Bilkis Bano case: What is wrong in convicts being garlanded by family members? ASG SV Raju in Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked how a writ petition filed before it under Article 32 by a convict in the Bilkis Bano rape case seeking remission of his sentence could have been entertained when the Gujarat High Court had rejected the same relief [Bilkis Yakub Rasool v. Union of India and ors]..A Bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan posed the question in reference to a decision by another Bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and Vikram Nath in May 2022.On May 13 last year, Justices Rastogi and Nath had ruled that the remission of the convicts in the case should be considered as per the policy existing at the time of conviction in the State where the crime was actually committed..That ruling was passed while considering an Article 32 petition filed by one of the convicts in the case, Radheshyam Bhagwandas Shah @ Lala Vakil, who had urged the Court to direct the Gujarat government to consider his application for premature release under a 1992 policy, which existed at the time of his conviction.His petition filed before the Gujarat High Court was earlier dismissed. The High Court had opined that since the trial was concluded in Maharashtra, the application for premature release has to be filed in Maharashtra and not in Gujarat..Justice Nagarathna today remarked that the petitioner-convict should have then moved the Bombay High Court first with his remission application, if at all."Did he reveal to this Court that he had filed a writ before the Gujarat High Court? How was the 32 maintainable then before this Court? How was it allowed to be filed? How was it maintainable and entertained? How was a mandamus issued? How could this Court admit and entertain a writ petition against a High Court order? Without any challenge, how was the Gujarat High Court ruling set aside?" she asked. .The Bench clarified that it was only putting forth these questions and would consider the issue at greater length when it hears counsel for the convicts.The Court was considering a batch of pleas challenging the decision of the Gujarat government to grant remission to 11 convicts who had gang-raped Bilkis Bano and murdered her family members during the 2002 Gujarat riots..What is wrong in family members garlanding convicts?.At today's hearing, Senior Advocate Indira Jaising, appearing for Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader Mahua Moitra, pointed out that the people justifying the move to release the convicts emphasise that the convicts were Brahmins. She also object to how the convicts were garlanded on their release."What is wrong in being garlanded by family members?" countered Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, appearing for the Gujarat and Central governments.Advocate Shobha Gupta stressed that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the Godhra district judge and an Additional Director General of Police had recommended against granting the convicts remission.She added that the concerned jail superintendent did not examine the gravity of the offence and failed to record reasons for recommending their premature release."This a negligent exercise done very mechanically or perhaps done with deliberate carelessness, if not a callous approach," she argued.Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra and Advocate Rishi Malhotra, representing two of the convicts, said they would be raising the issue of the locus of petitioners other than Bano.Today was the second day of the hearing. The hearing is set to continue tomorrow.BackgroundThe Gujarat government had granted remission to the 11 convicts based on the May 2022 judgment of the apex court.The 11 convicts who were 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 convicts, who had been sentenced to life imprisonment, were released by the Gujarat government ahead of the assembly polls in the State.This led to the present batch of pleas before the top court challenging the remission. On August 25 last year, the top court sought the response of the Gujarat government on some of the pleas..The Court had earlier expressed its displeasure at the attempt by the convicts to avoid the Bench headed by Justice KM Joseph (since retired)..Bilkis Bano gang rape: Supreme Court says 'clear attempt' by convicts to avoid present bench from hearing plea against remission