The Supreme Court emphasized that it needs to investigate whether the convicts in the Bilkis Bano gangrape case received preferential treatment in their early release from prison, rather than solely focusing on the nature of the crime or evidence. This statement came during a hearing on pleas challenging the Gujarat government’s decision to grant remission to 11 convicts involved in the 2002 Gujarat riots case, where Bilkis Bano was gang-raped, and her family members were murdered.
Questioning Preferential Treatment While acknowledging that the nature of a crime and evidence are not the sole factors for considering remission, the bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan questioned whether the convicts in this specific case had been treated differently. Justice Nagarathna asked if some convicts received preferential treatment, to which Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra, representing the convicts, replied that not all convicts are the same.
Legal Perspective on Remission Luthra argued that remission cannot be denied solely based on the heinous nature of the crime. The bench clarified that the key issue is whether the convicts in this case were granted remission in accordance with the law. They emphasized that they are not reviewing the nature of the crime or evidence.
Examining Reintegration and Selective Application The Court had previously highlighted an accused’s constitutional right to be reintegrated into society. It also questioned the selective application of remission policies by the Gujarat and Central governments.
Holistic Consideration of Remission In a related case, the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of considering applications for premature release holistically, noting that a trial judge’s opinion should not be mechanically applied when deciding on remission.
The hearing in the Bilkis Bano gangrape case will continue on September 20 at 3 PM, as the Court examines whether preferential treatment was accorded to the convicts in their early release.
