Tag: bilkis bano case convicts released

Bilkis Bano Case: Gujarat Government Moves SC, Wants ‘Adverse’ Comments Dropped

In its appeal, the Gujarat government stated that the comments in the judgement related to the case were “not only highly unwarranted and against the record of the case, but has caused serious prejudice to the State”.

New Delhi: About a month after the Supreme Court reprimanded the Gujarat government with respect to the premature release of the 11 convicts in the Bilkis Bano case, the government has moved the court asking for a review of its January 8 order and sought removal of the “adverse comments,” as per a report published in LiveLaw.

In its appeal, the Gujarat government stated that the comments in the judgement related to the case were “not only highly unwarranted and against the record of the case, but has caused serious prejudice to the State”. The government also underlined that the Supreme Court’s order holding the state guilty of “usurpation of power” and “abuse of discretion” for complying with an order of another top court bench, was an “error apparent on the face of the record,” as per a PTI report.

On January 8, the Supreme Court bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan had observed that while the Gujarat government had acted on the basis of the direction issued by the Supreme Court, it was contrary to the letter and spirit of law. It also said that Gujarat had “acted in tandem and was complicit with” the convicts.

The bench, according to LiveLaw had ruled that the order had been obtained by Radheshyam Shah, one of the convicts, by playing fraud on the court and misrepresenting or suppressing material facts.

The court was referring to an earlier ruling delivered by Justice Ajay Rastogi (now retired) on May 2022.

Also read: Bilkis Bano Convicts: Who Is Accountable for the ‘Fraud’ by Gujarat Government?

In response to Shah’s writ petition, the Supreme Court had in May 2022 held State of Gujarat to be the appropriate government for considering the remission plea. Following this May 2022 order, a series of developments took place which resulted in the release of all 11 life convicts in the Bilkis Bano case.

On January 8, the court noted that the convicts’ release had been ordered based on Gujarat’s 1992 remission policy, which had been superseded by a 2014 law, and ordered the 11 convicts to surrender within two weeks.

In 2002, Bilkis Bano was 21 years old and pregnant when she was gang-raped during the Gujarat riots; 7 members of her family, including her three-year-old daughter was killed.

Ecosystems of Support Aren’t Exclusive to ‘Urban Naxals’, the Right Is Better Endowed

And the power of that ecosystem may be gauged from the fact that the freedom of convicted rapists and murderers can be obtained even in the teeth of opposition from the all-powerful CBI and a trial court judge.

Remember how the nation is told at regular intervals that the Naxals and Maoists have an overground support structure which bats for their politics?

If there is anyone who endorses a praxis of violence as opposed to one of peaceful mass mobilisation and democratic protest, I express my principled disagreement with them – and have done so in writing.

What, however, remains the best-known secret of contemporary India is that their support structure, if it exists, cannot hold a candle to the ecosystem that makes protective excuses for convicted rapists and murderers of a particular persuasion who are released from jail before their time.

And the power of that ecosystem may be gauged from the fact that the freedom of such criminals can be obtained even in the teeth of opposition from the all-powerful Central Bureau of Investigation and a trial court judge.

The gods of the day, located in North Block, themselves shower benefactions upon them.

What is a Maoist supporter next to an overground network of such magnificent clout?

It also now turns out that the released rapists and murderers did not only enjoy a thousand days of parole during their incarceration, but had new FIRs filed against them for fresh assaults and promising more menace.

Does that make a mockery of the claim that they were released on grounds of “good behaviour”? You and I may think so, but the ecosystem ensures that official claims of their “good behaviour” are spread far and wide through an obliging support structure embedded in the “nationalist” media.

And here is the more significant and distressing aspect of the matter: the supporting ecosystem of these honourable convicts extends deep into the new social order. Perhaps the most nauseating sight of connivance has been that of other honourable members of the Hindutva order doing obeisance at the feet of the released conquerors and offering them sweets as ritual oblations.

The message from this is clear: these convicted rapists and murderers are being propitiated because they are the committed vanguard of the new nationalism – out to make that political point, if need be, on the body of a 19-year-old, a five-month pregnant Muslim woman, and the corpses of her entire household.

Also read: Two Faces of the Contemporary Indian State: The Benign and the Vengeful

There, indeed, is the “Gujarat model”, in case you were not aware enough.

