Supreme Court issues notice on appeals by two Bilkis Bano case convicts

The Supreme Court has asked the Gujarat and Maharashtra governments to respond to appeals by two convicts in the 2002 Bilkis Bano gangrape case. Justices Rajesh Bindal and Vijay Bishnoi issued notices and set a hearing for May 5. The appeals challenge the Bombay high court's 2017 conviction and life sentence.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court issued notices to the Gujarat and Maharashtra governments on appeals filed by Bipinchand Kanaiyalal Joshi and Pradip Ramanlal Modhiya. The two convicts are challenging their conviction and life imprisonment sentence handed down by the Bombay high court in the 2002 Bilkis Bano gangrape case on May 4, 2017. A bench of Justices Rajesh Bindal and Vijay Bishnoi scheduled the matter for hearing on May 5. Senior advocates Sidharth Luthra and Sonia Mathur represented the convicts. Luthra explained to the court that the delay in challenging the high court order stemmed from intervening events: the Gujarat government granted remission on August 10, 2022, leading to their release. Bilkis Bano challenged this in the Supreme Court, which quashed it in January 2024, ruling that remission power lay with Maharashtra and Gujarat had usurped it. The convicts then surrendered and are now in a Gujarat jail. The case arose amid the Gujarat riots following the February 27, 2002, torching of the Sabarmati Express at Godhra. Bilkis Bano, a 21-year-old pregnant woman, was gangraped while fleeing with her family, who suffered several deaths. The CBI investigated after a Supreme Court order in December 2003. In August 2004, the trial shifted to Mumbai. A designated court sentenced 11 convicts to life under IPC sections 302 (murder) and 376(2)(g) (gang rape) in 2008, upheld by the high court.

Mga Kaugnay na Artikulo

Illustration of Supreme Court justices hearing the Twisha Sharma case.
Larawang ginawa ng AI

Supreme Court takes suo motu cognizance of Twisha Sharma case, hearing on May 25

Iniulat ng AI Larawang ginawa ng AI

The Supreme Court has taken suo motu cognizance of the death of Twisha Sharma. A bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant will hear the matter on May 25.

The Supreme Court on Thursday stayed the Chhattisgarh High Court’s order convicting Amit Jogi to life imprisonment in the 2003 murder of Ram Avtar Jaggi, a political rival of his father Ajit Jogi. Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta issued notice on Jogi’s appeal and suspended the high court’s April 2, 2026, judgment. The bench ordered that the conviction under IPC Sections 302 and 120B and the life sentence remain stayed pending hearing.

Iniulat ng AI

India's Supreme Court has agreed to consider a plea by Sanatani Sangsad highlighting violence in West Bengal after the 2021 state polls. The application seeks a high-level monitoring committee chaired by a retired Supreme Court judge to oversee the state's law and order machinery. The bench directed the petitioner to implead the CBI as a party.

The Bombay high court on Friday dismissed a plea seeking a CBI probe into bribery allegations against Adani Green Energy Ltd for securing solar power contracts. The petitioner relied on US court proceedings, but the court cited his failure to establish bona fides and lack of legal standing.

Iniulat ng AI

India's Supreme Court indicated on Wednesday that uniform guidelines on judicial intervention in faith and rights disputes are neither feasible nor desirable, preferring case-by-case assessments. The observation came during the seventh day of hearings on the Sabarimala Temple entry reference.

A court in Madhya Pradesh's Jabalpur has directed police to register an FIR over a cruise boat tragedy in Bargi Dam reservoir that killed 13 people last week. Judicial Magistrate First Class D.P. Sutrakar cited the crew's failure to rescue drowning passengers as an attempt to commit culpable homicide. The order was issued on May 5, 2026.

Iniulat ng AI

The Delhi high court quashed look-out circulars issued against NDTV founders Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy, deeming their prolonged enforcement disproportionate and arbitrary. Justice Sachin Datta ruled that they unjustifiably curtail the fundamental right to travel abroad under Article 21 of the Constitution. The court directed the couple to cooperate fully with the investigating agency.

 

 

 

Gumagamit ng cookies ang website na ito

Gumagamit kami ng cookies para sa analytics upang mapabuti ang aming site. Basahin ang aming patakaran sa privacy para sa higit pang impormasyon.
Tanggihan