The Supreme Court on Monday sought responses from the Union Government and the Gujarat government on a petition challenging the remission given to 11 life offenders in the case of Bilkis Bano's gang rape and murder of her family members, PTI reported.
The plea has been filled by Bilkis Bano.
The Supreme Court has directed the Gujarat government to be prepared on April 18 with appropriate documentation providing remission to convicted.
Court further instructed the Gujarat government to have the appropriate documentation providing remission to the parties available for the next hearing date.
Throughout the hearing, the bench stated that it would not be swayed by emotions and would only follow the law.
The move comes after the Supreme Court heard a number of petitions against the commuted sentences of 11 defendants in the Bilkis Bano gang-rape case, including the murder of seven of her family members during the Gujarat riots in 2002.
Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna's bench heard pleas from a number of political and civil rights groups as well as a writ petition submitted by Bano.
On March 22, Chief Justice DY Chandrachud ordered that the case be listed urgently and consented to the formation of a fresh bench to hear the batch of petitions.
A bench made up of justices Ajay Rastogi and Bela M. Trivedi took up the appeal submitted by Bano and the other pleas on January 4. However, Judge Trivedi declined to hear the matter without citing a justification.
On November 30, 2022, Bano filed a petition with the supreme court protesting the state government's "premature" release of 11 lifers, claiming it "shook the conscience of society."
The gang rape victim had filed a second petition seeking a review of the highest court's May 13, 2022, ruling on a plea by a convict in addition to the suit challenging the release of the convicts. In December of last year, the review request was subsequently rejected.
On August 15 of last year, the Gujarat government freed all 11 prisoners after granting them pardons. In her ongoing writ petition, the victim claims that the state government enacted a "mechanical order" that utterly disregarded the Supreme Court-established legal requirements.