Context: Justice K.M. Joseph, on a Division Bench of the Supreme Court on Tuesday, said that it was “more than obvious” that the men released early from life imprisonment in the case of gang rape of Bilkis Bano and murder of her family members during the 2002 Gujarat riots were raising a maze of procedural objections in successive court hearings to avoid his Bench.
Time line of Bilkis Bano case
- During the Gujarat riots of 2002, Bilkis Bano (then five months pregnant) along with her three-and-a-half-year-old daughter and 15 other family members were abruptly attacked by about 20-30 people armed with sickles, swords, and sticks.
- Among the attackers were the 11 accused men. Bilkis, her mother, and three other women were raped and brutally assaulted. Of the 17-member of the group eight were found dead, six were missing. Only Bilkis (who reportedly was five months pregnant at that time), a man, and a three-year-old survived the attack.
- The case was looked upon by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and the Supreme Court, which ordered an investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation.
- Bilkis Bano was not able to receive her well-deserved justice instead, she got threat notices and so, the case was moved to Mumbai from Gujarat.
- A special CBI court in Mumbai sentenced the accused to life imprisonment on the charges of gang rape and murder in January 2008.
- The Bombay high court maintained the conviction of the accused in 2017, and in 2019
- The SC ordered the Gujarat state government to compensate the victim with Rs 50 lakh, a job, and a house.
- Almost after ten years, the Mumbai High Court, in May 2017, upheld the conviction and life imprisonment of 11 people in the gang rape case.
- In 2019, the Supreme Court awarded compensation of Rs 50 lakh to Bilkis Bano.
- One of the convicts, Radheshyam Shah, had approached the Gujarat High Court seeking remission of the sentence under section 432 (which mentions the empowerment of the state government to remit sentences as prison is a state subject under the constitution) and section 433 (which adds a caveat; convicts who have received a life sentence for an offence that even carry a death sentence) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Gujarat HC dismissed his plea saying that the "appropriate government" to decide about his remission is Maharashtra and not Gujarat.
| Power of Remission Under Cr.Pc Different From Constitutional Powers of Pardon Suspend or Remit – Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.PC) under Section 432 empowers central and state government to suspend or remit a sentence, in whole or in part, with or without conditions. Commutation – Section 433 empowers central and state governments to commute death sentence, imprisonment for life and rigorous imprisonment to a lesser degree. State Government to Consult the Centre – Section 435 of Cr.PC states that powers of state government to suspend, remit or commute a sentence must be done in consultation with the central government if: 1. The case was investigated by Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or 2. The case was investigated by any other agency empowered to make an investigation into an offence under any Central Act. 3. The offence involved misappropriation or destruction of, or damage to, any property belonging to the Central Government, or 4. The offence was committed by a person in the service of the Central Government while acting in the discharge of his official duty. Section 433A adds a restriction on powers of remission or commutation in certain cases. It states that where a sentence of imprisonment for life is imposed on conviction of a person for an offence for which death is one of the punishments provided by law, or where a sentence of death imposed on a person has been commuted under section 433 into one of imprisonment for life, such person shall not be released from prison unless he has served at least 14 years of imprisonment. |
- The Gujarat government had on August, 2022 granted remission to the convicts, as they had served over 15 years in prison and reportedly showed good conduct in Jail. However, the trial court judge at Mumbai as well as the prosecuting agency, the CBI, had opined against grant of remission on the ground that they committed the heinous offences in a gruesome manner.
- A series of petitions have been filed in the Apex court , challenging the release of the 11 rapists. The court took up the issue explained it was important for it to examine the records to see whether the State government had independently applied its mind to all the relevant factors before granting remission to 11 men sentenced to life imprisonment for the gangrape of Bilkis Bano and the “horrendous mass murder” of her family members during the 2002 riots.
For further readings regarding constitutional and legal provisions related to remission and pardon kindly refer following link