Express News Service
NEW DELHI: Questioning the maintainability of the writ filed by Subhashini Ali, Revati Laul, and Roop Rekha Verma which challenges the premature release of the 11 convicts in the Bilkis Bano case, RadheyShyam Bhagwandas Shah, one of the convicts has told the SC that none of the petitioners are related to the case and only happen to be either political activists or a third party stranger to the case.
“If such types of third party petitions are entertained by this Hon’ble Court, it would not only unsettle the settled position of law but would also open flood gates and would be an open invitation for any member of the public to jump in any criminal matter before any Court of law,” the affidavit states.
To further substantiate the contention on the locus, the convict has stated in the affidavit that neither the state nor the victim nor even the complainant has approached SC.
Relying on various rulings of the SC such as Janaka Dal v HS Chowdhary, Simranjit Singh Mann v UOI in which it has been held that a third party who is a total stranger to the prosecution has no locus in “criminal matters”, the convicts also state that if such cases are sought to be entertained, a settled position of law would certainly become an unsettled position of law.
Justifying the release, the convict has also told that SC in its order dated May 13, 2022, had said that the Gujarat government’s policy would be applicable for their remission and had thus directed the State of Gujarat to consider the application for premature release in terms of the policy dated July 9, 1992. Gujarat government’s 1992 policy did not prohibit the remission of rape, gang rape, or murder convicts.
ALSO READ | Bilkis Bano case: SC to hear plea against relief to 11 gangrape convicts
“Moreover, the present Writ Petition under Article 32 is nothing but the grossest abuse in as much as on one hand the petitioner pleads that she does not have the copy of the remission order and yet without ascertaining the reasons for grant of remission the said order has been assailed by the writ petition with a further prayer that such order of remission should be quashed,” the affidavit states.
The three women’s rights activists including Subhashini Ali had earlier filed a PIL in the Supreme Court to revoke the remission of the 11 convicts involved in the case. The PIL reportedly said the convicts should not be released as it is a case that involves gangrape and murder.
Earlier, over 6,000 people, including activists and historians, urged the Supreme Court to revoke the early release of the convicts in the case.
It may be recalled that a five-months pregnant Bano was gang-raped and her three-year-old daughter Saleha was among 14 people killed by a mob in Dahod on March 3, 2002, in communal riots that consumed Gujarat following the death of 59 passengers, mainly ‘Kar Sevaks’, when the Sabarmati Express was set on fire.
NEW DELHI: Questioning the maintainability of the writ filed by Subhashini Ali, Revati Laul, and Roop Rekha Verma which challenges the premature release of the 11 convicts in the Bilkis Bano case, RadheyShyam Bhagwandas Shah, one of the convicts has told the SC that none of the petitioners are related to the case and only happen to be either political activists or a third party stranger to the case.
“If such types of third party petitions are entertained by this Hon’ble Court, it would not only unsettle the settled position of law but would also open flood gates and would be an open invitation for any member of the public to jump in any criminal matter before any Court of law,” the affidavit states.
To further substantiate the contention on the locus, the convict has stated in the affidavit that neither the state nor the victim nor even the complainant has approached SC.
Relying on various rulings of the SC such as Janaka Dal v HS Chowdhary, Simranjit Singh Mann v UOI in which it has been held that a third party who is a total stranger to the prosecution has no locus in “criminal matters”, the convicts also state that if such cases are sought to be entertained, a settled position of law would certainly become an unsettled position of law.
Justifying the release, the convict has also told that SC in its order dated May 13, 2022, had said that the Gujarat government’s policy would be applicable for their remission and had thus directed the State of Gujarat to consider the application for premature release in terms of the policy dated July 9, 1992. Gujarat government’s 1992 policy did not prohibit the remission of rape, gang rape, or murder convicts.
ALSO READ | Bilkis Bano case: SC to hear plea against relief to 11 gangrape convicts
“Moreover, the present Writ Petition under Article 32 is nothing but the grossest abuse in as much as on one hand the petitioner pleads that she does not have the copy of the remission order and yet without ascertaining the reasons for grant of remission the said order has been assailed by the writ petition with a further prayer that such order of remission should be quashed,” the affidavit states.
The three women’s rights activists including Subhashini Ali had earlier filed a PIL in the Supreme Court to revoke the remission of the 11 convicts involved in the case. The PIL reportedly said the convicts should not be released as it is a case that involves gangrape and murder.
Earlier, over 6,000 people, including activists and historians, urged the Supreme Court to revoke the early release of the convicts in the case.
It may be recalled that a five-months pregnant Bano was gang-raped and her three-year-old daughter Saleha was among 14 people killed by a mob in Dahod on March 3, 2002, in communal riots that consumed Gujarat following the death of 59 passengers, mainly ‘Kar Sevaks’, when the Sabarmati Express was set on fire.
