New Delhi (The Hawk): The Gujarati government has informed the Supreme Court that one of the Bilkis Bano case defendants was charged with insulting a woman's modesty in 2020 while on parole.
In response to petitions opposing the release of 11 convicts in the Bilkis Bano case, the state government filed a 477-page affidavit with the Supreme Court. Before being released on the terms of a life sentence reduction, it was claimed that the prisoners had been out of custody for about 1,000 days.
Mitesh Chamanlal Bhatt, one of the prisoners, was arrested and charged with violating the IPC's Sections 354 (outraging the modesty of women), 504 (insult intended to provoke breach of the peace), and 506 (criminal intimidation), each of which carries a potential sentence of seven years in prison, a fine, or both.
The state administration also stated that all prisoners received furloughs, parole, and even temporary bail at various times throughout their terms of detention, with 1,576 days being the longest and 998 days being the shortest.
In a letter dated May 25, 2022, the District Magistrate of Dahod provided information regarding Bhatt. In accordance with sections 432-433A of the CrPC, which deal with the suspension and remission of sentence for offenders, he expressed his view regarding his early release.
The letter stated that a complaint had been filed against Bhatt in the Dahod district's Randhikpur police station, that a charge sheet had been submitted, and that the case was currently before the court's administrative board. According to the letter, the incident happened on June 19, 2020, and since then, Bhatt has taken 281 leaves out of the 954 parole and furlough days that have been granted to him as of today, May 25, 2022.
After taking into account the views of the police sub-inspector from Randhikpur and the deputy superintendent of police from Limkheda, the Collector did not object to Bhatt's early release.
The Gujarat government informed the Supreme Court in an affidavit that it had chosen to release the 11 defendants in the Bilkis Bano case because they had served at least 14 years in prison, had been judged to have good behaviour, and had received "concurrence/approval" from the Center.
The state government further stated that the Special Civil Judge (CBI), City Civil and Sessions Court, Greater Bombay, and the Superintendent of Police, CBI, Special Crime Branch, Mumbai, had opposed the convicts' early release in March of last year.
In letters to the superintendent of the Godhra Sub-Jail, the CBI official stated that because the criminal offence committed by the convicts was heinous, serious, and grave, they could not be freed early.
"The Government of India expressed the concurrence/approval of the Central Government under section 435 of the CrPC for premature release of 11 offenders," the undersecretary of the state's home department stated in an affidavit.
According to the affidavit, the state government took into account the recommendations of seven organisations: the CBI, the Special Crime Branch in Mumbai, the Inspector General of Prisons in Gujarat, the Jail Superintendents, the Jail Advisory Committee, the District Magistrate, the Police Superintendent, and the Sessions Court in Mumbai.
The Gujarat government's response followed a petition filed by Prof. Roop Rekha Verma, Revati Laul, a journalist, and former CPI-M MP Subhasini Ali, which contested the release of 11 men convicted of several killings and the gang rape of Bilkis Bano during the 2002 Gujarat riots. Mahua Moitra, a member of the Trinamool Congress, and others have filed petitions against the release of the prisoners.
The top court set a follow-up hearing for November 29 after giving petitioners until October 18 to respond to the state government's rebuttal affidavit.
(Inputs from Agencies)