VANCOUVER, June 18, 2004
The Canadian Press

The only man convicted for his part in the Air India bombing has waived his right to be considered for parole.

Inderjit Singh Reyat is serving a five-year term for manslaughter connected to the Air India bombings in June, 1985.

Two other men, Ripudaman Singh Malik and Ajaib Singh Bagri, are currently on trial, charged with conspiracy and murder in the bombings on June 23, 1985.

Reyat pleaded guilty last February to manslaughter in the bombing.

The prosecution in the case said Reyat assembled the materials for the bomb, but didn't intend for anyone to die.

He was sentenced to five years in prison, the term sought by the Crown.

The former marine electrician from Duncan, B.C., is eligible for full parole in October this year, but has chosen not to be considered for release, according to a letter sent by the National Parole Board to The Canadian Press.

Unless Reyat re-applies, his case won't be reviewed until around June, 2006, said the board.

A lawyer for Reyat could not immediately be reached for comment Thursday.

The Crown alleges Bagri and Malik were part of a group of B.C.-based Sikh separatists who targeted the national airline of India to retaliate for the Indian Army's attack a year earlier on the Golden Temple, Sikhism's holiest shrine.

Air India Flight 182 went down off the coast of Ireland on June 23, 1985, killing all 329 passengers _ 278 of them Canadians _ and crew on board.

A bomb exploded in luggage en route to another Air India flight at Narita airport the same day, killing two baggage handlers.

Reyat was sentenced in 1991 to 10 years in prison for that bombing.

He was charged with murder and conspiracy in the bombing of Flight 182 days before he finished serving his manslaughter sentence.

Meanwhile, the judge hearing the Air India trial allowed into evidence Thursday the diary of a dead man who allegedly participated in the two June 1985 bombings.

Justice Ian Bruce Josephson said he agrees with defence lawyers that the "pocket pal'' diary in question was written by Hardial Singh Johal, who died in 2002.

Malik's legal team argued the diary should be admitted because of a June 18, 1985, entry that said a meeting attended by both Malik and Johal at the home of an alleged Air India mastermind was to discuss a lawsuit.

Susan Coristine argued Johal's note about going to Talwinder Singh Parmar's house provided an innocent explanation for a meeting the Crown claimed was to discuss the terrorist plot unfolding the same week.