NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday quashed the Gujarat government’s decision to grant in the case of the gangrape of Bilkis Bano and the murder of seven of her family members during the 2002 riots in the state.
A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Justice B V Nagarathna and also comprising Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, who had reserved its verdict on October 12 last year, pronounced the judgement today.
The court refused to answer the point regarding the maintainability of the PILs since Bilkis Bano’s petition is already held to be maintainable.
The Top Court also said that its previous judgement by a separate bench on May 13, 2022, allowed the Gujarat govt to decide on the remission plea of one of the convicts, as a nullity.
It said the State, where an offender is tried and sentenced, is competent to decide the remission plea of convicts.
“The order of remission by the Gujarat government has to be quashed for lacking competence,” Justice Nagarathna said in the verdict.
The Gujarat govt had granted remission of all these 11 convicts following a May 2022 judgment in which the top court held that an application of remission should be considered in line with the policy of the State where the crime was committed and not where the trial was held.
The Gujarat government’s remission to all the 11 convicts of Bilkis and freeing them created a huge public outrage and social activists, lawyers, and civil society termed it a “miscarriage of justice.”
The name of 11 convicts who were set free by the Gujarat govt are Jaswant Nai, Govind Nai, Shailesh Bhatt, Radhyesham Shah, Bipin Chandra Joshi, Kesarbhai Vohania, Pradeep Mordhiya, Bakabhai Vohania, Rajubhai Soni, Mitesh Bhatt and Ramesh Chandana.
Primarily, a bunch of Public Interest Litigations (PIL) were filed in the Supreme Court by private parties, including; Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader Subhashini Ali, Professor Rooplekha Verma, journalist Revati Laul, Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra, former IPS officer Meeran Chadha Borwankar, and National Federation of Indian Women.
Bano had after this, moved the Supreme Court challenging the Gujarat government’s order of remission granted to her 11 convicts who gang-raped her and murdered many of her family members in 2002 during the Gujarat riots.
She pointed out that the remission was granted despite the objections raised by the Presiding Judge and the Investigating Officer to the premature release of convicts who have committed grave and heinous offences.
Bano had argued that the release of the prisoners, who committed horrific crimes against herself and her family members, has caused fear and emotional trauma to her.
Eight minors were killed, including Bilkis’ three-and-a-half-year-old child, whose head was smashed into a rock. A pregnant woman was gang-raped. A woman who had just at that time then, delivered a child was raped and murdered. 14 counts of murder in total. It’s heartwrenching to read about the condition in which the bodies were discovered, Gupta said.
The brutal gangrape survivor, Bano’s lawyer, Shobha Gupta, had told the Supreme Court that the factors which are to be considered, as per the SC judgement, while granting remission to her 11 convicts have been given a complete go-by.
She said that these 11 convicts needed to be sent to jail, their original place.
“There is no doubt that the crime was committed brutally. Look at the way, how Bilkis Bano has suffered. The remission is incorrect. The Apex Court should cancel the remission order and all these 11 convicts of Bilkis be sent to jail,” Gupta said.
She also said that the maximum sentence is of 14 years, but for people convicted of murder committed with premeditation and with exceptional violence or brutality, it is 26 years; while for those convicted of crimes with exceptional violence or with brutality or death of victim due to burn and/or murder with rape, it is 28 years.
“Such was public outrage. Public spirited individuals even approached this court challenging the remission,” Gupta had told the Apex Court.
She also questioned if the men who raped her and killed her entire family deserve the leniency they have been given. The answer is no.
Additional Director General of Police, Prisons and Correctional Administration, Gujarat had given a negative opinion and did not recommend the premature release of convict Radheshyam, she told the Apex Court.
“In this case how the leniency has been extended to the convicts,” Gupta questioned.
On the other hand, the Gujarat Government told the Supreme Court that it decided to release the 11 convicts as they completed 14 years of sentence and as their behaviour was found to be good. The Court was also told that the decision was taken with the requisite approval of the Centra Government (as the case was investigated by the CBI).
Opposing the Gujarat government’s arguments, Gupta said that even good behaviour in jail and completion of 14 years are not only factors to be considered when considering remission application in such kind of brutal offences, but she also said.
