Supreme Court Questions Gujarat Government's Decision To Release Convicts In Bilkis Bano Case
New Delhi: The Gujarat government”s decision to release 11 men who were convicted of the heinous crimes of rape and murder during the 2002 Gujarat riots has caught the attention of the Supreme Court. The court is currently examining the circumstances surrounding the release and questioning why these individuals were granted freedom after serving only 14 years, while other prisoners are not similarly treated.
These men were found guilty of raping and murdering multiple people including raping Bilkis Bano and killing her family during the 2002 Gujarat riots. Last year, on Independence Day, the convicts were allowed walk free after accepting their application for remission, by the Gujarat government.
In a hearing on Thursday that captured national attention, Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan raised bitter questions surrounding the selective application of a policy that permits the release of hardened criminals after 14 years. Justice Nagarathna articulated the core dilemma precisely: “The convicts” death penalty was commuted to life imprisonment. How could they be released after serving 14 years in such a situation? Why are other prisoners not given the relief of release? Why were these culprits selectively given the benefit of the policy in this case?”
Moreover, the apex court scrutinised the composition and functioning of the Jail Advisory Committee responsible for the decision to release the Bilkis convicts. The court demanded transparency in the formation of the committee.
The case, which had originally been tried in Gujarat, was later transferred to Maharashtra due to concerns about the impartiality of a trial in a state that had witnessed a flood of violence during the 2002 riots. Critically, the convicts” release appears to have been sanctioned based on a policy that is considered outdated.
Amidst these developments, Bilkis Bano”s legal counsel expressed strong dissent over the Gujarat government”s decision. The lawyer vehemently criticised the release, asserting that she was not informed about it, and contending that the decision was fundamentally flawed.
“The Maharashtra state was not heard in this matter. The Centre has not even been made a party in this… the Supreme Court”s order was only in relation to the application of convict Radheshyam, while the Gujarat government gave exemption to all 11 convicts,” legal counsel of Bilkis Bano said.
In a broader context, the Supreme Court”s intervention echoes a call for equity, consistency, and transparency in the dispensation of justice. The court”s demand for data and insights into the application of the 14-year release policy across the spectrum of prisoners underscores its commitment to ensuring that the opportunity for reform and reintegration is extended fairly to all prisoners.
