Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Wednesday, May 8, 2024

Dismissal By Apex Court Of Bilkis Bano’s Review Petition Is Most Disappointing

Posted in: Woman laws
Wed, Dec 21, 22, 18:06, 1 Year ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 5405
Bilkis Yakub Rasool vs UOI that Gujarat Government had the jurisdiction to decide the remission applications of 11 convicts who were sentenced to life for gangrape and murder during the 2002 Gujarat riots.

I am most aghast, most appalled, most ashamed and most astonished to learn that none other than the Apex Court itself in its latest judgment titled Bilkis Yakub Rasool vs Union of India & Others in Review Petition (Crl.) No(s). of 2022 (Diary No. 37739/2022) in Writ Petition (Crl.) No(s). 135 of 2022 has dismissed the review petition that was filed by Bilkis Bano who was seeking review of the May 2022 judgment which had held that Gujarat Government had the jurisdiction to decide the remission applications of 11 convicts who were sentenced to life for gangrape and murder during the 2002 Gujarat riots.

The Apex Court said that:
In our opinion, there appears no error apparent on the face of record, which may call for review of the judgment dated 13th May, 2022 and as regards the judgments on which the reliance has been placed, none of the judgments are of any assistance to the review petitioner. In our opinion, no case for review is made out. The review petition is accordingly dismissed.

It must be mentioned here that Bilkis through her lawyer Shobha Gupta had sought review of the judgment by primarily contending that it was contrary to clear language of Section 432(7)(b) of CrPC which envisages that the appropriate government to decide remission is the government of the State where the trial was held. She also pointed out that the Apex Court passed the judgment in a writ petition filed by one of the convicts.

While allowing the writ petition, the Apex Court set aside the judgment of the Gujarat High Court which held that remission has to be decided by the Maharashtra Government), although no special leave petition was filed challenging the High Court judgment. This, Bilkis contended, amounted to a grave procedural irregularity as a judgment cannot be set aside under Article 32 of the Constitution. She also stated that the convict had cleverly suppressed the fact that the case related to Gujarat riots.

It must also be mentioned here that neither was Bilkis made a party nor was her name mentioned in the petition. Thus, the gravity and seriousness of the crime were suppressed from the Court and the Court was misled into passing the order, she contended in the review petition. She has also filed another writ petition challenging the decision of the Gujarat Government to allow the premature release of the eleven convicts.

It must be asked: Why is it that when for murder there cannot be any lesser sentence than life have they been released so early? Why the Apex Court tend to gloss over that it was not just murder or rape but it was gang rape of Bilkis Bano on March 3, 2002 who was then 21 year old and five months pregnant and who witnessed rape and murder of her 3-year-old child in front of her smashing her head before her eyes and rape of her own mother and murder of 15 family members and gang rape of a pregnant women? It is most shuddering to think how horrendous the crime had been perpetrated so fearlessly by the perpetrators!

A piece in Shiv Sena’s mouthpiece Saamana some time back very rightly states on felicitation of Bilkis Bano convicts that:
Who is Bilkis Bano? Just because she is a Muslim does not mean that atrocities against her, rape and murder of her child is pardonable. What if she was our mother or sister? We cry out loud when similar atrocities take place in neighbouring Pakistan and Bangladesh. Then where has our sensitivity gone in case of Bilkis Bano? Neither the Prime Minister nor our Union Home Minister has spoken a word on this. What is the reason?

Eminent and senior journalist and author Tavleen Singh very rightly points out in ‘The Indian Express’ dated August 21, 2022 in her enlightening editorial that:
Then came the news that the Gujarat government had decided to release the 11 monsters who raped Bilkis Bano and smashed her three-year-old daughter’s head before her eyes. They also raped Bilkis’s mother and killed several members of her immediate family. And these crimes have been proved in a court of law.

The legal battle for justice happened because Bilkis, left naked, bleeding and half dead by these sub-human brutes, found the courage to go to a police station and register an FIR. Her complaint was reluctantly registered by the local police probably because she was able to name each one of the 11 rapists.

They were her neighbours in her village. They were her neighbours in her village. Bilkis fought with great courage a long, traumatic battle for justice and her rapists were finally convicted in 2008. The crimes they committed were so awful that when the Supreme Court awarded her compensation of Rs 50 lakh three years ago, the Judges remarked that what was done to her was so horrifying that she deserved the highest recompense paid in a rape case.