And, such is the compelling force of that narrative now that even the noisily self-righteous Aam Aadmi Party, as it sets its eyes on electoral fortunes in Gujarat, is able only to echo what the Gujarat government has said officially about these convicts: namely, that their release was done according to rule.

Foolishly, some moralists have supposed that the achievement of Vishwagurudom has to do with scaling heights of spirituality.

While their naiveté is touching, all good “nationalists” know it has to do with lording it over the naysayers by means fair or foul.

As to morality, have you seen the long-lasting Guru Ram Rahim, also out on parole precisely when elections are slated to happen in neighbouring Himachal Pradesh, with scions of the ruling party making a beeline for his throne?

And, through all this, have you heard the least squeak from any Women’s Commission with regard to both occurrences – the celebrated rapists in Gujarat or the convicted rapist (sentenced to serve 20 years in the slammer) showering blessings yet again in Haryana?

Or any squeak from the thousands of pious warriors from the housing society middle classes who protested admirably, it must be noted, with relentless energy alongside hordes of those who today constitute the ruling party when what has come to be christened the unconscionably gruesome “Nirbhaya” rape happened?

No sir.

You see, “Nirbhaya” was not part of any Hindu-Muslim contention, and her real name certainly was not Bilkis.

That indeed is how far the ecosystem of the right-wing exercises its influence, and how it lays down red-lines for the expression of Insaniyat.

Pray, what is a discarded “urban naxal” to this imperial ecosystem which has the power to turn rapists and murderers into national heros?

As for the CBI and the trial courts, they better not lose their patriotic moorings; they must at all times remind themselves of who they are authorised to go after or not.

Did not the unforgettable Dogberry in Much Ado About Nothing famously say “the law is an ass”?

Badri Raina taught at Delhi University.

SC Agrees to Hear Fresh Plea Challenging Release of Convicts in Bilkis Bano Case

The SC bench is also considering petitions filed by CPI(M)’s Subhashini Ali, journalist Revati Laul, activist Roop Rekha Varma, TMC MP Mahua Moitra, ex-IPS officer Meeran Chadha Borwankar, ex-IFS officer Madhu Badhuri, and activist Jagdeep Chhokar.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court agreed on Friday, October 21, to hear a fresh plea moved by a women’s organisation, challenging the remission of sentence and the release of convicts who in 2002 gang-raped Bilkis Bano and murdered 14 people, some of whom were her family members, during the Gujarat riots.

A bench of justices Ajay Rastogi and C.T. Ravikumar tagged the matter with the main petition and said it would be heard along with it.

The top court will hear the plea filed by the National Federation of Indian Women, challenging the remission of sentence and the release of convicts in the case. The seven-decade-old organisation is headed by Aruna Roy and is the women’s wing of the Communist Party of India.

In August, senior Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader Subhashini Ali, independent journalist and filmmaker Revati Laul, and former philosophy professor and activist Roop Rekha Varma filed a PIL against the remission of sentence.

The top court bench is also considering the petitions filed by Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra, ex-IPS officer Meeran Chadha Borwankar, ex-IFS officer Madhu Badhuri, and activist Jagdeep Chhokar.

The 11 men convicted in the case walked out of the Godhra sub-jail on August 15 after the Gujarat government allowed their release under its remission policy – with the permission of the Union government.

The court had, on October 18, said the Gujarat government’s reply to petitions challenging the remission is “very bulky,” and in it, a series of judgments have been quoted but factual statements are missing.

It granted time to the petitioners to file their response to the Gujarat government’s affidavit and said it will hear the matter on November 29.

Though the Gujarat government had told the Supreme Court that the 11 men were released because of their “good behaviour”, reports have emerged that one of them was accused of harassing a woman while he was out on parole.

The reports also said that the men had spent nearly or over 1,000 days outside prison prior to their release.

Bilkis Bano Case Convict Was Booked for ‘Outraging Modesty of Woman’ While on Out on Parole

Before the controversial release of the convicts in the case on August 15, they were out of jail for nearly or over 1,000 days each – on parole, furlough and temporary bail.

New Delhi: Though the Gujarat government told the Supreme Court that the 11 men who were convicted of gang-raping Bilkis Bano and murdering 14 people were released because of their “good behaviour”, reports have emerged that one of them was accused of harassing a woman while he was out on parole.

The reports also said that the men – who were released on August 15 with the Union government’s nod – had spent nearly or over 1,000 days outside prison prior to their release.

