The bench, comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, had reserved the matter for judgment on October 12.
The Supreme Court of India is set to deliver a crucial judgment on Monday, January 8 regarding the contentious issue of the early release of 11 convicts in the Bilkis Bano case. This case, which involves the gang rape of Bilkis Bano and the murder of her family members during the 2002 Gujarat riots, has been a subject of intense legal scrutiny and public debate.
The bench, comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, had reserved the matter for judgment on October 12. The petitions challenge the Gujarat government’s decision to grant remission to the convicts, who were sentenced to life imprisonment for their heinous crimes. The convicts, Jaswant Nai, Govind Nai, Shailesh Bhatt, Radhyesham Shah, Bipin Chandra Joshi, Kesarbhai Vohania, Pradeep Mordhiya, Bakabhai Vohania, Rajubhai Soni, Mitesh Bhatt, and Ramesh Chandana, were released following a May 2022 judgment of the Supreme Court. This judgment stated that an application for remission should be considered in line with the policy of the State where the crime was committed, not where the trial was held.
The Gujarat government applied its remission policy to release the convicts, even though the trial in the case had taken place in Maharashtra. Gujarat Additional Chief Secretary (Home) Raj Kumar stated that the convicts were released due to the “completion of 14 years” in jail and other factors such as “age, nature of the crime, behavior in prison, and so on.”
Advocate Shobha Gupta, representing Bilkis Bano, argued vehemently against the remission. She submitted,
“Eight minors 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 recently 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, which the high court has detailed. These crimes were brutal, barbaric, and gruesome. Convicts have a right to be considered for remission on completion of a certain period of sentence. My issue here is the factors that the government has neglected to consider. This is not a case in which remission should be granted. What would be the impact on society if people like these come out or what precedence value would it set? Considerations at the time of conviction cannot be completely ignored.”
The decision of the Gujarat government was challenged by various petitioners, including Bilkis Bano, before the Supreme Court. Senior Advocates Indira Jaising, Vrinda Grover, Aparna Bhat, Nizamuddin Pasha, and Pratik R Bombarde represented the public interest litigants, while Additional Solicitor-General SV Raju appeared for both the State of Gujarat and the Union of India.
The upcoming judgment is highly anticipated, as it will address the complex interplay of legal, moral, and societal considerations in the context of remission of sentences for grave offenses. The case has significant implications for the principles of justice, especially in cases involving heinous crimes, and is being closely watched by legal experts, human rights activists, and the general public.