The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed the Gujarat government’s review petition challenging certain remarks made in its verdict that canceled the remission granted to 11 men convicted of raping Bilkis Bano and murdering seven of her family members during the 2002 Gujarat riots.
The Gujarat government argued that the Supreme Court, in its January 8 order, made a “clear error” by accusing the state of “usurpation of power” and “abuse of discretion” for complying with an earlier order from a different bench of the top court. The government supported this claim with three primary arguments.
“No adverse inference of ‘usurpation of power’ can be drawn against the state of Gujarat for not filing a review petition against the judgment dated May 13, 2022 (of the coordinate bench),” stated the review petition.
A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan rejected this argument, saying, “Having carefully gone through the Review Petitions, the order under challenge, and the annexed papers, we are satisfied that there is no error apparent on the face of the record or any merit in the Review Petitions warranting reconsideration of the order.”
Bilkis Bano was 21 years old and five months pregnant when she was gang-raped while fleeing the 2002 Gujarat riots that followed the Godhra train burning. Her three-year-old daughter was among seven family members killed in the attack.
In 2008, 11 men were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for their crimes. However, they were released on August 15, 2022, under the Gujarat government’s remission policy.
On January 8, 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that the Gujarat government did not have the authority to grant remission, as the trial took place in Maharashtra. The Court struck down the remission and ordered the convicts to surrender.
The Supreme Court observed that the convicts were “wrongfully” set free in “violation of the law.” The Court also emphasized that the judiciary must serve as a beacon for upholding the rule of law; otherwise, it could lead to “dangerous circumstances” in the country’s democracy and political system.