According to LiveLaw, Mitesh Chimanlal Bhatt, one of the 11 convicts in the case, was booked for outraging the modesty of a woman while out on parole. He’s charged under Indian Penal Code Sections 354 (outraging a woman’s modesty), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), 506 (2) (punishment for criminal intimidation) in June 2020.

The case is pending before the court, the report added.

Nine other convicts repeatedly surrendered late when they were granted parole. They were warned for these violations and, in some cases, punishments were handed out. All this information was provided in the affidavit that the Gujarat government filed in the Supreme Court in the petitions challenging the release of the convicts.

On Tuesday, the top court tersely noted that the government’s affidavit was “very bulky” and contained a series of judgments but factual statements were missing. It will hear the petitions on November 29.

‘Good behaviour’

Separately, the Indian Express reported that before the release of the convicts in the gang-rape case for “good behaviour” on August 15, 10 of them were out of jail for more than 1,000 days each – on parole, furlough, temporary bail – and the 11th for 998 days.

The newspaper reported, citing the Gujarat government’s affidavit before the apex court, that Ramesh Chandana (58) was out of jail for the maximum number of days. He was out for 1,576 days (over four years) – including on parole for 1,198 days and furlough for 378 days.

The daily reported that his 14-day furlough was extended for 136 days between January and June 2015, after he was late to turn himself in by 122 days. In fact, of the 11 times he availed furlough leave, he had surrendered late thrice, another IE report said.

A case was also registered against him in 2015 under Prison Act 51 (a), and 51(b) for late surrender.

Also read: What Bilkis Bano Survived That Day in Gujarat, 2002

Parole and furlough are both forms of conditional release. Parole can be awarded in the case of short-term detention, whereas furlough is allowed in the case of long-term detention.

According to an explainer in the Indian Express, the period of furlough granted to a prisoner is treated as remission of his sentence. It is seen as a matter of right for a prisoner, to be granted periodically irrespective of any reason. In contrast, a parole is not seen as a matter of right, and is given to a prisoner for a specific reason, such as a death in the family or a wedding of a blood relative.

The 11 convicts got an average of 1,176 days of leave each – furlough, parole and temporary bail — the details in the Gujarat government affidavit show, the report said.

Only one of them, Bakabhai Vahoniya (57), was out of jail for a total of 998 days.

Another convict, Rajubhai Soni (58), surrendered late, leading to a 90-day parole turning into a 287-day leave between September 2013 and July 2014. In total, he was out of jail for 1,348 days.

The oldest among the 11, Jaswant Nai (65), was out of jail for a total of 1,169 days with a 75-day late surrender in 2015 at Nashik jail, the report said.

Notably, Dahod superintendent of police, Hitesh Joysar, had asked for the opinion of Bano and her family with respect to the premature release of only one convict, Radheshyam Shah. They had “categorically said not to release him prematurely” and an entry to that effect was made in the station diary, the newspaper reported.

In the case of 10 others, no such opinion was sought from the family, it said.

The top court will hear on November 29 the pleas challenging the remission of sentence and release of 11 convicts in the case.

SC to Hear on November 29 Pleas Challenging the Release of Convicts in Bilkis Bano Case

The top court also said that the Gujarat government’s reply to the pleas is ‘very bulky’ wherein a series of judgments have been quoted but factual statements are missing.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday, October 18, said it will hear on November 29 the pleas challenging the remission of sentence and release of 11 convicts in the 2002 Bilkis Bano gang-rape case and murder of her 14 family members during the Gujarat riots.

A bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and C.T. Ravikumar directed that the reply filed by the Gujarat government be made available to all parties.

The apex court also noted that the Gujarat government’s reply to the pleas challenging the remission granted to the convicts in the case is “very bulky” wherein a series of judgments have been quoted but factual statements are missing.

“I have not come across a counter affidavit where a series of judgments are quoted. Factual statement should have been made. A very bulky counter. Where is the factual statement, where is the application of mind?” a bench headed by Justice Ajay Rastogi observed.

The petitioners have been given time to file their reply to the affidavit filed by the Gujarat government.

In August, senior Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader Subhashini Ali, independent journalist and filmmaker Revati Laul, and former philosophy professor and activist Roop Rekha Varma filed the PIL against the remission of the sentence of the convicts and their release.

According to LiveLaw, the top court bench is also considering the petitions filed by Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra, ex-IPS officer Meeran Chadha Borwankar, ex-IFS officer Madhu Badhuri, and activist Jagdeep Chhokar.

