BILKIS YAKUB RASOOL versus UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

Citation: [2024] 1 S.C.R. 743 · Decided: 08-01-2024 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B.V. NAGARATHNA, UJJAL BHUYAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Cited by 5 judgment(s) · cites 55 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

* Author
[2024] 1 S.C.R. 743 : 2024 INSC 24
Bilkis Yakub Rasool 
v. 
Union of India & Others
(Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 491 of 2022)
08 January 2024
[B.V. Nagarathna* and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Writ petition filed u/Art. 32 by one of the victims challenging the 
order of State of Gujarat granting remission and early release of 
11 convicts held guilty in Bilkis Bano matter, if maintainable; writ 
petitions filed as Public Interest Litigation, assailing the impugned 
orders of remission dated 10.08.2022, if maintainable; Government 
of State of Gujarat, if competent to pass the impugned orders 
of remission in favour of convicts in Bilkis Bano case; Order of 
remission passed by the State of Gujarat in favour of convicts in 
Bilkis Bano case, if in accordance with law; and the 11 convicts 
having been granted liberty and released from imprisonment by 
virtue of the orders of remission which has been declared and 
quashed as wholly without jurisdiction and non est, should the 
convicts be sent back to prison.
Headnotes
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss. 432, 433, 433A and 
435 – Grant of remission – Bilkis Bano matter – Order of State 
of Gujarat granting remission and early release of 11 convicts 
held guilty of committing heinous crimes of gangrape, murder 
and rioting armed with deadly weapons during the large-scale 
riots in Gujarat in the aftermath of the Godhra train burning 
incident – Challenge to:
Held: Government of State of Gujarat was not competent to pass 
the orders of remission in favour of the convicts as it was not the 
appropriate Government – State of Maharashtra, had the jurisdiction 
to consider the application for remission as the convicts were 
sentenced by the Special Court, Mumbai – Government of the State 
of Gujarat usurped the powers of the State of Maharashtra which 
only could have considered the applications seeking remission – 
Also the Remission Policy of 1992 of the State of Gujarat was not 
applicable to the convicts – Thus, the Orders of remission dated 
744
[2024] 1 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
10.08.2022 not being in accordance with law is illegal, vitiated and 
thus, quashed – Also the judgment dated 13.05.2022 passed by 
this Court directing the State of Gujarat to consider the application 
for pre mature release is a nullity and is non est in law since the 
said order was fraudulently obtained at the hands of this Court, 
and the said order being contrary to the larger bench decisions 
of this Court, is per incuriam – Thus, the rule of law is to prevail 
– 11 convicts to report to the concerned jail authorities within the 
stipulated period. [Paras 56, 70]
Constitution of India – Art. 32 – Bilkis Bano matter – Writ 
petition filed u/Art. 32 by one of the victims challenging the 
order of State of Gujarat granting remission and early release 
of 11 convicts held guilty of committing heinous crimes of 
gangrape, murder and rioting armed with deadly weapons 
during the large-scale riots in Gujarat in the aftermath of the 
Godhra train burning incident – Maintainability:
Held: Writ Petition filed u/Art. 32 is clearly maintainable – It was 
not mandatory for the petitioner to have filed a writ petition u/
Art. 226 before the Gujarat High Court – Petitioner-Bilkis Bano 
filed writ petition u/Art. 32 to enforce her fundamental rights u/
Art. 21 and Art. 14 – Access to justice includes speedy remedy, 
the petition could not be dismissed on the ground of availability 
of an alternative remedy u/Art. 226 – Furthermore, in view of the 
submission regarding the State of Gujarat not being the competent 
State to consider the validity of the orders of remission in a petition 
filed u/Art. 226, particularly, when the question of competency was 
raised, could not have been dealt with by the Gujarat High Court 
on the principle of judicial propriety. [Paras 22.2-22.3, 56]
Constitution of India – Art. 32 – Public interest litigation – Bilkis 
Bano matter – Writ petition filed as public interest litigation 
challenging the order of State of Gujarat granting remission 
in favour of convicts guilty of committing heinous crimes of 
gangrape, murder and rioting armed with deadly weapons 
during the large-scale riots in Gujarat in the aftermath of the 
Godhra train burning incident – Maintainability:
Held: Writ petitions filed as public interest litigation assailing the 
impugned orders of remission dated 10.08.2022 are maintainable 
or not, is kept open to be raised in
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.