“ABUSE OF POWER”: SUPREME COURT DISCARDS REVIEW PETITION BY CONVICTS, AND STATE CHALLENGING CANCELLATION OF REMISSION IN BILKIS BANO GANG RAPE CASE
Category: Criminal Law
「 ✦ Content ✦ 」
BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
The brief facts of the following case incept within the timeline of Communal Riots of 2002 of Gujarat. The present review petition concerns with the early release of 11 convicted men who had gang-raped a pregnant woman Bilkis Bano and also murdered several of her family members during the 2002 communal riots in Gujarat.
At first, the police dismissed the case against the accused, the victim then approached the National Human Rights Commission of India and lodged a petition in the Supreme Court pleading a reinvestigation. The Supreme Court granted the relief in the favour of the victim, directing the CBI for the investigation, constituting a team under the leadership of Professor T.D. Dogra.
Later on, the trial was transferred from the Gujarat to Maharashtra. The chargesheet was filled against nineteen (19) persons including the six police officials, a government doctor along with the eleven (11) accused of the case.
After that, on January 2008, eleven men were sentenced to imprisonment for lifetime, convicted them for rapes and murders and one police official was convicted for falsifying the evidences of the case. The High Court of Bombay upheld the same on 8th of May, 2017. In the same order, the court set aside the acquittal of the remaining co-accused, containing Gujarat Police officials and government doctors who were charged with falsifying and tampering of the evidence.
On 23rd of April, 2019, the Supreme Court of India directed the Gujarat Government to pay the compensation worth INR 50,00,000 and ordered a government job and a housing in area of her choice.
In the month of March 2022, one of the convicts of gang rape, namely Radheshyam Bhagwandas Shah approached the Supreme Court seeking a remission of his sentence for an early release, under the States’ 1992 remission policy.
The State granted remission of their sentence 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.
Pursuant to that judgment, the Gujarat government applied its remission policy to release the convicts though the trial in the case had taken place in Maharashtra.
On 15th of month of August 2022, the State of Gujarat remitted the punishment of life imprisonment of 11 convicts and released the eleven convicts from Godhra jail custody.
Few days later, the Supreme Court agreed to look into the plea filled challenging release of 11 convicts.
KEY ASPECTS
The Hon’ble High Court highlighted several key considerations:
Authoritative Competency to Grant Remission: The Supreme Court analysed the authority to grant remission to the convicts. The Supreme Court reaffirmed that Gujarat Government did not have the authority to grant remission to the convicts, as the trail has been conducting in Maharashtra.
No apparent error in previous ruling: The Supreme Court founded that there is no error apparent on the face of the record nor any considerable merits in the review petition filled by the state government and other convicted parties.
Removal of Adverse Remarks: The Supreme Court dismissed the plea filled by the Gujarat Government to remove adverse remarks against it in the ruling dated 8th of January.
Usurpation of Power: The Supreme Court reiterated its stance that the Gujarat Government had usurped and abused its discretion while granting remission to the convicts of the Bilkis Bano gang rape case.
After the early release of 11 convicts, various petitioners including Bano challenged the same before the Supreme Court. The Hon’ble Court on January 8 quashed the Gujarat government's decision to allow premature release of convicts.
The Hon’ble Court said that since the government of the State where the trial had taken place in this case, that is Maharashtra, was the appropriate government authorized to pass orders of remission, the Gujarat government lacked the authority to do so.
The Gujarat government in the month of February filed its review petition before the Supreme Court against the top court's judgment dated 8th of January.
On 26th of September, 2024, The Supreme Court denied the convicts' review petitions on Thursday, which contested the denial of their early release from prison in the Bilkis Bano gang rape case. Additionally, a comparable petition that the Gujarati government had filed was dismissed as part of this ruling.
The State and the convicts had no basis to contest the court's ruling dated 8th of January, which overturned the Gujarat government's decision to grant the eleven convicts’ remission, according to a bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan.
The Supreme Court stated that the government of Gujarat lacked the authority to issue the remission order.
The Hon’ble Court stated and the writer quoted,
“Having carefully gone through the review petitions, the order under challenge and the papers annexed therewith, we are satisfied that there is no error apparent on the face of the record or any merit in the review petitions, warranting reconsideration of the order impugned,”
CONCLUSION AND DECISION OF THE COURT
The Hon’ble Court said that since the government of the State where the trial had taken place in this case, that is Maharashtra, was the appropriate government authorized to pass orders of remission, the Gujarat government lacked the authority to do so.
Hence, the Supreme Court, on 26th of September, 2024, dismissed all review petitions before the quorum, upholding its previous ruling in this case.
OLQ is a Pan-India basis law firm connecting legal expertise nationwide.
WRITTEN BY: YASH BHARDWAJ
GUIDED BY: ADVOCATE ANIK
