PTI, New Delhi. The Supreme Court docket has refused to listen to the interim bail plea of two convicts within the Bilkis Bano case. The apex court docket on Friday (July 19) refused to contemplate a plea in opposition to the Supreme Court docket's January 8 verdict quashing the remission granted to 2 convicts convicted for gang-raping Bilkis Bano through the 2002 Gujarat riots.
Allow us to inform you that each the convicts had demanded that they be granted interim bail until the Gujarat authorities takes a call on their launch. However the Supreme Court docket questioned the petition and refused to listen to it.
SC refuses to contemplate the plea of two convicts
The Supreme Court docket on Friday refused to contemplate the plea of two of the 11 convicts within the Bilkis Bano case difficult the January 8 determination cancelling their remission.
A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Sanjay Kumar termed the plea as “utterly misconceived” and requested the way it might enchantment in opposition to an order handed by one other bench of the apex court docket.
SC raised questions on the petition
“What is that this petition? How is that this petition acceptable? That is utterly incorrect. How can a petition be filed underneath Article 32? We can not enchantment in opposition to an order handed by one other bench,” the bench mentioned.
Advocate Rishi Malhotra, showing for convicts Radheshyam Bhagwandas Shah and Rajubhai Babulal Soni, sought permission to withdraw the plea.
In March, the 2 convicts had approached the apex court docket, arguing that the January 8 verdict annulling their remission was opposite to the 2002 Structure Bench order and sought that the problem be referred to a bigger bench for ultimate determination.
Shah and Soni, lodged within the Godhra sub-jail following the Supreme Court docket verdict, mentioned an “anomalous” state of affairs had arisen whereby two completely different coordinate benches (bench of equal numbers) had given diametrically reverse views on the identical problem of untimely launch and as to which coverage of the state authorities would apply to the petitioners in search of remission.
The plea, filed via Malhotra, mentioned that whereas a bench dated Could 13, 2022 had clearly directed the Gujarat authorities to contemplate Shah's utility for untimely launch by way of the state authorities's remission coverage dated July 9, 1992, the bench which pronounced the judgment on January 8, 2024 got here to the conclusion that not the Gujarat authorities however Maharashtra was competent to grant remission.
“With all due respect we want to submit that the judgment dated January 8, 2024 is in stark distinction to the judgment of the Structure Bench within the Roopa Ashok Hurra case of 2002 and have to be put aside as, if allowed, it could not solely result in judicial unfairness however would additionally create uncertainty and chaos as to which precedent of legislation ought to be utilized in future.
In different phrases, if a celebration isn’t glad with the choice of the Supreme Court docket on any problem, it shall be entitled to file a writ petition to problem the mentioned determination by resorting to the legislation laid down within the Bilkis Bano case, the petition mentioned.
The court docket mentioned {that a} elementary problem arises for consideration as as to whether the next coordinate Bench can overrule the judgment rendered by the sooner coordinate Bench and cross contradictory orders/judgments overruling its earlier view or the correct course would have been to refer the matter to a bigger Bench, if it discovered that the sooner judgment was handed on the premise of incorrect appreciation of legislation and details.
The petition sought a path to the Centre to contemplate the case of the petitioners for untimely launch and to make clear which of its coordinate benches' determination of Could 13, 2022 or January 8, 2024 would apply to them.
It mentioned that since two benches of equal numbers of the Supreme Court docket have handed conflicting orders, the matter ought to be referred to a bigger bench for ultimate determination.
On January 8, in a serious blow to the Gujarat authorities, the Supreme Court docket had cancelled the remission granted to 11 convicts within the high-profile gangrape and homicide of Bilkis Bano and her seven members of the family, and accused the state authorities of colluding with the accused and abusing its discretion.
Learn this also- Bilkis Bano Case: Gujarat authorities once more reached the Supreme Court docket within the Bilkis Bano case, filed a evaluation petition and made this enchantment
