Join Our WhatsApp Group:
https://linktr.ee/sujitnair
In this edition of his editorial, Mr. Sujit Nair discusses the queries raised by the Supreme Court of India regarding the Gujarat government's decision to release the rapists and murderers of Bilkis Bano and her family before their sentences were completed. The Supreme Court has directed pointed questions towards both the Gujarat government and the Central government concerning the selective application of a policy for granting remission to convicts involved in the gang-rape and murder cases related to the 2002 post-Godhra riots in Gujarat.
During the ongoing hearings on the premature release of the individuals convicted of these crimes, the judges have expressed skepticism about the Gujarat government's approach to granting remission. They have inquired about the release of the convicts who had initially received the death penalty, which was later commuted to life imprisonment. The justices questioned why these individuals were released after serving only 14 years in prison while other prisoners were not given similar opportunities for release. They also raised concerns about the selective implementation of the policy and the lack of consistent opportunities for reform and reintegration in the prison system. The court has asked for data on the extent of this policy's application and the reasons behind the overflowing prison population.
The Supreme Court has further questioned the basis for forming the Jail Advisory Committee specifically for the Bilkis Bano convicts and why the opinion of the Godhra court was sought when the trial did not take place there.
The 11 convicts, who were released on Independence Day the previous year, were sentenced by a court in Maharashtra. The judge who had convicted them had recommended against their release. The Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, representing the Gujarat government, expressed difficulty in addressing the court's inquiries in a general manner. He indicated that a pending case in the Supreme Court would require all states to provide detailed information.
The Gujarat government argued that the convicts had been released in accordance with the law, referring to a policy from 1992 that was applicable due to their conviction in 2008. In the prior hearing, the court had questioned an earlier Supreme Court order related to the Bilkis Bano case, raising concerns about the process of passing the order as a PIL (Public Interest Litigation) rather than an appeal against the Bombay High Court's decision.
Bilkis Bano's lawyer, Shobha Gupta, criticized the Gujarat government's decision to release the convicts. She highlighted that the Maharashtra state and the Central government were not adequately involved in the decision-making process.
#bilkisbano #godhrariots #gujaratgovernment #bjp #womensafety #bjp #brijbhushansingh #wrestlersprotest #ramrahim #crimeagainstwomen
https://linktr.ee/sujitnair
In this edition of his editorial, Mr. Sujit Nair discusses the queries raised by the Supreme Court of India regarding the Gujarat government's decision to release the rapists and murderers of Bilkis Bano and her family before their sentences were completed. The Supreme Court has directed pointed questions towards both the Gujarat government and the Central government concerning the selective application of a policy for granting remission to convicts involved in the gang-rape and murder cases related to the 2002 post-Godhra riots in Gujarat.
During the ongoing hearings on the premature release of the individuals convicted of these crimes, the judges have expressed skepticism about the Gujarat government's approach to granting remission. They have inquired about the release of the convicts who had initially received the death penalty, which was later commuted to life imprisonment. The justices questioned why these individuals were released after serving only 14 years in prison while other prisoners were not given similar opportunities for release. They also raised concerns about the selective implementation of the policy and the lack of consistent opportunities for reform and reintegration in the prison system. The court has asked for data on the extent of this policy's application and the reasons behind the overflowing prison population.
The Supreme Court has further questioned the basis for forming the Jail Advisory Committee specifically for the Bilkis Bano convicts and why the opinion of the Godhra court was sought when the trial did not take place there.
The 11 convicts, who were released on Independence Day the previous year, were sentenced by a court in Maharashtra. The judge who had convicted them had recommended against their release. The Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, representing the Gujarat government, expressed difficulty in addressing the court's inquiries in a general manner. He indicated that a pending case in the Supreme Court would require all states to provide detailed information.
The Gujarat government argued that the convicts had been released in accordance with the law, referring to a policy from 1992 that was applicable due to their conviction in 2008. In the prior hearing, the court had questioned an earlier Supreme Court order related to the Bilkis Bano case, raising concerns about the process of passing the order as a PIL (Public Interest Litigation) rather than an appeal against the Bombay High Court's decision.
Bilkis Bano's lawyer, Shobha Gupta, criticized the Gujarat government's decision to release the convicts. She highlighted that the Maharashtra state and the Central government were not adequately involved in the decision-making process.
#bilkisbano #godhrariots #gujaratgovernment #bjp #womensafety #bjp #brijbhushansingh #wrestlersprotest #ramrahim #crimeagainstwomen
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00 Namaskar!
00:01 Welcome to another episode of Editorial.
00:04 You see, it is one thing
00:10 when an opposition tells a government that your decisions are selective.
00:14 Your decisions are not fair, they are selective.
00:17 It is one thing when an opposition says that.
00:19 It is one thing when journalists like us say it,
00:24 that the government's decisions are selective.
00:29 But it is a completely different thing
00:31 when the Supreme Court of this country
00:33 tells the government that why are your decisions selective.
00:37 I am going to talk to you about Bilquis Manu's case
00:41 and I am going to talk to you about the Supreme Court's questions
00:44 that they ask the Gujarat government.
00:47 Let's get right into the show.
00:48 The Supreme Court, today,
00:55 asked a volley of questions to the Gujarat government.
00:59 Questions that a lot of us have been asking for the last one year.
01:03 The Supreme Court asked the Gujarat government
01:08 that, you see, out of all the people you have,
01:12 all the people that were in jail,
01:14 how come you selected the 11 people
01:21 who raped a woman called Bilquis Manu,
01:24 who raped this woman and killed her family members
01:27 in front of her while raping her?
01:29 How could you do that?
01:32 How did you select these 11 people?
01:35 In fact, the judge said that the Gujarat government
01:41 is on thin ice as far as grant of premature remission release is concerned.
01:48 The judge went on to say that the convict's death penalty
01:52 was committed to life imprisonment.
01:54 How could they be released after serving 14 years in such situation?
01:59 Why other prisoners are not given the relief of release?
02:05 Why were the culprits selectively given the benefit of the policies in this case?
02:11 This was asked by Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan.
02:17 What I told you?
02:18 There were so many people.
02:21 How could you identify just the 11 people and give them?
02:24 A person who has raped a woman and murdered her family in front of her,
02:30 how could you do that?
02:31 I am constantly saying it is because I want you to imagine
02:36 the act that these 11 people have done.
02:40 Convicted, it is not accused.
02:43 Convicted.
02:46 What does it mean by a state government selecting these 11 people
02:49 and giving them remission and saying that go home, enough.
02:52 What does that mean?
02:54 What message is the state government sending?
02:58 The court further asked,
03:00 how far this rule, that is, giving a chance to harden criminals to reform
03:06 by releasing them after 14 years is being applied on other prisoners.
03:12 Why is this policy being applied selectively?
03:16 Opportunity to reform and reintegrate should be given to all.
03:22 How far is this being implemented?
03:25 Why are our prisons overflowing?
03:28 Give us the data.
03:29 In a very simple term, the court is asking what we are thinking too.
03:33 Why?
03:35 A person who raped a woman, killed her family in front of her,
03:40 and I am going to say this again and again,
03:42 raped her and killed her family in front of her,
03:45 you are allowing them to go.
03:47 You set them free.
03:48 15th August, 2022, after 14 years,
03:53 where they were supposed to serve life.
03:57 How many other prisoners have you done this to?
04:01 Why?
04:03 Reintegrating and all is only, these 11 people deserve it.
04:06 Others don't.
04:07 People who have committed small crimes,
04:09 people who have committed robbery, people who have committed murders,
04:13 they don't deserve this.
04:14 The rapist of a woman who killed her family in front of her deserves it.
04:19 This is what the court asked.
04:22 This is what the court asked.
04:24 What the court is actually asking for is,
04:28 why are you doing this?
04:30 What is the reason?
04:31 Like I told you before, what message are you trying to send
04:34 to the community and to the society?
04:37 The court also questioned on what basis
04:40 the Jail Advisory Committee was formed for Bilkis convicts,
04:44 ordering the state to provide details.
04:47 It also asked why the opinion of Godhra court was sought
04:51 since the trial was not conducted there.
04:54 A very important point.
04:57 A very important point.
04:58 You see, the trial was not conducted in Gujarat.
05:03 The trial was conducted in Maharashtra.
05:07 The judge who convicted these people was sitting in Maharashtra.
05:11 The court that heard this case is in Maharashtra
05:15 and you are releasing those people in Gujarat?
05:18 What is this?
05:19 Gujarat court was not even allowed to hear this case.
05:25 You don't know what this case is.
05:27 You don't know what the evidences are.
05:29 You don't know what the judge was thinking.
05:31 You don't know what the prosecution said.
05:32 You don't know what the defense said.
05:34 You don't know anything.
05:36 On what basis did you give them remission?
05:38 The court said, I want to see the data.
05:40 I want to see your logic as to why these people were selected.
05:43 In fact, Bilkis Banu's lawyer Shobha Gupta
05:47 told the court that the Maharashtra state
05:49 was not heard in this matter at all.
05:52 The center has not even been made a party to this.
05:56 The Supreme Court's order was only in relation to the application of convict Radhesham
06:02 while Gujarat's government gave exemption to all 11 convicts.
06:05 The story is like this.
06:07 Bilkis Banu's advocate says that,
06:10 listen, you know what, Maharashtra court was not even consulted.
06:13 The center was not consulted before releasing these people.
06:18 Well, while I understand she is putting a point across,
06:23 but the point is, are you telling me that the center didn't know
06:27 that these 11 rapist murderers were being released?
06:32 Kashmir to Kanyakumari, a common man knows that these 11 people were released.
06:37 But center doesn't know, baba.
06:40 Center has no idea about this.
06:42 Center was never told.
06:43 What logic is this?
06:45 And are we supposed to believe that if the center wanted,
06:49 they couldn't stop it?
06:50 If the center wanted, they couldn't put these people back in the prison where they belong?
06:57 People who raped a woman and killed her family in front of her.
07:02 These people couldn't have been put behind bars?
07:05 This is sending a very, very wrong message to people in general
07:14 and to one particular community in particular.
07:17 It is sending a very wrong message.
07:20 Because she was Bilkis Banu,
07:24 is that the reason why her rapists are roaming scot-free?
07:28 That question is bound to arise.
07:30 That question is bound to arise.
07:33 Now, let me tell you the larger story.
07:36 Let me tell you the larger story of this.
07:38 The larger story is, let's go to Madhya Pradesh.
07:43 A 35-year-old man in Madhya Pradesh,
07:48 a rape convict from Satna district in Madhya Pradesh
07:53 was released in 2021 following a sentence of remission.
07:58 Same remission.
07:59 This rapist was allowed to go and you know what this rapist went and did?
08:03 The rapist was caught again because this time around,
08:06 this rapist went and raped a minor.
08:09 He was convicted again.
08:14 See, somewhere down the line,
08:18 it's not just that the rapes are happening in our country.
08:23 It is also the fact that we are seen as a country, as a government,
08:28 who is not really bothered about rapes,
08:31 who is not really bothered about protecting our women.
08:33 Were we bothered about when those wrestlers sat outside in Jantar Mantar?
08:37 Were we bothered about that?
08:40 Were we bothered about when we sent that Ram Rahim,
08:43 that fellow, that another rapist, convicted rapist,
08:47 when that fellow is roaming around and enjoying his birthday party?
08:51 He gets furlonged like, you know, some kind of a vacation.
08:56 So, if he is bored in the jail, then he goes,
09:00 in fact, rather it is reversed.
09:01 When he gets bored at home, then he goes to jail.
09:03 And whenever he wants, at a drop of a hat, gets furlonged.
09:09 So, literally, you are rewarding people who have raped,
09:14 who are accused of sexual harassment in the case of that Bridge Bush and Sharon Singh.
09:20 Look at the way he is roaming around.
09:22 Look at the way. Nothing. No arrest. Nothing.
09:26 No arrest. Nothing.
09:29 Every time a rapist roams free in this country,
09:33 believe me you, like I tell always, you are creating hundred other rapists.
09:39 Because you are giving confidence to hundred other rapists saying that nothing happens.
09:43 Nothing happens in India.
09:45 Eleven men raped a woman,
09:49 killed her child, killed a member of her family while she was being raped.
09:55 And those men were released.
09:58 What law are we talking about?
10:01 What is your GDP?
10:03 What is your superpower?
10:05 What is all this worth?
10:06 If you can't protect our own girl children,
10:09 what is all of this worth?
10:10 Please ask yourself.
10:12 And if you find an answer, please write it down and let me also know.
10:15 Because I don't see an answer to this.
10:17 And believe me you, yes, I am a little upset today.
10:20 And I have all the right to be.
10:23 I have all the right to be because I believe a society that can't protect their own girl children
10:30 is a society that doesn't deserve to be called as a civil society.
10:36 I think, I hundred percent believe in this.
10:39 And the way we are going,
10:41 and the way we are going,
10:43 we are reaching there.
10:45 That's the point I wanted to make today.
10:47 Thank you so much for listening to me.
10:49 Till I see you next time, Namaskar.
10:51 [music]