The Supreme Court deferred hearing to July 11 on a batch of petitions challenging the remission granted by the Gujarat government in 2022 to 11 people, who were convicted for their alleged involvement in the gangrape of Bilkis Bano and murder of her family members during the 2002 Godhra riots.

The Bench of Justice K.M. Joseph, Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah on Tuesday issued notice to the convicts, who remained unserved even now.

The Apex Court directed the publication of notices in local newspapers, including in Gujarati and English, against the convicts who could not be served notices, including the one whose house was found locked by the local police and his phone was switched off.

The next date of hearing in the matter, which was fixed at July 11, shall also be published in the notices to be carried in the newspapers, ordered the top court of the country.

It said the reason behind adopting this process was that time should not be wasted on the next date of hearing and the case should proceed.

It was likely that a new Bench would hear the matter on July 11 as Justice Joseph, who was currently heading the Bench, was set to superannuate on June 16, with May 19 being his last working day.

The Supreme Court will go on summer vacation from May 20 till July 2.

Earlier on May 2, the Apex Court had deferred the hearing after counsel for some of the convicts raised objections about not being served notices on the pleas.

The Apex Court had then observed that it seemed pretty obvious that the convicts did not want the hearing to be conducted by the current Bench. 

Both the Centre and the State of Gujarat had apprised the top court of the country that they were not claiming any privilege and not filing any plea for a review of the court’s March 27 order, asking for production of the original records with regard to the remission granted to the convicts.

The Gujarat government had raised preliminary objections with regard to the petitions filed in the matter other than the one by Bano, saying that it will have wide ramifications as every now and then, third parties will approach the courts in criminal cases.

The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice on a petition filed by Bilkis Bano, challenging the Gujarat government order that granted premature release to 11 people, convicted to life imprisonment for gangraping Bilkis Bano and murdering seven members of her family during the Gujarat riots 2002.

The Bench of Justice K.M. Joseph and Justice B.V. Nagarathna, while observing that the crimes committed by the convicts were ‘horrendous,’ said that it would not be ‘overwhelmed’ by emotions.

The top court of the country listed the petitions for further hearing on April 18.

Earlier on March 22, the Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice J.B. Pardiwala had agreed to constitute a Special Bench to hear the petitions. Advocate Shobha Gupta, appearing for Bano, had mentioned the matter before the Apex Court, seeking urgent hearing and constitution of a new Bench in the case.

Earlier on January 24, the Apex Court could not take up Bano’s plea as the judges concerned were hearing a matter related to passive euthanasia as part of a five-judge Constitution bench.

Besides the plea challenging the release of the convicts, the gangrape survivor had also filed a separate petition seeking a review of the order passed by the top court of the country on May 13, 2022 on a plea by a convict.

Seven members of Bilkis Bano’s family were also killed during the 2002 Gujarat riots.

In its May 13, 2022 order, the apex court had asked the state government to consider the plea of a convict for premature release in terms of its policy of July 9, 1992 which was applicable on the date of conviction and decide it within a period of two months.

All 11 convicts were granted remission by the Gujarat government and released on August 15, last year.

Bano’s review plea against the May 13, 2022 order, however, was dismissed by the top court in December last year. 

Last month also, CJI DY Chandrachud had said that he will constitute a special bench to take up the matter.

Meanwhile, Bano’s counsel Advocate Shobha Gupta claims that the matter has been mentioned 4 times earlier but is yet to be taken up for preliminary hearing and notice. 

The matter was first mentioned on November 30, 2022, whereafter it was listed before a bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi & Bela N. Trivedi. Justices Rastogi had authored the previous judgment allowing Gujarat to decide the remission plea. However, Justice Trivedi recused from hearing the case. (She was deputed as Law Secretary of the Gujarat Government during 2004-2006.)

The matter was mentioned on December 14, 2022 and to be tentatively listed on January 2 this year. On January 20, Gupta again mentioned the matter but it could not be heard on set dates, i.e., January 24 and January 31, due to sitting of Constitution bench.

On February 7, the CJI agreed to constitute a special bench to hear the pleas. “BUT matter not listed and no date is being shown despite the passing of 41 days since last mentioning,” Gupta said.

In May 2022, the Bench led by Justice Rastogi had ruled that the Gujarat Government had the jurisdiction to consider the remission request as the offence took place in Gujarat.

Supreme Court judge, Justice Bela M. Trivedi, has decided to recuse herself from taking up the PILs challenging the Gujarat government’s decision to release prematurely 11 convicts sentenced to life imprisonment in the gangrape of Bilkis Bano and murder of her family members during the Godhra Riots of 2002.

