New Delhi: Asked by Gujarat riot survivor lawyer Bilkis Bano about a petition against the release of convicts who raped them and killed 14 family members, Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud urged them on Wednesday to “don’t.” mentioning the same thing over and over again” and that it was “very irritating”.
Eleven of those accused of gang-raping Bano and killing their relatives, including her young daughter, were released from prison on August 15 this year to mark celebrations.
Petitions against the enactment were filed by Trinamool Congressman Mahua Moitra, CPI(M) leader Subhashini Ali, independent journalist Revati Laul, activist Roop Rekh Varma, former IPS official Meeran Chadha Borwankar and several others. In late November, Bilkis Bano himself approached the Supreme Court to challenge the early release of the convicts and a review of the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling that allowed the Gujarat government to make a decision on the remission of the convicts.
Attorney Shobha Gupta, acting for Bano, told a bench composed of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha that the petition against the Gujarat government’s decision to release the detainees was listed a day ago but was not taken up by the court had been.
“Writing is listed. Don’t keep saying the same thing over and over again. Very irritating,” CJI Chandrachud said loudly bar and bench.
CJI Chandrachud previously said there was no reason to revisit the matter on Wednesday.
However, One of the judges on the bench – Judge Bela Trivedi – had withdrawn from the matter during Tuesday’s hearing. Trivedi was Deputy Minister of Justice in the Gujarat government from 2004 to 2006. LiveLaw has called.
Judge Rastogi then asked that the case be referred to a panel of judges, which consists of neither Judge Trivedi nor himself. Judge Rastogi penned the ruling that allowed the Gujarat government to consider remission requests from the convicts, which Bano has objected to.
In May, a jury led by Judge Rastogi ruled that the Gujarat government had jurisdiction to consider the convicts’ requests for release because the crime had taken place in Gujarat. The Supreme Court overturned the Gujarat High Court’s earlier decision that the state of Maharashtra must issue immunity cases because the trial was moved from Gujarat.
Thus, the chamber to which the case had originally been referred was left without a judge.
When Gupta pointed out that the matter had not been taken up a day later, the CJI said:
“So what? Don’t keep bringing this matter up. It will be listed. Review [petition] was also circulated yesterday.”
Earlier, Attorney Gupta asked the CJI if Judge Rastogi would retire.
The CJI had said: “Only a court can decide that. The criticism must be heard first. Bring it before Judge Rastogi.”