Public outcry, agitations can’t affect judicial decisions, SC on plea against release of Bilkis Bano case convicts

The Supreme Court has made it clear that public outcry will not have an impact on the judicial decisions while deciding pleas challenging the remission granted to all the 11 convicts in the Bilkis Bano gang-rape case and murder of her family members during the 2002 Gujarat riots.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday made it clear that public outcry will not have an impact on the judicial decisions while hearing pleas challenging the remission granted to all the 11 convicts in the Bilkis Bano gang-rape case and murder of her family members during the 2002 Gujarat riots.

Advocate Shobha Gupta, representing Bilkis Bano, contended before a bench comprising justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan that there was a “public outcry” and it is one of the important factors to be considered while granting remission to convicts.

The top court said the society’s outcry and the agitation, against the release of convicts, will not affect its decisions and the court will consider legal submissions and follow the law. Gupta emphasised that there were agitations across the country.

The bench told Gupta, “Suppose, there is no public outcry. Are we supposed to uphold the order? If there is a public outcry, does it mean it is a wrong order?” Gupta contended that after the apex court directed the Gujarat government to consider the plea filed by one of the convicts, everything got expedited and all of them were released on August 15, 2022.

Senior advocate Indira Jaising, representing one of the petitioners, who moved the apex court, against remission to convicts, pointed out that convicts were garlanded and felicitated and statements were made about their being Brahmins, who cannot commit crime. Additional Solicitor General SV Raju said those who garlanded the released convicts were their family members. “What is wrong with garlanding by a family member?” he asked.

During the hearing, Bano’s counsel submitted that the Additional Director General of Police, Prisons and Correctional Administration, Gujarat had tendered a negative opinion about remission to the convicts and also did not recommend premature release of one of them -- Radheshyam Shah--the Gujarat High Court declined Shah’s plea seeking premature release under the Gujarat government’s July 9, 1992 policy, and he moved the apex court against this order.

Shah sought remission on the ground that he had completed 15 years and 4 months in jail. In 2008, a CBI court in Mumbai sentenced him to life imprisonment. According to the rules then, a convict could apply for remission after 14 years, which was then considered the period of life imprisonment. The apex court had then asked the Gujarat government to look into the matter and decide within two months whether he could be granted remission.

After hearing the argument, the top court scheduled the matter for further hearing on August 9 and said it will consider the locus standi of petitioners, who filed PILs in the Bilkis Bano gang-rape case. Besides the petition filed by Bano, Trinamool Congress (TMC) MP Mahua Moitra has also filed a PIL against the remission, along with several other PILs, including one by CPI(M) leader Subhashini Ali, independent journalist Revati Laul and former vice-chancellor of Lucknow University Roop Rekha Verma.