Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

Two convicts in the Bilkis Bano case have moved the Supreme Court challenging the January 8 verdict cancelling their remission arguing that it is "in teeth of" a 2002 constitution bench order and seek for the case to be referred to a larger bench for adjudication.

Court has been told that an anomalous situation has arisen wherein two different coordinate benches of the same strength have taken opposite views on the issue of premature release as well as on which policy of the state government would be applicable to the petitioners for remission.

It is the convicts' case that the impugned judgment is directly in teeth of the constitution bench decision in Rupa Ashok Hurra's case and if the same is permitted then it would lead to judicial impropriety and uncertainty and chaos as to which precedence of law has to be applied in future. 

It is to be noted that quite recently, a special bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan had dismissed the applications filed by the convicts in the Bilkis Bano case seeking an extension of four to six weeks to surrender before the concerned jails.

On January 8, 2024, a division bench of the Supreme Court had quashed the Gujarat Government's order granting remission to 11 convicts who had gangraped Bilkis Bano in Gujarat in 2002.

"We fail to understand why the state of Gujarat did not file a review petition against the direction of this court asking it to consider the remission applications, when the appropriate government was in fact the State of Maharashtra.", said the division bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan.

Court further called the impugned orders to be a usurpation of power by the state of Gujarat. Additionally, the bench had refused to accept the plea of liberty made by the 11 convicts and directed them to report to the concerned jails within two weeks.

In October last year, Supreme Court had reserved its judgment in the pleas filed by Bilkis Bano and different PIL petitioners challenging the remission granted to 11 convicts who had gangraped Bano in Gujarat in 2002.

Supreme Court in July 2023 had started hearing the final arguments in all pleas filed against the remission granted to 11 convicts.  Earlier, the Supreme Court had constituted a bench of Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna to hear the petition filed by rape survivor Bano, but due to Justice Joseph's retirement, the bench's composition changed.

She submitted that the accused persons concealed important documents/ material from the Supreme Court which are very necessary for proper adjudication of the review petition and issue in hand, the present petitioner would therefore be filing an application seeking permission to bring on record additional facts and documents.