“You cannot say that the remission order cannot be questioned by anybody because of the earlier order (of the Supreme Court). That order was the starting point of the process (of remission). It was the beginning and not the end. They have challenged the end,” told a bench comprising of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan to the counsel appearing for a convict.
Notably, in an earlier judgment, the Supreme Court had directed the Gujarat government to consider and decide the application for pre-mature release within two months in terms of remission of 1992 policy of the state.
The bench said that its earlier order was limited to the extent that the Gujarat government is the appropriate government to decide convicts’ application for remission and remission order passed thereafter would fall under the category of ‘administrative order.’
Advocate Rishi Malhotra, appearing for a convict, contended that 1992 Gujarat remission policy did not require an unanimous decision but only a collation of the views from various stakeholders.
He justified that validity of remission order cannot be set aside solely on the ground that an adverse opinion was rendered by the Session Judge in Maharashtra.
Earlier, the top court had questioned the Gujarat government for extending the benefit of remission policy “selectively” to convicts and said that the opportunity to reform and reintegrate with society should be given to every prisoner.
In defence, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju had said that the 11 convicts deserve the chance of reformation and their applications seeking remission were considered pursuant to an earlier judgement of the Supreme Court.
The final hearing is underway in the batch of petitions filed against the release of convicts, including the one filed by Bilkis Bano.
The 11 men convicted in the case were released on August 15 last year, after the Gujarat government allowed their release under its remission policy.
The convicts had completed 15 years in jail.
–Ajit Weekly News
pds/pgh
News Credits – I A N S