It was learnt that Justice Trivedi was deputed as Law Secretary of the Gujarat Government during 2004-2006.

The Bench of Justice Ajay Rastogi and Justice Trivedi on Wednesday took up the petitions filed by Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra, Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader Subhashini Ali, former Lucknow University vice-chancellor Roop Rekha Verma and journalist Revati Laul.

As per Justice Rastogi, since Justice Trivedi had earlier recused herself from hearing a petition by Bilkis Bano, she would refrain from hearing this case as well.

On December 13 last year, while sitting in the same combination with Justice Rastogi, Justice Trivedi had recused herself from hearing the writ petition filed by Bilkis against the Gujarat government’s decision to release the convicts.

Representing one of the petitioners yesterday, Advocate Aparna Bhat apprised the Bench that the pleadings were complete and the same could be kept for final hearing in February.

The Counsel appearing for the accused raised the issue of maintainability, to which Justice Ajay Rastogi replied that Bilkis had herself approached the Apex Court. 

Appearing for one of the petitioners, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi submitted that every time the matter came up for hearing, the respondents raised the issue of maintainability.

Justice Rastogi directed the parties involved to argue only on the basis of merits. He further said that the plea filed by Bilkis Bano could be tagged and made the lead matter in the batch of petitions. 
The Supreme Court Judge asked Advocate Shobha Gupta, appearing for Bilkis, to mention the matter when he was sitting in a different combination, so that it can be tagged.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday said that it will take up after the Winter vacations, the writ petition filed by gangrape survivor Bilkis Bano, challenging the decision of the Gujarat government to grant remission to 11 people, who were convicted for gangraping her and murdering her family members, during the 2002 Godhra riots in Gujarat.

Advocate Shobha Gupta, appearing for Bilkis, mentioned the matter before a Bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud.

The CJI assured to take up the matter after Winter vacations, but told the Counsel appearing for the petitioner not to mention the same thing again and again, saying that it became ‘very irritating’. 

“Don’t keep mentioning this matter again and again. The Writ will be listed. A review was also circulated yesterday,” he added.

Earlier on December 13, Justice Bela M. Trivedi decided to recuse herself from hearing the petition filed by Bilkis Bano. The matter was placed before the Bench of Justice Ajay Rastogi and Justice Bela Trivedi, when the latter chose to recuse herself from the case.

Justice Ajay Rastogi told Advocate Gupta to list the matter before another Bench, but she insisted on urgent listing of the matter before the Court closed for winter vacations and hence, the matter was listed today before the Bench led by CJI Chandrachud.

Bilkis Bano was gangraped during the 2002 riots. Her three-year-old daughter was among 12 people killed by a mob in Limkheda taluka of Dahod district in Gujarat.

In May 2022, a bench led by Justice Rastogi had ruled that the government of Gujarat had the jurisdiction to consider the remission request as the offence took place in Gujarat.

Justice Rastogi had allowed a writ petition filed by one of the convicts, which overturned the Gujarat High Court’s view that the remission had to be considered by the State of Maharashtra, as the trial was held in Mumbai, upon transfer from Gujarat.

On May 13, the Apex Court had said that the remission of the convicts in the case should be considered as per the policy that was existing at the time of conviction in the State where the crime was actually committed.

One of the convicts had filed a petition seeking direction to the State of Gujarat for considering his application for premature release under the policy dated July 9, 1992, which was existing at the time of his conviction.

The petitioner was serving rigorous imprisonment for life after being found guilty of offences under Sections 302, 376(2)(e)(g) read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The Supreme Court finally decided that if the crime happened in Gujarat, all further proceedings including plea for remission has to be considered as per the policy of Gujarat government.

In accord with the Supreme Court order of May 13, the Gujarat government had granted remission to 11 convicts, who had been sentenced to life imprisonment.

They were released by the Gujarat government ahead of the Assembly polls in the State. The name of the 11 convicts who were set free are Jaswant Nai, Govind Nai, Shailesh Bhatt, Radhyesham Shah, Bipin Chandra Joshi, Kesarbhai Vohania, Pradeep Mordhiya, Bakabhai Vohania, Rajubhai Soni, Mitesh Bhatt and Ramesh Chandana.

This led to the present plea by Bano before the top court.

A separate review petition has been filed by Bano against the Apex Court’s May 13 verdict, contending that the remission policy of the State of Maharashtra should apply in present case, instead of 1992 remission policy of Gujarat, since the trial had happened in Maharashtra.