The Supreme Court of India recently reaffirmed its decision from January 8, 2024, dismissing the Gujarat government's plea to review the cancellation of remission granted to 11 convicts in the Bilkis Bano case. The convicts had been sentenced to life imprisonment for their involvement in the brutal gang-rape of Bilkis Bano, who was five months pregnant at the time, and the murder of seven of her family members, including her three-year-old daughter, during the 2002 Gujarat riots. Their release on August 15, 2022, under Gujarat’s remission policy sparked nationwide outrage and calls for justice.
The Gujarat government, in its review plea, contended that the Supreme Court had made a clear error by accusing the state of "usurpation of power" and "abuse of discretion" in granting the remission. The government defended its decision by claiming it was acting in compliance with a previous Supreme Court order from May 13, 2022. According to the state, it had been wrongly criticized, and no adverse inferences should have been drawn against its actions. The Gujarat government also argued that it was following proper legal protocol and questioned why it was being held accountable for not filing a review petition earlier.
However, a bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan thoroughly examined the Gujarat government's review petition and found no merit in its arguments. The bench rejected the contention that the January 8 verdict contained any "error apparent on the face of the record," affirming that the original ruling was sound and did not require reconsideration. The court emphasized that the remission granted to the convicts was illegal and outside the jurisdiction of the Gujarat government since the trial had taken place in Maharashtra. Therefore, it was the Maharashtra government, not Gujarat, that had the authority to consider any remission applications.
The Supreme Court’s January ruling had already made it clear that the convicts were "erroneously" released and that this act violated the rule of law. The court had expressed strong disapproval of the remission, stressing that such decisions must adhere to legal protocols and uphold the sanctity of justice. The judgment also highlighted the broader implications of such actions, warning that a failure to uphold the rule of law could lead to dangerous consequences for India’s democratic framework.
The Bilkis Bano case has long symbolized the extreme violence and communal unrest that characterized the 2002 Gujarat riots. Bilkis, then 21 years old, was one of the many victims who suffered unspeakable horrors during the riots. While fleeing the violence, she was gang-raped, and her family, including her young daughter, was brutally murdered. The case became a rallying point for justice, with activists and legal experts demanding accountability for those responsible for the horrific crimes. In 2008, after a long and arduous legal battle, 11 men were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for their roles in the atrocities committed against Bilkis and her family.
When these same convicts were prematurely released in 2022 under Gujarat’s remission policy, the decision was met with widespread condemnation from civil society, human rights organizations, and legal experts. The public outrage surrounding their release further intensified as the issue became emblematic of larger concerns regarding justice and the treatment of victims of communal violence. Many questioned how individuals convicted of such heinous crimes could be allowed to walk free, especially when the wounds of the 2002 riots were still fresh in the minds of many.
In its January 8 ruling, the Supreme Court firmly struck down Gujarat’s remission order, stating that the state government had acted beyond its legal authority. The court ruled that the decision to grant remission was not only improper but also violated the principles of justice. It instructed the convicts to immediately surrender, asserting that releasing them had undermined the rule of law and the credibility of the judicial system. The judgment underscored the need for the judiciary to act as a beacon of justice, ensuring that the law is upheld without bias or deviation.
By rejecting the Gujarat government's plea for review, the Supreme Court has sent a strong message that legal procedures must be followed rigorously, especially in sensitive and high-profile cases like that of Bilkis Bano. The court's actions reinforce the principle that justice should be served, regardless of political or administrative pressures. Moreover, it highlights the importance of protecting the rights and dignity of victims, particularly in cases involving sexual violence and communal atrocities.
This case, and the Supreme Court’s decisive stance, will likely have lasting implications for how remission policies are applied in the future, particularly in cases involving violent crimes. The ruling also sets a precedent for holding state governments accountable when they act outside their jurisdiction or fail to uphold the law. For Bilkis Bano and the many supporters who have stood by her in her long quest for justice, the Supreme Court’s reaffirmation of its January decision marks another significant victory in ensuring that those responsible for such horrific acts face the full consequences of their actions.
Â
