mumbai University, informed the bench that the University had decided to permit Ansari to sit for one remaining paper scheduled on June 12 from Nashik Central Prison.
Rodrigues stated-
“After discussions with prison and state officials, university authorities have consented to allow Ansari to take the remaining paper from Nashik jail.”
This decision marks a significant move by the judiciary to balance the rights of convicts to pursue education while serving their sentences. The court’s directive reflects a consideration of Ansari’s efforts to continue his legal studies despite being incarcerated.
ALSO READ:Bombay High Court Questions Maharashtra’s Approach in 7/11 Train Blasts Prosecutor Appointment
The 7/11 serial train blasts, which occurred on July 11, 2006, involved a series of coordinated bomb attacks on Mumbai’s commuter trains, resulting in significant casualties and injuries. Ansari, along with other convicts, was sentenced for his involvement in these heinous attacks.
The Bombay High Court’s decision underscores the importance of providing educational opportunities to convicts, highlighting the role of education in rehabilitation. By facilitating Ansari’s participation in his law exams, the court has acknowledged his right to education and his efforts towards self-improvement.
The court’s directive also indicates a collaborative effort between the judiciary, the prison authorities, and educational institutions to ensure that convicts can continue their education without unnecessary hindrances. This approach not only benefits the individual convict but also contributes to broader societal goals of rehabilitation and reintegration.
As Ansari prepares to sit for his remaining paper from within the confines of Nashik Central Prison, this case sets a precedent for similar situations in the future. It demonstrates the judiciary’s willingness to adapt to unique circumstances and uphold the educational rights of those serving prison sentences.
The involvement of Mumbai University and Siddharth Law College in facilitating this process also highlights the importance of academic institutions in supporting the rehabilitation and educational advancement of convicts. By accommodating Ansari’s request, these institutions have played a crucial role in enabling him to pursue his academic goals.
The High Court has approved an arrangement allowing inmates to continue their education from behind bars, a move that highlights the intersection of legal proceedings and educational reform. This decision came to light during a recent hearing where the court addressed the educational aspirations of inmates, specifically those convicted of serious offenses.
In the particular case of Ansari, a convict from the infamous 2006 serial blasts that resulted in the tragic death of 189 commuters and injured 824 others, the court sanctioned an unprecedented method for taking examinations. Ansari, who was sentenced to life imprisonment in September 2015, has shown a consistent inclination towards rehabilitation through education. He was granted permission in 2015 to pursue a law degree and, more recently, received approval to appear for his first semester exams.
The High Court’s decision entails that Ansari will sit for his exams within the confines of the jail, from 10:30 AM to 12 noon on the scheduled date. The examination paper will be electronically sent to the jail’s common mail address as well as directly to the jail Superintendent’s email. Upon completion, the answer paper will be sealed by an invigilator—who will be present on-site—and then personally delivered to the principal of Siddharth Law College. This decision was made after considering the logistical challenges and security concerns of escorting high-risk inmates outside the jail premises for exams.
ALSO READ: 1993 Train Blast Case: TADA Court Acquitted Abdul Karim Tunda
“The Anti-Terrorism Squad had confirmed their willingness to send an invigilator to the jail on the exam day.”
-confirmed the administrative arrangements, ensuring a secure yet conducive environment for Ansari to complete his examination.
In response to concerns about setting a precedent, the court humorously remarked-
“Why not? If individuals are keen on enhancing their educational qualifications, then why not facilitate it? We need more lawyers.”
indicating a supportive stance towards educational pursuits by inmates.
Furthermore, the court acknowledged an affidavit filed by the DIG (Prisons), which proposed the idea of establishing a policy regarding the conduct of examinations within jail facilities. This approach was praised as a positive step by the prison department towards addressing the educational needs of inmates.
“The prison department’s stance on this matter was indeed positive.”
-the court noted, recognizing the initiative to streamline the process and reduce the frequency of similar applications in the future.
Additional public prosecutor Mankhuvar Deshmukh, representing the jail authorities, articulated the security concerns, emphasizing that transporting inmates convicted of serious crimes outside jail premises poses significant risks.
The High Court has scheduled a further hearing on July 1.