Also read: Understanding the Remission Policy That Led to the Release of Bilkis Bano’s Rapists

The Gujarat government on October 17 had told the apex court that the petitioners challenging the remission are nothing but an “interloper” and a “busybody”.

It had also said that since the investigation in the case was carried out by the Central Bureau of Investigation, it had obtained “suitable orders” for the grant of remission of the convicts from the Union government.

Bilkis Bano was 21 years old at the time of the crime. She was also five months pregnant when she was gang-raped. Fourteen of her family members, including her three-year-old daughter, were killed in the brutal attack in Gujarat’s Dahod district.

The 11 men convicted in the case walked out free from the Godhra sub-jail on August 15 after the Gujarat government allowed their release under its remission policy. The order has come under severe criticism from several quarters, with critics saying that the perpetrators of such heinous crimes should not have been granted remission.

(With inputs from PTI)

Convicts in Bilkis Bano Case Released With Union Govt’s Approval: Gujarat Govt

The Gujarat government appealed to the Supreme Court to dismiss petitions challenging its August 15 decision to release convicts in the case.

New Delhi: The Gujarat government told the Supreme Court on Monday, October 17, that 11 men convicted for the gang rape of Bilkis Bano during the 2002 Gujarat riots were released after the Union home ministry had approved the remission and premature release of convicts through a letter dated July 11, 2022, according to LiveLaw.

In the affidavit filed before the apex court, the state government underlined that their “behaviour was found to be good” and that they were released on the grounds that they had completed 14 years in jail.

The court was hearing a batch of petitions, filed by CPI (M) Politburo member Subhashini Ali, and Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra, challenging the decision of the Gujarat government to release the convicts.

The 11 convicts walked out of the Godhra sub-jail on August 15, serving 18 years of their life term. Their premature release set off a huge controversy, with political parties and civil society organisations demanding the decision be rolled back.

The state government underscored that the decision was taken according to its remission policy dated July 9, 1992, “as directed by” the apex court and not “under the circular governing the grant of remission to prisoners as part of the celebration of ‘Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav'”.

“It is well established that a PIL is not maintainable in a criminal matter. The petitioner is in no way connected to the proceedings which either convicted the accused in question nor with the proceedings which culminated in grant of remission to the convicts,” an affidavit filed by the Gujarat home department stated, according to the LiveLaw report.

Calling for the petitions to be dismissed, the state government reply alleged that petitions were moved “at the instance of a mere busybody which has political machinations”.

“A third party stranger either under the provisions of the Code or under any other statute is precluded to question the correctness of grant or refusal of ‘sanction for prosecution’ or the conviction and sentence imposed by the court after a regular trial. Similarly, a third party stranger is precluded from questioning a remission order passed by the state government which is strictly in accordance with law,” the state government affidavit said.

During the 2002 Gujarat riots, Bano was raped and her three-year-old daughter was among 14 killed by a mob in Limkheda taluka of Dahod district. The convicts were sentenced to life term in prison by a special court in Mumbai for gangrape and the murder of Bano’s family members. The sentence was later upheld by the Bombay high court.

According to Indian Express, the Gujarat government cited a “unanimous” recommendation of the Jail Advisory Committee (JAC) to grant remission to the convicts on grounds of “good behaviour”.

Bilkis Bano Case: Convict Questions Maintainability of Pleas Challenging Remission

Radhey Shyam, who was recently released by the Gujarat government on remission, said that the petitioners are not related to the case or are either political activists or “third party stranger”.

New Delhi: A convict in the Bilkis Bano gangrape case has questioned the maintainability of the petitions that challenged the remission granted to him and ten others, saying the petitioners have no locus standi and are “complete strangers” in the matter.

In his counter-affidavit, Radhey Shyam, who was recently released by the Gujarat government on remission, said that the petitioners are not related to the case or are either political activists or “third party stranger”.

Questioning the maintainability of the petition, he said if such petitions are entertained by the court, it would be an open invitation for any member of the public to “jump in any criminal matter before any court of law”.

“That at the very outset the answering respondent seriously questions the locus as well as maintainability of the instant writ petition which has been filed by a political activist or in other words, a complete stranger to the instant case,” he said.