It must be mentioned here that Bilkis Bano case convicts were out of jail for around 1000 days even before being released on remission of life sentence and one of them even got charge sheeted for outraging the modesty of a woman in 2020 while out on parole, the Gujarat government had itself told the Apex Court about this. A state government affidavit said all convicts were granted parole, furlough and even temporary bail at different points during their incarceration, with the highest being for 1576 days for Ramesh Chandana and the lowest being 998 days for Bakabhai Vahoniya.

Out of the 11, Mitesh Chamanlal Bhatt was booked and chargesheeted for offences under Sections 354 (outraging the modesty of a woman), 504 (insult intended to provoke breach of the peace) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of IPC entailing a maximum sentence of 7 years or fine or both.

How can it be just glossed over that none other than the BJP leader and Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister and former Chief Minister – Devendra Fadnavis said days after the release of the 11 convicts that it was wrong for the convicts to have been honoured? Fadnavis also pointed out that:
The convicts served their sentence and were released as per a Supreme Court order. However, be it any accused, honouring them on their release is wrong. A convict is a convict and they cannot be honoured. This definitely cannot be ever justified under any circumstances as it amount to abetting the crime itself!

It must be asked: Why these 11 convicts were frequently given parole and furlough leaves multiple times in a year even though the rules forbid them and they had committed such heinous crimes? Why is it glossed over that one of the convicts named Rajubhai Soni was granted 90 days parole in September 2013 but returned in July 2014 after a 197-day delay? Why was this allowed to happen at the first place? Why no action taken against those guilty?

As if this was not enough, why was it again glossed over that one of the convicts Mitesh Bhatt was booked for the offence of outraging the modesty of a woman during parole in 2020? Why still Mitesh Bhatt continued to enjoy over 350 days of parole to after this offence was committed? Is Mitesh Bhatt above the law of the land?

It must also be asked: How can remission be granted to 11 convicts in August despite objections from the Trial Court Special CBI Judge who convicted the 11 men? How can remission be granted to them when even CBI which investigated and prosecuted the case in Mumbai following the 2004 Apex Court order of shifting the trial outside Gujarat calling the offence heinous, grave and serious’ while turning down the remission requests?

The Trial Court Judge Umesh Salvi who was a Special Judge in the Mumbai City Civil and Sessions Court who convicted these 11 convicts in Bilkia Bano case minced just no words to say that:
While the remission was legal, was it just? Salvi said that the Government should have sought better legal understanding of the circumstances and the people involved. The Committee never closely consulted any legal professionals on the case, let alone those closely associated with it. Salvi also said that:
But their felicitation (by some people) was in absolute bad taste. The convicts themselves should not have accepted felicitation.

In hindsight, the 11 men were released after one of them named Radheshyam Shah approached the Apex Court in April 2022 seeking remission arguing that they had spent over 15 years in prison. Bano had very rightly condemned their release saying that:
The release of these convicts has taken from me my peace and shaken my faith in justice. My sorrow and my wavering faith is not for myself alone but for every women who is struggling for justice in courts. I was bereft of words. I am still numb.

Today I can say only this – how can justice for any woman end like this? I trusted the highest courts in our land. I trusted the system, and I was learning slowly to live with my trauma. No one enquired about my safety and well-being, before taking such a big and unjust decision. I appeal to the Gujarat Government, please undo this harm. Give me back my right to live without fear and in peace…

All told, Bilkis Bano still has the option to file curative petition. One definitely feels most dejected to see that the Apex Court has not risen to the occasion and displayed the same level of zero tolerance as it displayed in Dhananjoy Chatterjee case where he was hanged in 2004 for rape and murder of a school girl and that too on circumstantial evidence alone and who was only personally liable but in this case where there is murder, gang rape and what not by so many men in group and still accused are being treated so lightly! Supreme Court is final but it is certainly not infallible.

Let us still hope fervently that Apex Court will realize its grave folly and do justice with Bilkis Bano who has gone though so much of trials and tribulations for no fault of hers other than her being a women and a Muslim! Apex Court must remember that it had itself on April 23, 2019 while awarding her Rs 50 lakh in compensation described how the brutal, diabolic, gruesome, horrific acts of violence committed on her has left an indelible imprint on her mind which will continue to torment and cripple her. It also had noted that the then 21-year-old and pregnant Ms Bilkis was repeatedly gangraped.

She was a mute and helpless witness to her three-and-a-half-year old daughter butchered to death. She had lost all the members of her family while fleeing the mayhem and violence of the 2002 riots. The Apex Court had itself conceded that she had lived the life of a nomad, an orphan!

