Convicted killer granted day parole

• An Ontario woman who started a family with another inmate and earned two degrees while serving a life sentence for killing a child has again been given a taste of freedom, though it may be short-lived.

Amina Chaudhary, 54, was granted day parole and released to a halfway house last month but efforts to have her deported may mean she’ll be detained by immigration authorities.

Chaudhary was convicted in 1984 of killing her former lover’s eight-year-old nephew but maintains her innocence. She’s seeking a ministerial review of her case after an unsuccessful appeal and judicial review.

She met her husband, Anees Chaudhary — also a convicted murderer — while in pre-trial custody. The couple’s three children, all of whom have autism or Asperger syndrome, were raised by friends or the state and are now adults.

Chaudhary previously was granted day parole and her husband full parole but both were taken back into custody roughly five years ago over concerns about financial irregularities, though no charges were laid. Her husband has since been granted day parole.

Chaudhary was also released on day parole for six months in 2012 but spent that time in custody on a deportation order, which immigration officials have not been able to enforce because neither India nor the U.K. will issue her travel documents.

After going on several unescorted trips to visit her husband during the past year, she sought full parole in June, but a Parole Board of Canada panel instead gave her day parole, saying she needs to “establish a history of credibility” before being granted more freedom.

Several conditions have also been imposed on Chaudhary, including that she refrain from contacting the victim’s family or associating with anyone who may be involved in criminal activity, and continue to undergo counselling for anger management.

“The severity of your criminal offending, your continued stance of innocence, your documented and demonstrated lack of transparency and your need of ongoing psychological intervention speak to the requirement of a very closely monitored and structured release environment inherent in a (halfway house),” the panel said in its written decision.

“You have developed a reputation over the years as being someone who attempts to manipulate the system, are described in psychological reporting as deceptive and evasive and by your own admission, you can be difficult to manage,” it said.

At her June hearing, she denied carrying out the killing but refused to name the person she believed was responsible.

Prosecutors said a thirst for revenge led Chaudhary to slay eight-year-old Rajesh Gupta, who was left in her care while his uncle, her exlover, travelled to India for an arranged marriage to another woman.

Gupta was strangled in February 1982 with the drawstring cord of his ski jacket hood, packed in a cardboard box and dumped in a remote section of east Toronto where the former couple used to meet.

Chaudhary has said that she was pregnant and recovering from an arm wound at the time and would not have been able to kill a struggling boy in her weakened state.

At her trial, however, now-disgraced pathologist Charles Smith testified that autopsy photos showed damage to Gupta’s skull indicating the boy had been knocked out before he was murdered.

Her case has been taken on by the Innocence Project at York University’s Osgoode Hall.