He pointed out that the in the PIL questioning his release, petitioner number one, CPI(M) leader Subhashini Ali, claims to be a former parliamentarian and vice president of the All India Democratic Women’s Association,

He noted that petitioner no 2, Revati Laul, claims to be an independent journalist, whereas petitioner no 3, Roop Rekha Verma, claims to be a former vice-chancellor, at Lucknow University.

The affidavit said, “That with great respect and humility, the answering respondent submits that if such types of third party petitions are entertained by this court, it would not only unsettle the settled position of law but would also open flood gates and would be an open invitation for any member of the public to jump in any criminal matter before any court of law.”

Shyam said that the top court has categorically held in earlier cases that a total stranger in a criminal case cannot be permitted to question the correctness of a decision and if that was to be permitted, any and every person could challenge a criminal prosecution/ proceedings recorded day in and day out by courts even if the person convicted does not desire to do so and is inclined to acquiesce in the decision.

“Thus, it was further held that unless an aggrieved party was under some disability recognised by law, it would be unsafe and hazardous to allow any third party to question the decision against him,” he said in his affidavit filed through advocate Rishi Malhotra.

He said that since the 1992 verdict in Janata Dal versus HS Chowdhary, a view which was reiterated and followed in Subramanian Swamy vs Raju in 2013, the top court has consistently held in clear terms that a third party who is a total stranger to the prosecution has no locus standi in criminal matters and has no right whatsoever in filing a petition under Article 32 of the constitution.

“Accordingly, this court while considering the fact that the conviction in this present case by the trial court had occurred in the year 2008 and by that time the State of Gujarat’s premature policy dated July 9, 1992 was in operation, the State Government was directed to consider the application for premature release in terms of the policy dated July 9, 1992,” it said.

The affidavit said that in this present writ petition, the petitioners seek to challenge the remission order of the State of Gujarat whereby 11 accused persons including the answering respondent were released.

“In Para 1B the writ petitioner has pleaded that she has no personal interest in the matter and does not stand to gain anything from the filing of the same.

“It is further submitted that the writ petition has been filed purely in the public interest and according to the petitioner the release of such persons has shocked the consciousness of the society which has prompted the petitioner to file this Public Interest Litigation”, it said.

The affidavit said that interestingly enough, neither the State nor the victim nor even the complainant has approached this Court and thus, it is respectfully submitted that if such cases are sought to be entertained by this court, “a settled position of law would certainly become an unsettled position of law”.

Also Read | ‘Wrong; Very Bad Precedent Set’: Judge Who Convicted 11 Men in Bilkis Bano Case on Their Release

Background

The remission and consequent release of 11 convicts on August 15 this year from Godhra sub-jail under the Gujarat government’s remission policy has sparked a debate on the issue of such relief in heinous cases. The convicts had completed more than 15 years in jail.

On August 25, the top court sought responses from the Union and Gujarat governments to the petition challenging the remission granted to the 11 convicts in the case.

It had asked the petitioners to implead the 11 convicted persons, who have been granted remission, as parties in the matter.

TMC MP Mahua Moitra has also filed a separate plea in the top court challenging the grant of remission.

Bilkis Bano was 21 years old and five months pregnant when she was gang-raped while fleeing the riots that broke out after the Godhra train burning incident. Her three-year-old daughter was among seven family members who were killed.

The investigation in the case was handed over to the CBI and the trial was transferred to a Maharashtra court by the Supreme Court.

A special CBI court in Mumbai had on January 21, 2008, sentenced the 11 to life imprisonment on charges of gang rape of Bilkis Bano and murder of seven members of her family. Their conviction was later upheld by the Bombay high court and the Supreme Court.

Watch | Delhi: Activists Stage Protests Against Early Release of Bilkis Bano Rape Convicts

The protesters pointed out that the arrest of activists and now the early release of those who committed widespread violence against Muslims highlights the majoritarian surge against the minorities in India.

Left parties, student groups and activists on Friday, August 19 held a protest at Jantar Mantar in Delhi, demanding cancellation of the remission order of those convicted for the gang-rape of Gujarat riots survivor Bilkis Bano.

The protesters pointed out that the arrest of activists such as Teesta Setalvad and now the early release of those who committed widespread violence against Muslims highlights the majoritarian surge against the minorities in India.

Over 6,000 Signatories Urge SC to Revoke Early Release of Convicts in Bilkis Bano Case

“The remission of sentences for the 11 men convicted of gang-rape and mass murder will have a chilling effect on every rape victim who is told to ‘trust the system’, ‘seek justice’, ‘have faith’,” the statement said.