Before parting, it must be definitely asked most forthrightly: How can the killers and gang rapists who didn’t spare her small child of 3 years nor her aged mother and gang raped her also and so also killed all 15 members be not sent to the gallows? But what we see here is let alone being sent to the gallows, they have not even been sent to jail for whole life! They are out within few years! This is not rule of law but rule of jungle and if not corrected soon will be the biggest miscarriage of justice from which both Centre and the Apex Court cannot be ever exonerated for not taking this high profile case to its logical conclusion!

The Apex Court should never gloss over that it had itself conceded in its 2018 decision in Tehseen Poonawalla case that horrendous acts of mobocracy should not become the new normal. Justice should not only be done but should also seen to be done. We find both lacking in case of Bilkis Bano which is certainly an unpalatable truth from which we definitely cannot run away!

Parvez Alam (Advocate), BA, LLB, LLM,
Chamber No. 151, Near Election Office,
Collectrate Compound, Kutchery,
Meerut - 250003

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
Gender equality, also known as sexual equality, is the state of equal ease of access to resources and opportunities regardless of gender, including economic participation and decision-making; and the state of valuing different behaviors, aspirations and needs equally, regardless of gender.
Child sex ratio and right to life: The child sex ratio had deteriorated across the country over the last decade. In the Indian context there is a strong preference for son.
Facet relating to offences against women. The offences are of various types. They find mention in many enactments. These under- mentioned provisions are enumerated in Indian Penal Code, 1860:
The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 was brought into force by the Indian government from October 26, 2006.
For couples who cannot have children, a surrogate mother is a viable and increasingly popular option. A surrogate mother is a woman who has agreed to become pregnant in order to deliver a child specifically for a couple
Article 15(3) of Indian Constitution permits State to make any special provision in law for women as well as children.
Let me begin at the very beginning by first and foremost pointing out that in a latest landmark judgment by the Bombay High Court titled Mr Ali Abbas Daruwala v/s Mrs Shehnaz Daruwala
Uttarakhand High Court in State of Uttarakhand v/s Karandeep Sharma, Razia, Raju in its landmark judgment delivered on January 5, 2018 recommended strongly the state government to enact in three months a suitable legislation for awarding death sentence to those found guilty of raping girls of 15 years or below.
Brutal Gang Rape and murder of a 12 years old girl in Uttarkashi v State of Uttarakhand The Court took cognizance of two reports published in newspaper
It is most gratifying and satisfying to learn that from now onwards victims of online sexual abuse can report the same anonymously from their homes without bothering to run from pillar to post and pleading with police to lodge their report! The first-of-its-kind national sex offenders registry was launched on September 20.
Legal Implications of the #Metoo Movement and remedies under Indian law for the victims
Laws pertaining to online harassment abuse faced by women, and the the stringent measures taken by the Government to prevent online harassment/abuse of women with an insight to cyber-crime cell catering to women
The UDHR is a milestone document consisting of international human rights law based on the ideas of freedom, equality and dignity, a living text which is universal in scope and relevant to all individuals.
There are various property rights of women in India. This is a short study about them.
Delhi High Court in Anita Suresh vs. Union of India imposed Rs. 50,000 cost on a woman for false sexual harassment plea.
An over all view of Surrogacy Bill 2016
Punjab and Sind Bank and Others v/s Mrs Durgesh Kuwar have minced no words to make it abundantly clear that sexual harassment at the workplace is an affront to the fundamental rights of a woman.
The Secretary, Ministry of Defence vs Babita Puniya vs Lt Cdr Annie Nagaraja that serving women Short Service Commission Officers in Indian Navy were entitled to Permanent Commission at par with their male counterparts.
Scenario of Marital Rape in India - By Malvika Verma
This article relates to the Female Genital Mutilation that is being carried out in India.
The Author of this Article is Yashpriya Sahran. He is currently pursuing B.A. LL.B from Lloyd Law College, Greater Noida.
Reference v. Union of India asked Indian Railways to consider re-prioritising the lower berth allotment by giving the highest priority to pregnant women, then to senior citizens and thereafter to the VVIPs.
Nasiruddin Ali vs The State of Assam rape is a violation of victim's fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. Mrs Justice Rumi Kumari Phukan of Gauhati High Court who authored this noteworthy judgment
Muhammad Abbas Vs The State in Jail Supreme Court of Pakistan observed that extremism and violence has permeated through Pakistani society and it has been brutalized. Not enough is done to ensure that crimes against women do not take place.
