On Tuesday, Justice KM Joseph of the Supreme Court expressed disappointment that attempts were being made to prevent him from hearing the case regarding Bilkis Banos petition against the remission granted to 11 men convicted of gang rape and murdering her family. He stated that such continuous efforts to derail the proceedings were unjust to him, and he decided to leave it to another bench to hear the case before his retirement.Justice Joseph of the Supreme Court observed that many lawyers for the convicts had raised issues about the receipt of formal notice in the case and requested more time to file their affidavits. He said that he could see a clear pattern emerging where the parties did not want him to be on the bench to decide the case. He also remarked that it was unfair to him and, as a result, he was leaving it for another bench to hear the case. The case in question pertains to Bilkis Banos petition against the remission granted to 11 men convicted of gangrape and murdering her family.Justice Joseph, who is due to retire on June 16 during the Supreme Courts summer break, expressed his concern on Tuesday that some lawyers for the convicts were trying to prevent him from hearing the case. He observed that there was a pattern emerging in which parties were delaying the proceedings by raising questions over the receipt of formal notice and seeking more time to file their affidavits. Justice Joseph and Justice BV Nagarathna were hearing Bilkis Banos petition against the remission granted to 11 men convicted of gangrape and murdering her family. Justice Joseph noted that the notice had been issued on the first day the matter came to them, and questioned whether this was the appropriate way for the case to proceed.Justice Joseph noted that there was a clear pattern emerging, where lawyers for the convicts were asking for more time or claiming they had not been served notice, in an attempt to prevent him from hearing the case before his retirement. He said that even if they adjourned the matter for a week, the same tactics would likely be used.During the previous hearing in April, the bench had expressed its desire to examine whether the remission granted to the 11 men was a valid exercise of power and application of mind, and had questioned the reluctance of the Union and Gujarat governments to produce the original files pertaining to the decision.On that day, Justice Joseph expressed his view that the crime committed, which was the gang rape of Bilkis Bano and the murder of seven people during the 2002 Gujarat riots, was extremely terrible. He also mentioned that a massacre could not be equated to a single murder.During the hearing on April 18, Justice Joseph had pointed out that the case of Bilkis Bano was not an ordinary rape and murder case, as a pregnant woman was gang-raped and 14 members of her family were killed. He emphasised that the case was so heinous that the trial had to be moved out of the state to Mumbai. Justice Joseph had questioned the counsel for the Centre and Gujarat on how this case could be compared to any other rape and murder case and what message would be conveyed if remission was granted. He had also highlighted that there were larger considerations involved in granting remission.During the hearing on Tuesday, Bilkis Banos lawyer, Shobha Gupta, asked Justice Joseph to expedite the case before his retirement, as she alleged that the convicts were intentionally delaying the proceedings for administrative reasons. Senior advocate Indira Jaising, representing one of the petitioners in the case, added that the court should not allow such tactics to succeed and that judges should not recuse themselves simply because a party wants it.Justice Joseph declined to hear the case before his retirement but clarified that he and Justice BV Nagarathna were not recusing themselves. He explained that while he has no difficulty hearing the matter, the convicts have intentionally delayed the case, and he cannot compel anyone to argue the case during the vacation. Moreover, he has done everything in his power to expedite the case, but there is no time left. If the matter had come to him earlier, it might have taken a different turn.Justice Joseph emphasised that following the proper procedure was necessary, which includes serving formal notice to all parties and giving them time to respond. He said that they could not proceed without ensuring that all parties were served. Justice Joseph clarified that they never said they didnt want to hear the matter, but the lack of time was the issue. He made these remarks while responding to Shobha Guptas suggestion that the bench could proceed with the matter regarding the convicts who had received formal notices.During the 2002 riots, Bilkis Bano was 21 years old and five months pregnant when she was gang-raped while fleeing the violence. Tragically, her three-year-old daughter was among the seven people killed during the incident. Eleven men were convicted for these crimes, but they were released on August 15th after Radheshyam Shah, one of the convicts, approached the Supreme Court in April seeking remission. Shah argued that he had spent more than 15 years in prison.
