Bilkis Bano case: Convict challenges validity of plea against remission, questions petitioners’ locus standi

A convict in the Bilkis Bano gangrape case has questioned the maintainability of the petitions that challenged the remission granted to him and 10 others by the Gujarat government last month, arguing that the petitioners have no locus standi and are “complete strangers” in the matter.

In his counter-affidavit, Radhey Shyam, who was recently released by the Gujarat government on remission, said that the petitioners are not related to the case or are either political activists or “third party stranger”, according to PTI. He added that it would be an open invitation for any member of the public to “jump in any criminal matter before any court of law.

“That at the very outset the answering respondent seriously questions the locus as well as maintainability of the instant writ petition which has been filed by a political activist or in other words, a complete stranger to the instant case,” he said.

He pointed out that the PIL questioning his release petitioner number one, CPI(M) leader Subhashini Ali, former parliamentarian; petitioner no 2, Revati Laul, an independent journalist and petitioner no 3, Roop Rekha Verma, former Vice Chancellor of Lucknow University.

He underlined that the top court earlier had held that a total stranger in a criminal case cannot be permitted to question the correctness of a decision. “Thus, it was further held that unless an aggrieved party was under some disability recognised by law, it would be unsafe and hazardous to allow any third party to question the decision against him,” he said in his affidavit filed through advocate Rishi Malhotra.

According to the PTI, the affidavit said, “That with great respect and humility, the answering respondent submits that if such types of third party petitions are entertained by this 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 top court has consistently held in clear terms that a third party who is a total stranger to the prosecution has no ‘locus standi’ in criminal matters and has no right whatsoever in filing a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution.

“Accordingly, this court while considering the fact that the conviction in this present case by the trial court had occurred in the year 2008 and by that time the State of Gujarat’s premature policy dated July 9, 1992 was in operation, the State Government was directed to consider the application for premature release in terms of the policy dated July 9, 1992,” it said.

All the 11 convicts in the case were granted release by the Gujarat government on 15 August triggering massive outrage. It also sparked a debate on the issue of such relief in heinous cases. Bilkis Bano was 21 years old and five months pregnant when she was gang-raped while fleeing the riots that broke out in Gujarat. The culprits had also snatched a small kid from Bilkis arms and banged her head to rock to death.

On August 25, the top court had sought responses from the Centre and the Gujarat government to the petition challenging the remission granted to the 11 convicts in the case.

It had asked the petitioners to implead the 11 convicted persons, who have been granted remission, as parties in the matter.

Trinamool MP Mahua Moitra has also filed a separate plea in the top court challenging the grant of remission.

The investigation in the case was handed over to the CBI and the trial was transferred to a Maharashtra court by the Supreme Court.

A special CBI court in Mumbai had on January 21, 2008, sentenced the 11 to life imprisonment on charges of gang rape of Bilkis Bano and murder of seven members of her family.  Their conviction was later upheld by the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court.

(With PTI Inputs)

-INDIA NEWS STREAM