New Delhi: Around 6,000 signatories, including activists, eminent writers, historians, filmmakers, journalists and former bureaucrats, on Thursday, August 18 urged the Supreme Court to revoke the early release of 11 rapists in the Bilkis Bano case.

In 2008, these men had been sentenced to life for gang-raping 21-year-old Bilkis Bano, who was also five months pregnant, and murdering 14 people, including Bano’s three-year-old daughter, during the 2002 Gujarat communal riots.

The convicts walked out of the Godhra sub-jail after the Gujarat government approved their application for remission.

“On the morning of August 15, 2022, in his Independence Day address to the nation, the Prime Minister of India spoke of women’s rights, dignity and ‘Nari Shakti’. That very afternoon, Bilkis Bano, a woman who embodied that ‘Nari Shakti’ in her long and daunting struggle for justice, learnt that the perpetrators who killed her family, murdered her three-year-old daughter, gang-raped and left her to die, had walked free,” the signatories said in a joint statement.

“The remission of sentences for the 11 [men] convicted of gang-rape and mass murder will have a chilling effect on every rape victim who is told to ‘trust the system’, ‘seek justice’, ‘have faith’,” it said.

“Most importantly, in a case investigated and prosecuted by the Central Bureau of Investigation, no remission can be granted by a State without concurrence by the Centre. That such a remission was even considered, and then permitted, reveals the hollowness of the public posturing about Nari Shakti, Beti Bachao, women’s rights and justice for victims…Hence, the statement urged the Supreme Court to undo this grave miscarriage of justice,” it added.

Also read: What Bilkis Bano Survived That Day in Gujarat, 2002

An article in The Wire explained that in June this year, the Union home ministry had issued guidelines to states pertaining to the release of convicted prisoners. These guidelines were issued under a special policy formulated as part of India’s 75th year of Independence.

As per the guidelines, special remission was to be granted to prisoners on August 15, 2022, January 26, 2023 (Republic Day) and August 15, 2023. However, the guidelines made it clear that persons sentenced to life imprisonment and rape convicts were not entitled to be prematurely released.

Therefore, several experts have questioned whether the Gujarat government violated the central guideline by releasing the convicts in the Bilkis Bano case.

The full text of the joint statement and list of signatories is appended below.

§

PRESS RELEASE
18.08.2022

20 YEARS AFTER HORRIFIC GANG-RAPE AND MASS MURDERS IN GUJARAT, ABOUT 6,000 CITIZENS SPEAK OUT IN SUPPORT OF BILKIS BANO’S CONTINUING STRUGGLE FOR JUSTICE!

Demand the revocation of the pre-mature release of 11 gang-rapists and mass murderers in Gujarat.

Appeal to the Supreme Court of India to undo this grave miscarriage of justice.

Call upon citizens to stand with all victims of rape against such an injustice.

Full text of statement and complete list of signatories below.

Coming together to express their shock and horror at the pre-mature release of 11 men convicted of gang-rape and mass murder, about 6000 ordinary citizens, grassroot workers, women’s, human rights, peace, secularism, anti-caste, disability, queer rights and other peoples’ movements, groups and activists, eminent writers, historians, scholars, filmmakers, journalists and former bureaucrats and many more, came together to say, “On the morning of August 15, 2022, in his Independence Day address to the nation the Prime Minister of India spoke of women’s rights, dignity and Nari Shakti. That very afternoon Bilkis Bano, a woman who embodied that ‘Nari Shakti’ in her long and daunting struggle for justice, learnt that the perpetrators who killed her family, murdered her 3 year old daughter, gang-raped and left her to die, had walked free.” No one sent her notice. No one asked how she, a gang-rape survivor, felt about the release of her rapists… it shames us that the day we should celebrate our freedoms and be proud of our independence, the women of India instead saw gang-rapists and mass murderers freed as an act of State largesse.

The remission of sentences for the 11 convicted of gang-rape and mass murder will have a chilling effect on every rape victim who is told to ‘trust the system’, ‘seek justice’, ‘have faith’. Further the statement stated that the “remission of these sentences is not only immoral and unconscionable, it violates the State of Gujarat’s own existing remission policy…” and “the guidelines issued by the Central government to States on a prisoner release policy to coincide with Azadi ka Amrit Mahotsav which also clearly states that among the categories of prisoners NOT to be granted Special Remission are “those convicted of rape”. Most importantly, in a case investigated and prosecuted by the CBI, no remission can be granted by a State without concurrence by the Centre. That such a remission was even considered, and then permitted, reveals the hollowness of the public posturing about Nari Shakti, Beti Bachao, women’s rights and justice for victims.

