Introduction:

In the case of Bilkis Yakub Rasool v. Union of India & Ors., a monumental legal battle unfolded before the Supreme Court. This case delved into the premature release of 11 convicts involved in the ghastly 2002 communal riots in Gujarat, including multiple murders and gang rapes, notably that of Bilkis Bano.

Arguments from Both Sides:

Advocate Shobha Gupta, representing Bilkis Bano, passionately argued against the premature release, emphasizing the heinous nature of the crimes committed and questioning the convicts’ eligibility for leniency. The petitioners, including activists and politicians, contested the Gujarat government’s decision, citing the barbarity of the crimes, lack of remorse from the convicts, and the flawed exercise of remission-granting power.

On the other side, the Gujarat government defended its decision, invoking the reformative theory of punishment and stating that the remission followed established guidelines. The convicts’ counsels highlighted the absence of a fixed-term sentence and stressed reformation as the primary objective of criminal justice.

Court’s Judgment:

In a landmark judgment authored by Justice Nagarathna, the Supreme Court set aside the remission orders, ruling that the State of Gujarat lacked the authority to decide on remission due to the trial being held in Maharashtra. The Court criticized the Gujarat government’s actions, citing abuse of power and violation of the rule of law. The judges upheld the paramountcy of the rule of law over personal liberties, ordering the convicts to surrender within two weeks.