The Supreme Court on Monday held as ‘not valid’ the Gujarat government’s order remitting sentences of 11 convicts in 2002 Bilkis Bano gang rape case and said the state government had no such authority in the matter concerned. A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan pronounced the judgment after reserving it last year.
Notably, various pleas, including one by Bilkis Bano herself, were filed challenging the remission granted to convicts. There was only one judgment, by Justice BV Nagarathna.
Top Quotes From SC On Bilkis Bano Case
1. Justice Nagarathna said: “Plato states punishment is not for vengeance but for reformation…Curative theory likens punishment to medicine, if a criminal is curable, he should be set free. This forms the heart of reformative theory,” quoted Live Law.
2. The bench said that the victim’s rights are also important. “A woman deserves respect. Can heinous crimes against women permit remission? These are the issues which arise,” it added. “Justice Krishna Iyer has said, quoting George Bernard Shaw, …men are not improved by injuries,” said Justice Nagarathna, the Live Law report added.
3. Place of occurrence of crime and place of imprisonment are not relevant considerations. The intention of Parliament is to hold that Government where the offender is tried and sentenced is the appropriate govt. Emphasis is on the place of trial rather than the place where offence is committed, the court said.
4. The government of the State where the offender is sentenced is the appropriate government to grant remission, not the govt of the state where the offence took place. It is not the Govt of the State where the offence took place or the offenders are imprisoned which is the appropriate govt for remission, the bench further said. “On this ground alone (that Gujarat Govt lacked competence), the writ petitions are liable to be allowed and the orders are liable to be declared as nullity. But the matter does not end there. Reliance was placed on earlier judgment which directed Gujarat Govt to consider,” he added.
5. Justice Nagarathna further said: The writ petition (in which direction to Gujarat Govt to consider remission) was filed by the convict by suppressing relevant facts, he also made misleading statements. The earlier judgment of Bombay HC and the opinion of the presiding judge were not revealed. The court said that by suppressing material facts and making misleading facts, a direction was sought by the convict to the State of Gujarat to consider remission. “The judgment of May 13, 2022 held that State of Gujarat and not the State of Maharashtra was the appropriate govt to consider remission. This is contrary to the Constitution Bench judgment in Sriharan case,” the apex court said, reported ANI.