Bilkis Banu Case-Supreme Court Judgement On Petitions Against Remission Of 11 Convicts-LIVE UPDATES

Justice Nagarathna: We fail to understand why the State of Gujarat did not file a review petition against the judgment dated May 13, 2022. Had the Govt filed a review and impressed upon this court, the ensuing litigation would not have occurred.

Justice Nagarathna : What is interesting is that in the earlier judgment, Gujarat Govt submitted before this Court that appropriate Govt was Maharashtra. But this contention was rejected, which was contrary to precedents. State of Gujarat failed to file a review petition.

Justice Nagarathna : Usurputation of power arises when power vested in one authority is exercised by another. Applying the principle in this case, having regard to our answer of "appropriate power", Gujarat Govt exercising the power was an instance of usurpation of power.

Justice Nagarathna : There is arbitrariness if there is non-consideration of relavant factors, non-application of mind, acting on dictation, or any usurpation of power..

Justice Nagarathna : The power to grant remission is ultimately an exercise of discretion by the authority. The test is whether the authority was acting within the scope of powers and whether it was exercised in accordance with law ..

Justice Nagarathna : We need not have gone into the other issues. But for sake of completion, we have...all orders dated 10.08.2022 (remission orders) are stereotype and cyclostyled orders.

Justice Nagarathna : We hold : (1) Govt of State of Gujarat had no competence to entertain the applications for remission or pass orders thereon.

(2) This Court's order dated 13.05.2022 obtained by fraud a nullity. All proceedings taken in furtherance of the judgment are also vitiated and a nullity in law.

Justice Nagarathna : Decision rendered in ignorance of statute or binding precedents is per incuriam.

Justice Nagarathna : Judgment of May 13, 2022 also per incuriam as it set aside a HC judgment in a writ petition under Art 32. This is contrary to 9-judge bench judgment in Mirajkar case.

Justice Nagarathna : Judgment of May 13, 2022 is also "per incuriam" (bad in law) as it refused to follow binding precedents, including the Constitution Bench judgment in Sriharan, regarding the appropriate govt for remission.