Maharashtra Remission Policy: Impact on Bilkis Bano Gangrape Convicts
Introduction
In recent legal developments, the Supreme Court has quashed the Gujarat government’s decision to grant remission to eleven convicts involved in the horrific gangrape of Bilkis Bano. This raises questions about the Maharashtra government’s remission policy and its potential impact on the immediate release of these individuals.
Background
The apex court, in its judgment, highlighted that the trial of this heinous crime took place in Maharashtra, not Gujarat. Consequently, the court emphasized that Maharashtra should be the appropriate authority to decide on remission. This led to the nullification of Gujarat’s decision to grant premature release to the convicts.
Maharashtra’s Role
With the convicted individuals set to return to prison, it is essential to understand how the Maharashtra government and its remission policy will come into play. The court’s order makes it clear that Maharashtra’s stance on the plea for remission filed by the convicts is crucial.
Analysis of the 2008 Resolution
Paragraph 52.6 of the judgment sheds light on the significance of Maharashtra’s consideration of the convicts’ remission applications. It emphasizes that the opinion of the presiding judge and the terms of the 2008 government resolution are pivotal in this decision-making process.
Minimum Sentence Criteria
As per the 2008 resolution, the minimum sentence before any remission is 18 years. This implies that the convicted men would be eligible for remission only in 2026. However, a more stringent clause within the resolution identifies cases of brutal crimes against women involving exceptional violence. In such instances, the convicts become eligible for remission only after serving a sentence of 28 years.
Implications for the Convicts
Considering the severity of the crime, the 11 convicts face the possibility of remaining behind bars until 2036. Even if the 1992 policy were to apply, which the special judge referenced in the trial, release could only occur after a minimum of 22 years, extending up to 28 years for cases involving exceptional violence or perversity.
Lack of Clarity on Policies
There is some ambiguity regarding which policy applies, as the trial judge applied the 2008 policy. If the 1992 policy is considered, the convicts may only become eligible for release in 2030 or 2036, further complicating the timeline for their potential freedom.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Supreme Court’s intervention in quashing Gujarat’s decision has shifted the focus to Maharashtra’s remission policy. The intricate details of the 2008 resolution and its clauses, especially those related to crimes against women, play a significant role in determining the fate of the Bilkis Bano gangrape convicts.