Hence, the statement urged the Supreme Court to undo this grave miscarriage of justice. Prominent among the signatories to the statement are:

Groups, organisations and networks: Saheli Women’s Resource Centre, Gamana Mahila Samuha, Bebaak Collective, All India Progressive Women’s Association, Uttarakhand Mahila Manch, Forum Against Oppression of Women, Pragatisheel Mahila Manch, Parcham Collective, Jagrit Adivasi Dalit Sangathan, Amoomat Society, WomComMatters, Centre for Struggling Women, Sahiyar, Stree Mukti Sanghatana, Women & Transgender Joint Action Committee, Bailancho Saad, Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan, Peoples’ Union for Civil Liberties, All India Lawyers Association for Justice, National Alliance of Peoples’ Movements, Bhagat Singh Ambedkar Students Organization, All India Students Association, Mission Justice; Bahutva Karnataka, Swaraj Abhiyan, Democracy Collective, National Confederation of Human Rights Organisations, Penn Urimay Iyakkam, Delhi Solidarity Group, Collective, Peoples’ Watch, United Christian Forum, Jharkhand Jan Adhikar Mahasabha, National Platform for Rights of the Disabled, CityMakers Mission International, Association of Protection of Democratic Rights, Progressive Writers Association, Jan Jagran Shakti Sangathan, Delhi Science Forum, National Federation of Indian Women, Jan Swasthya Abhiyan, Movement For Secular Democracy, Hindus for Human Rights, South Asia Forum for Human Rights.

Activists, scholars, and other citizens: Syeda Hameed, Zafarul-Islam Khan, Roop Rekha Verma, Devaki Jain, Uma Chakravarti, Subhashini Ali, Kavita Krishnan, Maimoona Mollah, Hasina Khan, Rachana Mudraboyina, Shabnam Hashmi, Gabriele Dietrich, Zakia Soman,
Arundhati Dhuru, Meera Sanghamitra, Madhu Bhushan, Kavita Srivastav, Ammu Abraham, Navsharan Singh, Khalida Parveen, Anjali Bharadwaj, Malika Virdi, Bittu K R, Pyoli Swatija, Dr Ajita, Dipta Bhog, Poonam Kaushik, Bondita Acharya, Chayanika Shah, Kalyani Menon Sen, Madhuri K, Maya John, Vahida Nainar, Monisha Behl, Mridul D, Sarojini NB, Vihaan Vee, Rumi Harish, Ranjita Biswas, Lara Jesani, Amrita Johri, Aqsa Shaikh, Mira Shiva, Sabina Martins, Fr Cedric Prakash, Veena Shatrugna, Keval Arora, V Geetha, Padmaja Shaw, Sadhna Arya, Nivedita Menon, Nandini Sundar, Kumkum Roy, Pratiksha Baxi, Rohini Hensman, Nandita Narain, Kumkum Roy, Pulin Nayak, Suvir Kaul, Subir Sinha, Vineeta Bal, Salil Mishra, Meena Kandasamy, Kalpana Sharma, Mukul Kesavan, Pamela Philipose, Laxmi Murthy, Freny Manecksha, Brinelle D’Souza, Revati Laul, Ammu Joseph, Sujata Madhok, Sameera Khan, Sagarika Ghosh, Maya Krishna Rao, Sheba Chachhi, Rajiv Mehrotra, Amar Kanwar, Niranjani, Yousuf Saeed, Reena Mohan, Sameera Jain, Pushpamala N, Priya Thuvassery, Anjali Monteiro.

Thank You, Modiji, We Now Know What Is the Biggest Danger to Our Democracy

Gujarat’s elections are due in months and nothing is more important to the BJP than winning them; thus appeasement of the majority has been an imperative they could not have resisted.

This August 15 of the Amrit Mahotsav time will go down as truly incomparable in India’s post-colonial history.

The nation owes a debt of gratitude to the prime minister for telling us in his customary ringing tones what constitutes the biggest danger to our democracy.

