On Friday, the Supreme Court of India delivered a significant verdict regarding the Bilkis Bano case by rejecting a plea from two of the 11 convicts challenging the court’s January 8 decision that canceled their remission. The plea, filed by Radheyshaym Bhagwandas Shah and Rajubhai Babulal Soni, was dismissed by a bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Sanjay Kumar, who deemed it “absolutely misconceived.”
The bench expressed its frustration with the plea, questioning its maintainability and the appropriateness of filing such a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution. “What is this plea? How is this plea maintainable? This is absolutely misconceived. How can an Article 32 petition be filed? We can’t sit in appeal over an order passed by another bench,” the justices remarked.
The rejection of the plea marks a critical point in the ongoing legal battle related to the Bilkis Bano case. Advocate Rishi Malhotra, representing Shah and Soni, sought permission to withdraw the plea following the court’s stern remarks. The bench granted the request, allowing the plea to be formally withdrawn.
Earlier this year, in March, Shah and Soni approached the Supreme Court arguing that the January 8 decision to cancel their sentence remission was contrary to a 2002 constitution bench order. They requested that the issue be referred to a larger bench for “final” adjudication, asserting that the cancellation of their remission was unjust.
In addition to the plea dismissal, Shah has also applied for interim bail, adding another layer of complexity to the case. The Supreme Court’s latest ruling emphasizes the finality of its earlier decisions and highlights the judicial system’s commitment to upholding legal precedents and maintaining the integrity of its orders.