New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the 11 convicts in the Bilkis Bano gangrape-cum-murder case to publish notices in newspapers to ensure that all of them are informed about the hearing of petitions challenging their premature release. be informed.
The 11 convicts were sentenced to life imprisonment but were given premature release by the Gujarat government on 15 August 2022 under the state’s remission policy. Several public interest litigations (PILs), including Bano’s, were subsequently filed, seeking quashing of the release order. A batch of five such petitions are currently being heard by the court.
On Tuesday, a three-judge bench headed by Justice KM Joseph said it is issuing directions to publish notices in newspapers so that the matter comes up for hearing in July and none of the convicts are found guilty. , Named as respondent in petitions against his release , Arguing that he was not served or informed about the matter in the apex court.
The other two judges in the bench are Justices BV Nagaratna and Ahsanuddin Amanullah.
The SC direction came after the bench was told that one of the 11 convicts named in Bano’s petition against her release remained ineligible despite the court’s earlier order to serve her.
According to a report submitted by the apex court’s registry, the convict was not at his residence when the local police went to serve the notice.
In three more related petitions, it was found that some of the 11 convicts are yet to receive court notices regarding petitions against their release.
Non-service of court summons on the respondents has been one of the primary reasons why the bench has not been able to initiate a proper hearing in the matter.
So far, the court has not been able to settle the issues of housekeeping, such as service of notices, filing of replies and rejoinders in the matter. Out of six petitions, the service of notice has been completed in only one.
Even though the 11 convicts have been officially represented in one petition, their counsel has sought that the court not proceed with the hearing unless they are served in other petitions, as per apex court rules. may increase.
Directing that all the petitioners shall again take steps to enforce the new service on the ineligible convicts under the apex court’s rules, the court said that they shall simultaneously serve the notice of the court through a public notice in two Gujarati newspapers. publicize the same, which are in vogue in the area where the respondents reside.
“Each petitioner shall take out an individual public notice,” the bench clarified, as it asked the SC Registry to inform the petitioners’ lawyers about the details of the unanswered respondents within three days.
The notice states that the next date of hearing in the matter is July 11.
Read also: Convicts row in Bilkis Bano case: Why 11 were released under ‘old’ 1992 policy
‘Court can relax conditions’
During the arguments, Bano’s counsel Shobha Gupta submitted that notices were served to both the defendants (convicts), whose advocates earlier date (May 2) strongly objected to the bench’s attempt to start hearing his plea on the ground that they had not received the court summons and were, therefore, unable to respond to his plea.
Gupta said that even though the report submitted by the SC Registry showed that one of the two was not present at home to receive the summons, the police had pasted the notice outside his house. He argued that it should be treated as service of notice.
Gupta drew the court’s attention to the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) which allows service in this manner. He also cited SC rule which empowers a bench to relax any requirement in the rules.
This particular case, Gupta told the bench, was fit for the court to exercise its discretionary power to relax the rules mandating the service of court notice.
However, the bench said that it would prefer to ensure that all the respondents receive court summons or are adequately informed about the proceedings pending in the court, so that no excuse is made in future for delay in hearing.
On May 2, the last date of hearing, there was uproar in the court when the bench indicated that it was ready to take up the matter. Counsel for the defendants wanted the bench to first rule on their objections locus standi Of the five other petitioners. They wanted the court to consider only Bano’s petition.
Other petitioners in the case are Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader Subhashini Ali, Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra and others, whom the convicts have termed as “third party” interests in the case and their interests are disputed. locus standi to file a petition against his release.
Further, the lawyers of the two convicts, who claimed that they were not served notices, demanded that the procedure be followed before the court could proceed with the matter. This enraged the bench, as it told the counsel, “It is clear that you do not want this bench to hear the matter.”
Bano was 21 years old, and pregnant, when she was gang-raped in Gujarat’s Dahod district during the 2002 post-Godhra communal violence. Seven members of his family – including his three-year-old daughter – were also killed by the rioters.
The trial of the case was transferred to a special court in Mumbai, which convicted the accused in 2008 and sentenced them to life imprisonment.
In May 2017, the Bombay High Court upheld the trial court order, dismissing the appeal filed by the accused. The 11 convicts walked out of jail on August 15, 2022, after the Gujarat government accepted their pardon applications.
(Editing by Nida Fatima Siddiqui)