And, it is none of the things you and I, in our insufficient nationalism, might have thought:

It is not a party system that has now succumbed to profitable chicaneries;

It is not the ruthless drive of the ruling BJP to cannibalise other parties in order to turn India into a one-party state like China;

It is not an electoral bond system that funnels moneys from corporates, ostensibly to parties, but actually to the powerful ruling party in the main, wherein the prudent donors remain properly anonymous;

It is not a PM CARES Fund which is either a private trust or a public body as and when it suits it, and which remains outside the ambit of the Right to Information law;

It is not the investigative and prosecutorial agencies of the state that 90% of the time pursue not their “own course” but rather a “known course’;

It is not the unauthorised and clandestine use of software like Pegasus to pulverise citizens by robbing all their private data, even conversations, or to plant incriminating data into their instruments so that their journey to jail could be hastened;

It is not 90% of the print and electronic media that has heroically woken up to loyalty and compliance;

It is not a parliament in which the opposition is reduced to howling most of the time because none of their notices or motions are admitted for discussion;

And it is emphatically not a famous organisation which claims to be apolitical but manages to have its satraps placed in influential slots in the education system, the bureaucracy, the security services, as ombudsmen in media organisations, and which patronises energetic “voluntary” youth brigades who fix social and community “problems” with a pat on the back from the said organisation (parivar) and the governments filial to it.

Even more emphatically, it is not a numero uno who never holds a press briefing, lest the even advance of democracy from his office suffer embarrassing disequilibriums.

And it certainly is not the ever-increasing numbers of citizens hard put to manage a meal a day, numbering some 90% of the population, since those who earn 25,000 rupees a month fall within the top 10% of Indian earners!

So what is the biggest danger to democracy? Now we know at last: it is dynastic politicians!

But, wait a minute: if you thought this profound formulation included the dynast of all political parties, you are again behind times.

The biggest danger to Indian democracy is the memory of Nehru, now thankfully ejected from an ambitious poster that lists all the worthies who made the freedom of India from British rule possible, and it is Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, and Priyanka Vadra Gandhi who now conspire to hold back the march of Indian democracy.

Question Easily Done, as only we and the world of which we are Guru trust only the serendipitous Modiji to do, where others – scholars, historians, critics of social ideas, political pundits – fail to do because of their debilitating allegiance to complexity, fairness, and facts.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi gestures as he addresses the nation from the ramparts of the Red Fort on the occasion of the 76th Independence Day, in New Delhi, Aug 15, 2022. Photo: PTI

Remission

This here Independence Day is also notable for another exemplary achievement.

The 11 men in Gujarat who had been so unfairly jailed for the service they had rendered in 2002 to consolidate the nationalist cause by venturing to murder 14 of the five-month pregnant Bilkis Banu’s family, including a three-year-old baby whom they pulped by tossing her to the ground, and by, at great cost to their own sense of piety and morality, gang-raping Bilkis Bano, their neighbour of old, have finally been let out by an enlightened turn of remissive law.

Less deserving convicts in other jails who have also spent over 14 years behind bars, however, not having the same sort of denominational and ideological credentials, remain duly incarcerated.

But the release of the 11 aforesaid alone is the least part of this expansively laudatory story.

At a time when hate has been so rampant among all sorts of people, the residents of Dahod where the heroic nationalists were let off have demonstrated how truly tolerant and loving and grateful Indians can be.

The 11 warriors-come-home were duly felicitated; their holy feet were touched, flowers were sprinkled over their incomparable heads, vermillion was dabbed on their foreheads, and sweets were offered to them one by one for what they has accomplished at a time when vicious conspiracies were underway against the then chief minister of Gujarat.

This moral side to our democracy, again unsurprisingly sourced in Gujarat, has understandably received due exposure on electronic channels, although there are the bleeding-heart liberals, at bottom horribly dangerous communists, who have begun muttering that the courts must be approached to cancel the remission granted to these republic-saving scions of Hindutva.

We have little doubt that their customary babble will be suitably dealt with by the sentinels of the media and patriotic opinion-makers and sundry vigilante brave-hearts.

Let us, therefore, on both counts remember the momentous standing of this particular Independence Day, and vow to take that selfie with the tiranga and upload it as well so that others may be enthused and so that the IT companies, really the hero among them Jio, make a needed killing from the flow of messages among loyal citizens back and forth.

Gujarat’s elections are due in months and nothing is more important to the BJP than winning them; thus appeasement of the majority has been an imperative they could not have resisted.

Vande Bharat.