9

Jan

SC order in Bilkis Bano case hailed

image

Today’s Edition

New Delhi, 9 January 2024

Anwarulhaq Beg

Various human rights activists and organizations working for peace and communal harmony have welcomed the decision of the Supreme Court, rejecting the Gujarat government’s remission of the sentence to convicts in the gangrape case of Bilkis Bano and others, and brutal murder of several persons of her family during the anti-Muslim violence in Gujarat in 2002.

The Supreme Court has said that the Gujarat government has no competence to pass remission orders of the convicts in the Bilkis Bano case. The apex court noted that the Gujarat government was “complicit and acted in tandem” with the convict who had earlier approached the Supreme Court for a decision on the plea for premature release in the Bilkis Bano gang rape case.

The Gujarat government had remitted the sentence before state assembly elections in 2022 following which 11 convicts were released from jail.

Among the organisations that hailed the apex court judgement include Jamaat-e-Islami Hind (JIH), All India Muslim Majlis Mushawarat and Ahmedabad-based Prashant (tranquility) headed by Christian human rights and peace activist Fr. Cedric Prakash.

JIH national secretary Rahamathunnissa, reacting to the top court’s order, said that it was very disturbing that the Gujarat government had carried out remission by misinterpretation of the Supreme Court’s law.

She said that “the apex court had rightly pointed out in its order today that the act carried out by the BJP government of Gujarat was a classic case where the order of the Supreme Court has been used to violate the rule of law for passing orders for remission.”

“The ruling party owes an explanation to the nation for its state government in Gujarat being derided by the apex court for ‘usurpation and abuse of power’,” she observed.

The JIH leader felt that “the remission, which has now been reversed, was aimed at reaping political dividends to appease a particular constituency. It was highly objectionable and Jamaat-e-Islami had condemned it that time. It was a mockery of our justice dispensation system and could have led the citizens of our country to lose hope in the system. Justice for all is one of the most abiding principles of our Constitution, and we appreciate the Supreme Court for upholding justice in the case of Bilkis Bano. It was quite reprehensible as to how these convicts were felicitated and lauded after their remission. This decision of the Supreme Court has thoroughly exposed the hypocrisy of the ruling party being a promoter of Nari Shakti and guardian of women’s honour and dignity.”

Reacting to the apex court’s order, Christian leader Fr. Cedric Prakash who had supported the cause of justice in the Bilkis Bano case since day one of the incident, said, “It(Supreme Court order) is a triumph for truth and justice!”

“The Supreme Court verdict overruling the remission of the imprisonment of the perpetrators of the gangrape of Bilkis Bano and others (and the brutal murder of many) makes the Gujarat Government (and others) complicit in this heinous crime .They should hang their heads in shame instead of flaunting a so-called ‘ Vibrant Gujarat’ tamasha!,” Fr Prakash commented.

“It is also a vindication of Bilkis’ (and of  those who supported her) relentless struggle for truth and justice – despite all hostilities!” the prominent human rights activist observed.

He also said that “the landmark judgement certainly helps in restoring the faith of the ordinary citizen in the Apex Court!”

Former AIMMM president Navaid Hamid described it as a “slap on the face of the Gujarat government for its illegal remission of the convicts in the Bilkis Bano case.”

He demanded that “a criminal case should be filed against those who took this illegal communal decision to release criminals for political dividends.”

What did Supreme Court say on illegal remission by the Gujarat Government?

Stating that the Gujarat government was “complicit and acted in in tandem” with the convicts, the bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan said that the Gujarat government should have filed a review petition against the supreme court order of May 2022 that had declared state to be competent to decide the plea for remission of convicts in the case.

The two judge bench said that the Gujarat government had misled the apex court by suppression of facts in its earlier plea and has usurped the power of the Maharashtra government in the case.

“It was the State of Maharashtra [which] could have only passed the remission orders respondent no 3 [convict] surreptitiously filed the plea before the Supreme Court. Taking advantage of May 13 order of this court, other convicts also filed remission applications and this Gujarat government passed remission orders. Gujarat was complicit and acted in tandem with respondent no. 3 (convict) in this case. This court was misled by suppressing facts. Use of power by Gujarat was only an usurpation of power by the State,” the Bar and Bench quoted the apex court having said in its judgement, rejecting the remission granted by the Gujarat government.

The top court said that the Gujarat government had earlier contended before the Supreme Court that the appropriate government was Maharashtra to pass remission order but this plea was rejected.

The bench said that the Gujarat government should have filed a review for correction of the apex court ruling of May 13, 2022. The bench said it failed to understand why did the Gujarat government did not file review petition and went ahead with granting remission.

The SC said that its May 2022 ruling had held that Gujarat government was competent to order premature release of convicts, it was based on a plea by Radheyshyam Shah seeking remission of his sentence. But the bench found that convict Shah had suppressed the material facts of the case.

Shah had earlier approached the Gujarat High Court for remission but the latter dismissed his application for remission by the Gujarat government.

The apex court said that the convict then filed the application for premature release in Maharashtra.

The SC said that it here that the convict “played fraud” with the top court, saying that if he were aggrieved by the Gujarat High Court order, he could have filed an appeal before the top court.

However, he moved Maharashtra government for remission and when he got a negative order in Maharashtra, he moved the Supreme Court.

The bench said that the earlier ruling of the Supreme Court in the case was invalid in law because of suppression of material facts.

---------------

  • Share:

About Us

We must explain to you how all seds this mistakens idea off denouncing pleasures and praising pain was born and I will give you a completed accounts..

Contact Us

Contact Info

  • 70, Gyan Khand- 4, Indirapuram, Ghaziabad. Uttar Pradesh.
  • +91-9810533682
  • info@mediamap.co.in
  • Week Days: 09.00 to 18.00 Sunday: Closed