New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed a review petition filed by the Gujarat government against the adverse observations made against it for being "complicit" with the 11 convicts, in the Bilkis Bano case. In January this year, the apex court scrapped the remission of these convicts.
A bench comprising Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan said: "Application(s) for listing Review Petition(s) in open court is rejected. 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".
The bench said: "The review petitions are, accordingly, dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of." The Gujarat government, which was taken aback by the adverse remarks passed against it, moved a review petition in the apex court to reconsider the comments in the Bilkis Bano case judgment.
On January 8, the apex court quashed the Gujarat government’s decision taken in August 2022 of granting remission to 11 convicts sentenced to life term for the gangrape of Bilkis Bano and the murder of her family members during the 2002 Gujarat riots.
The court, in its judgment, had directed the men to surrender. The apex court had concluded that Gujarat had no jurisdiction to release the convicts.
A month after the Supreme Court ordered that the 11 men, convicted of raping Bilkis Bano and killing her family during the 2002 riots, must return to jail, the Gujarat government moved the apex court seeking a removal of some "adverse" observations made against it in the judgment.
The state government, in the review petition filed through advocate Swati Ghildiyal, said: "At the outset, it is humbly submitted that the observation holding the State of Gujarat guilty of 'usurpation of power' and 'abuse of discretion' for complying with the order of this Hon’ble Court, whereby another Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court held the State of Gujarat to be the 'appropriate government' u/s 432(7) of CrPC, and issued a mandamus to the State of Gujarat to decide the remission Application of the Respondent No.3 herein/accused in accordance with the Remission Policy of 1992 which was in existence at the time of conviction in the State of Gujarat, is an error apparent on the face of the record…”.
The Gujarat government contended that the extreme observation made by the apex court that the state "acted in tandem and was complicit with respondent No3/accused" is not only highly unwarranted and against the record of the case, but has caused serious prejudice to the state of Gujarat.
"In view of the errors on the face of the record, brought to the notice of this Hon’ble Court as mentioned hereinabove, the interference of this Hon’ble Court is imperative and this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to review its impugned common final judgement and order dated January 8, 2024…”, said the review plea.
