Why in news?

The Supreme Court rejected the Gujarat government's plea to review its January 8 verdict, which had canceled the remission granted to 11 men convicted of raping Bilkis Bano and killing seven of her family members during the 2002 Gujarat riots.

The Gujarat government contested certain "adverse" observations made by the court in the January verdict, arguing that such remarks should not have been made against the state. However, the court found no merit in the review plea and dismissed it.

What’s in today’s article?

• Remission
• Bilkis Bano case
• Key highlights of the January 8 judgement by SC
• Supreme Court dismisses Gujarat review plea

What is Remission?

• About
  • Remission is the complete ending of a sentence at a reduced point.
  • Remission is distinct from both furlough and parole in that it is a reduction in sentence as opposed to a break from prison life.
• Constitutional Provisions
  • Both the President and the Governor have been vested with sovereign power of pardon by the Constitution.
  • Under Article 72, the President can grant pardons, reprieves, respites or remissions of punishment or suspend, remit or commute the sentence of any person.
  • Under Article 161, a Governor can grant pardons, reprieves, respites or remissions of punishment, or suspend, remit or commute the sentence.
• Statutory power of remission
  • The Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) also provided for remission of prison sentences. This is because prisons is a State Subject.
    • Under Section 432 of CrPC, the ‘appropriate government’ may suspend or remit a sentence, in whole or in part, with or without conditions.
    • Under Section 433 of CrPC, any sentence may be commuted to a lesser one by the appropriate government.
    • This power is available to State governments so that they may order the release of prisoners before they complete their prison terms.
  • The CrPC is now replaced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
    • CHAPTER XXXIV of the BNSS 2023 deals with the powers of remission or commutation in certain cases under the following sections:
    • Section 473 - Power to suspend or remit sentences.
      • The Central Government has the power to do so in cases where the sentence is for an offense against a law that comes under the executive power of the Union.
      • In other cases, the Government of the State where the offender is sentenced has the power to do so.
    • Section 474 - Power to commute sentences. The appropriate Government can commute any punishment to any other punishment without the consent of the offender.
    • Section 475 - Restriction on powers of remission or commutation in certain cases.
    • Section 477 -  State Government acting after concurrence with the Central Government in certain cases.
  • Guidelines to be followed while granting Remission
    • In ‘Laxman Naskar v. Union of India’ (2000) case, the Supreme Court laid down five grounds on which remission is considered:
      • Whether the offence is an individual act of crime that does not affect the society;
      • Whether there is a chance of the crime being repeated in future;
      • Whether the convict has lost the potentiality to commit crime;
      • Whether any purpose is being served in keeping the convict in prison; and
      • Socio-economic conditions of the convict’s family.
    • Also, convicts serving life sentences are entitled to seek remission after serving a minimum of 14 years in prison.

What is Bilkis Bano Case?

• About
  • In the aftermath of the Godhra riots in Gujarat in 2002, Bikinis Bano and her family were attacked by a group of people.
  • Bilkis was brutally gangraped and seven of her family members were murdered.
  • Her case was taken up by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and Supreme Court, which ordered an investigation by the CBI.
  • Due to persistent death threats, the trial was moved out of Gujarat to Mumbai where charges were filed against these people.
  • In January 2008, a special CBI court in Mumbai had sentenced the 11 accused to life imprisonment.
• Release of these convicts
  • In 2022, one of the convicts named Radheshyam Shah, after completing 15 years and four months of his life term, moved to the SC for early release.
  • In May 2022, the SC passed this case to the Gujarat government.
    • It asked the Gujarat government to consider Shah’s application for premature release, as per the state’s 1992 remission policy.
  • On August 15, 2022, the Gujarat government released all 11 convicts in the gangrape case under its remission policy.
  • However, this decision sparked a major public backlash, and prompted petitions from opposition MPs.
• Review petition by Bilkis Bano
  • Bilkis Bano in 2022 filed an appeal in the Supreme Court to review the decision of the Gujarat government ordering release of the 11 gangrape convicts.
• January 8 judgement of Supreme Court
  • In response to the review petition filed by Bilkis Bano, the apex court, on January 8, overturned the Gujarat government's decision to release the 11 convicts.

Key highlights of the January 8 judgement by SC

• The Gujarat government was not the appropriate government to pass the remission order as the trial was held in Maharashtra.
  • The exemption order lacks competence. Criminals can be released only by the state where they are tried.
• The bench also held that the SC order of May 13, 2022 was obtained by fraud and suppression of facts.
• Gujarat government should have filed a plea seeking review of the 2022 order stating they are not the competent government.
• The Supreme Court came down heavily against its own judgment in May 2022.
  • In May 2022, the SC ruled that there cannot be a concurrent jurisdiction of two State governments on the issue of remission.
  • Premature release of a convict has to be considered in terms of the policy applicable in the State where the crime was committed
  • Hence, Gujrat government’s remission policy was applied for the release of these convicts.
• The rule of law must be preserved unmindful of the ripples of the consequences.

News Summary- Supreme Court dismisses Gujarat review plea

• About the news
  • The Supreme Court dismissed the Gujarat government's review plea challenging its January 8 judgment that canceled the remission granted to 11 convicts in the Bilkis Bano case.
  • The January judgment accused Gujarat of being complicit with one of the convicts, Radheshyam Shah, and held that the May 2022, order granting remission was obtained through fraud and suppression of facts.
  • The Supreme Court also criticized Gujarat for not filing a review against the 2022 order sooner, which could have avoided further litigation.
• Stand of Gujarat govt
  • In its review plea, Gujarat argued that it was only complying with the 2022 Supreme Court directive to decide the remission application under its 1992 Remission Policy, though it consistently maintained that Maharashtra was the appropriate authority to decide.
  • The state rejected the court's accusation of "usurpation of power" and emphasized that it had no need to file a review petition as Bilkis Bano herself had done so, but her review was dismissed in December 2022.
  • The state further contended that it was not complicit in any fraud.