CJI gets 'irritated' with Bilkis Bano's lawyer repeatedly mentioning plea
The Supreme Court on Wednesday expressed displeasure to Bilkis Bano's counsel for requesting an urgent listing of her petition contesting the release of 11 men convicted of her gang rape and the murder of her family members. Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud said the matter had already been listed yesterday, and bringing it up again is "irritating."
Why does this story matter?
Bano was five months pregnant when the Gujarat riots erupted in 2002 after a Sabarmati Express coach was set on fire. On March 3, 2002, 21-year-old Bano and her family were attacked in Ahmedabad's Randhikpur village by an angry mob that raped her and killed her family members. More than 1,000 people reportedly lost their lives in the Gujarat riots.
Chief Justice's response to Bano's counsel
"The writ (petition) will be listed. Please, do not keep mentioning the same thing again and again," the CJI said. "It is very irritating," he added. Bano's counsel, Advocate Shobha Gupta, repeatedly sought a hearing by another bench. Her petition could not be heard on Tuesday as one of the judges on the bench, Justice Bela M Trivedi, recused herself without giving a reason.
CJI to set up new bench after plea adjourned
After Justice Trivedi recused herself from hearing the plea filed by Bano, the constitution of the new bench was necessitated. The CJI will now have to set up a fresh bench to hear Bano's case. The investigation in the case was handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the trial was transferred to a Maharashtra court by the Supreme Court.
Bano's plea against remission of convicts
Bano, who was gang-raped and had seven members of her family, including her three-year-old daughter, killed during the Gujarat riots, petitioned the SC on November 30, challenging the Gujarat government's decision to release the 11 convicts in August. Additionally, Bano had also filed a review petition to challenge the SC's May ruling that allowed the Gujarat government to decide on the convicts' remission.
Rape survivor was shocked by the government's decision
Bano, in her petition, revealed that she had approached the Gujarat government asking for the papers or entire documents related to the premature release of the convicts. However, nothing came from the state government despite her reminders. Bano also claimed that, despite being the victim of the crime, she was not informed about such a process of premature release or remission being initiated.