X vs State of Kerala Guidelines for maintaining rape victim's anonymity in the matters instituted before it. Justice PB Suresh Kumar who authored this recent, remarkable and righteous judgment while considering a petition arising out of a bail order passed by POCSO
Maheshwar Tigga vs Jharkhand have acquitted a man accused of raping a woman on the pretext of marriage. It observed that misconception of fact arising out of promise to marry has to be in proximity of time to the occurrence and cannot be spread over a long period of time coupled
Smt. Neeraj v. Rajasthan A female government servant is entitled to grant of maternity leave, irrespective of the fact that she had given birth to the child prior to her joining government service.
J & K v/s Md. Imran Khan while reminding the mandate of Section 228A of the J&K Ranbir Penal Code directed the Trial Courts of the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh to avoid disclosing identity of rape survivors in their proceedings and judgments.
marital rape an offence. A rape is a rape. A husband who is supposed to protect his wife and take care of her in all possible respects if himself starts raping his wife must be awarded the strictest punishment
Satish vs Maharashtra groping a child's breasts without skin-to-skin contact would amount to molestation under the Indian Penal Code but not the graver offence of sexual assault under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
Sangita v/s Maharashtra has issued additional guidelines to restrain print/electronic media as well general public, using social media, from publishing information related to rape victim that could directly or indirectly disclose her identity.
Dr Sandeep Mourya vs State in Bail Appn granted anticipatory bail to a doctor based in Delhi accused of raping a woman on the pretext of false promise of marriage after observing that there was no forceful sexual assault done in the case.
The idea of marital rape has always been under a limelight when it came to the situations of India. The laws in India have extensively worked on rape, sexual assault and sexual abuse but have turned a dead eye to the concept of marital rape
A rape is a rape. Just because a man has married a woman that by itself does not confer the legitimate right to man to have sex with woman against her wish by forcing her in anyway.
huge surge in complaints by women of sexual harassment at workplace. As things stand, if strongest possible action is not taken against the culprits who dare to sexually harass a woman
fast-tracking rape trials, the Supreme Court has said that a rape victim should be taken directly to a Magistrate for recording her statements within 24 hours of the crime.
This article puts light on how a woman's life could have a positive impact if the marital age is revised.
Mohasina Mukhtar PhD Scholar Law, RIMT University,Mandi Gobindgarh, Punjab
Monika vs HP there should be no restraint to a woman throughout the period of her pregnancy as restraints and confined spaces might cause mental stress to a pregnant woman.
Mahesha vs Malebennur Police Davanagerewhile displaying zero tolerance for crimes against humanity laid down in no uncertain terms
Aarti Sharma vs Ganga Saran provisions of Domestic Violence Act, being a social welfare legislation, cannot be used by a son as a ploy to either claim a right in his father's property or to retain possession of the same on the strength of his wife's right of residence
Rajkishore Shrivastava vs. MP that getting the consent of the prosecutrix to involve in a sexual act by making false promise of re-employment, can't be called 'free consent' and it would amount to consent obtained under a misconception of fact (as per Section 90 of IPC).
Guruvinder Singh v UP even if sexually explicit images and videos are captured with the consent of a woman, the misuse of the same can't be justified once the relationship between the victim and the accused gets strained.
Irappa Siddappa Murgannavar vs Karnataka the low age of the rape victim is not considered as the only or sufficient factor for imposing a death sentence.
Mamta Devi Vs UP Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow the rescue of a married woman who had moved the High Court with her protection plea claiming that she is facing threats from her family members
Kumari D v/s Karnataka has held most commendably that the right of a woman to exercise her reproductive choice is a dimension of personal liberty as understood under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and she has a sacrosanct right to have her bodily integrity protected.
Kashinath Narayan Gharat v/s Maharashtra that mere refusal to marry a woman after a long relationship would not constitute cheating under Section 417 of the IPC if there is no evidence of fraudulent misrepresentation of promise of marriage for sex.
Neha vs Vibhor Garg Recording of telephonic conversations of the wife without her knowledge amounts to infringement of her privacy and the transcripts of such conversations cannot be accepted as evidence by Family Courts.
Mirza Iqbal @ Golu v/s Uttar Pradesh quashed the criminal proceedings lodged for a dowry death and dowry demand against a man and a woman observing that the husband's family members are frequently named as accused in matrimonial disputes by making passing reference of them in the FIR.
Siddhivinayak Umesh Vindhe v/s Maharashtra asked the Maharashtra State Government to consider making offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC a compoundable offence. The Court also pointed out that Andhra Pradesh is already taking this approach.
Top