The Gujarat High Court has granted a short parole to one of the eleven men serving life imprisonment in the Bilkis Bano case. The parole is for seven days, on a personal bond and strict conditions. It is a temporary release, not a remission of sentence.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Ahmedabad: The Gujarat High Court on September 17 granted seven days’ parole to Radheshyam Bhagwandas Shah, one of the eleven convicts sentenced to life imprisonment in the 2002 Bilkis Bano case [Radheshyam Bhagwandas Shah v. State of Gujarat and Others].
Justice Sanjeev J Thaker partly allowed the parole plea, ordering the release for seven days on conditions.
The order
The Court directed that the petitioner be released on parole for seven days from the date of his actual release, on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs 10,000 to the satisfaction of the jail authority, on the usual terms and conditions. The order directs that he surrender to the jail authority forthwith on the expiry of the parole period, and that he mark his presence at the nearest police station on every third and fifth day from the date of release.
Parole is a temporary, conditional release from prison for a limited period; it does not reduce or set aside the sentence, and the convict remains liable to return to custody at the end of the period.
ALSO READ: Eleven Convicts In Bilkis Bano Case Surrender Following Supreme Court Deadline
The conviction
The case arises from offences committed during the 2002 communal riots in Gujarat. By a judgment of January 21, 2008, the Special Judge at Greater Mumbai convicted the eleven accused and sentenced them to life imprisonment for offences including murder and gang rape, and convicted a police official in connection with the recording of the first information report. The offences of conviction included those punishable under Sections 302 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of fourteen persons, and Section 376(2) for gang rape.
The Bombay High Court upheld the trial court’s judgment on May 4, 2017, and on November 20, 2017 the Supreme Court dismissed the convicts’ special leave petitions, affirming the convictions and the sentence. The convictions therefore stand concluded up to the Supreme Court.
The remission history
The case has a separate and much-litigated history on the question of remission. After proceedings on which government was the “appropriate government” to decide remission, the eleven convicts were granted premature release by the State of Gujarat in 2022 under the remission policy in force at the time of their sentencing.
In 2024, the Supreme Court set aside that remission, holding that Gujarat was not the “appropriate government” to decide the question, since the trial had been held in Maharashtra, and that the remission orders were therefore invalid. The convicts, who had been released in August 2022, were directed to surrender, and did so. The present order concerns only a seven-day parole, and is distinct from the remission question decided in 2024.
Why it matters
Parole and remission are distinct in law, and the distinction is central to reading this order correctly. Remission shortens or ends a sentence; parole is a temporary, supervised release for a defined period, after which the convict must return to prison. The order granting seven days’ parole leaves the life sentence, and the 2024 position on remission, untouched. It is a limited custodial concession of a kind that convicts serving long sentences may seek from time to time, subject to conditions.
The conditions the Court attached, a personal bond, mandatory surrender on the seventh day, and reporting to the police twice within the week, are directed at ensuring the convict’s return to custody and his supervision while released. Courts weigh such applications against the conduct of the applicant and the terms on which release can be safely allowed, and grant them for defined, short durations.
Given the gravity of the offences of which the eleven were convicted, and the sustained public attention the case has drawn, any order relating to the custody of the convicts is closely followed. This report is confined to what the order does, a grant of seven days’ parole on conditions, and to the record of the case as concluded by the courts; the convictions stand, and the sentence continues.
Case Title: Radheshyam Bhagwandas Shah v. State of Gujarat and Others [Special Criminal Application (Parole Leave) No. 12343 of 2026]
Bench: Justice Sanjeev J Thaker, High Court of Gujarat
Date of Order: September 17, 2026 | Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 250
Status: Seven-day parole granted on a personal bond and conditions, including surrender on expiry and periodic reporting to the police. The life sentence and the convictions, upheld up to the Supreme Court, are unaffected.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE