Bilkis case: SC adjourns hearing till Nov 29; says Gujarat govt’s counter ‘very bulky’

In the counter-affidavit, a “series of judgments have been quoted…so many judgments that we don’t know where is the factual statement, where is the application of mind,” Justice Rastogi said.

Mehta agreed that it could have been avoided and said that the sole purpose was to make it easy for the judges to refer to.

The bench told the parties that if they want to file any rejoinder affidavit, they should do so before the next date of hearing.

In an affidavit filed on Monday, the Gujarat government had stated that it decided to release the 11 convicts since they had “completed 14 years and above in prison…(that) their behaviour was found to be good”, and that the Centre had also “conveyed (its) concurrence/approval”. The State also said that the “Superintendent of Police, CBI, Special Crime Branch, Mumbai” and the “Special Civil Judge (CBI), City Civil and Sessions Court, Greater Bombay”, had, in March last year, opposed their early release.

On August 15, the Gujarat government had released all 11 convicts, who had been sentenced to life imprisonment in 2008. The state government cited a “unanimous” recommendation of the Jail Advisory Committee to grant them remission on grounds of “good behaviour”.

Since then, the apex court has issued notices to the state government on two petitions challenging their release — one filed by CPI(M) leader Subhashini Ali, journalist Revati Laul and academic Roop Rekha Verma; and the other by Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra.

The petitioners have contended that the remission was granted without the Centre’s sanction. In their plea, Ali and the two petitioners stated that the case was investigated by CBI and “accordingly, grant of remission solely by the competent authority of a state government/ state of Gujarat…without any consultation with the Central government…is impermissible in terms of the mandate of Section 435 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973”.