[Bilkis Bano] Convict opposes plea in Supreme Court against remission; says remission as per top court order, petitioners have no locus

One of the convicts in the Bilkis Bano gang rape case, who was recently released by the Gujarat government, has opposed the plea before the Supreme Court challenging remission of his life sentence..Convict Radheysham Bhagwandas Shah has told the Supreme Court that the remission was in accordance with the Supreme Court dated May 13, 2022. "This Hon'ble Court while considering the fact that the conviction in this present case by the Trial Court had occurred in the year 2008 and by that time the State of Gujarat’s premature policy dated July 9, 1992 was in operation, the State Government was directed to consider the application for premature release in terms of the policy dated July 9, 1992," the counter-affidavit filed by Shah states.Shah has also questioned the locus of the petitioners, stating that it is a settled position of law that a third party cannot file a petition opposing such remission..The Gujarat government had recently granted remission to 11 convicts who had gangraped Bilkis Bano and murdered her family members during the 2002 Godhra riots.The 11 convicts who have been set free are Jaswant Nai, Govind Nai, Shailesh Bhatt, Radhyesham Shah, Bipin Chandra Joshi, Kesarbhai Vohania, Pradeep Mordhiya, Bakabhai Vohania, Rajubhai Soni, Mitesh Bhatt and Ramesh Chandana.The petition before the top court was filed by CPI(M) leader Subhasini Ali, independent journalist and filmmaker Revati Laul and former philosophy professor and activist Roop Rekh Varma.The Supreme Court had sought the response of the Gujarat government and the 11 convicts to the plea. .In his response, Shah has stated that none of the petitioners in this case are related to the case and only happens to be either political activist or a third party stranger to the said case."This Hon'ble Court in as early as since celebrated judgment in “Janata Dal v. HS Chowdhary, which was reiterated and followed in “Simranjit Singh Mann v. UOI and which continued till date in “Subramanian Swamy v. Raju, has consistently held in clear terms that a third party who is a total stranger to the prosecution has no ‘locus standi’ in criminal matters and has no right whatsoever in filing a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution," Shah has contended.If such third party petitions are entertained by the apex court, it would not only unsettle the settled position of law but would also open flood gates and would be an open invitation for any member of the public to jump in any criminal matter before any court of law, the convict has argued..On the merits of the matter and regarding the applicability of the remission policy of the State of Gujarat, the affidavit states that the issue was settled by the top court by way of its May 2022 judgment."Even on the merits of the case this Hon'ble Court vide its Judgment dated May 13, 22 passed in W.P. (Crl.) No.135/2022 after hearing all the parties in case came out with a categorical Judgment and directions on broadly two issues. The first issue which was answered by this Hon'ble Court was which State Government Policy would be applicable in the instant case wherein it was answered that the Policy applicable in the given case would be of State of Gujarat. The second issue which was answered by this Hon'ble Court was nothing but reiteration of again a settled law propounded in “State of Haryana Vs. Jagdish,2010 (4) SCC 216” by a three Judges Bench that it is always a policy for premature release which is applicable at the time of the conviction by the Trial Court on a convict and not a subsequent policy at the time of consideration," it has been contended..Bano was gangraped during the 2002 riots and her three-year-old-daughter was among twelve people killed by a mob in Limkheda taluka of Dahod district in Gujarat.The Supreme Court had ordered a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the case after Bano approached National Human Rights Commission.When Bano complained of death threats by the accused, the apex court in 2004 directed the trial to be transferred from Godhra in Gujarat to Maharashtra.In January 2008, a Special CBI Court convicted thirteen accused, out of which eleven were sentenced life imprisonment on the charge of gangrape and murder.In May 2017, the conviction order was upheld by the Bombay High Court.In 2019, the Supreme Court also directed the State of Gujarat to provide ₹50 lakh compensation to Bano.A Bench of then Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi and Justices Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna had also directed the State to provide her with a government job and accommodation.

[Bilkis Bano] Convict opposes plea in Supreme Court against remission; says remission as per top court order, petitioners have no locus

Debayan Roy

Related Stories