SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(SC) 23

B. V. NAGARATHNA, UJJAL BHUYAN
Bilkis Yakub Rasool – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Parties : Ms. Shobha Gupta, AOR Mr. Aditya Ranjan, Adv. Ms. Tarjana Rai, Adv. Ms. Jessy Kurian, Adv. Ms. Akanksha Bhatia, Adv. Mr. Anshuman Sharma, Adv. Mr. Pratik R. Bombarde, AOR Mr. Yogesh Yadav, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. Ms. Sumita Hazarika, AOR Ms. Vrinda Grover, Adv. Ms. Devika Tulsiani, Adv. Mr. Aakarsh Kamra, AOR Mr. Soutik Banerjee, Adv. Ms. Indira Jaising, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shadan Farasat, AOR Ms. Warisha Farasat, Adv. Mr. Paras Nath Singh, Adv. Mr. Rohin Bhatt, Adv. Mr. Harshit Anand, Adv. Mr. Aman Naqvi, Adv. Ms. Hrishika Jain, Adv. Ms. Natasha Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Mriganka Kukreja, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Babbar, Adv. Ms. Aparna Bhat, AOR Ms. Karishma Maria, Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG Mr. S.V. Raju, A.S.G. Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, AOR Ms. Devyani Bhatt, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Annam Venkatesh, Adv. Mr. Hitarth Raja, Adv. Ms. Madhumita Keshavan, Adv. Mr. Samrat Goswami, Adv. Mr. Harh Paul Singh, Adv. Ms. Sonali Sharma, Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG Mr. S V Raju, A.S.G. Dr. Reeta Vasishta, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Adv. Mrs. Shradha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Annam Venkatesh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR Mr. Santosh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Shrey Sharawat, Adv. Mr. Sayooj Mohandas M., Adv. Mr. Sushil Kumar Dubey, Adv. Mr. Bhaskar Gautham, Adv. Mr. Vishal Arun, AOR Mr. Dileep Kumar Dubey, Adv. Ms. Mrinal Gopal Elker, AOR Mr. Saurabh Singh, Adv. Ms. Aarushi Gupta, Adv. Mr. Divyansh Singh, Adv. Mr. Ashish Rawat, Adv. Mrs. Sonia Mathur, Sr. Adv. Mr. Yashraj Singh Bundela, AOR Mr. Simarjeet Singh Saluja, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Chandra Jaiswal, Adv. Mr. Divik Mathur, Adv. Ms. Pratiksha Mishra, Adv. Ms. Rupakshi Soni, Adv. Ms. Prerna Dhall, Adv. Mr. Surjeet Singh, Adv. Ms. Ronika Tater, Adv. Mr. Pawan, Adv. Ms. Jyoti Verma, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Singh, AOR Mr. Sunil Kumar Tomar, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. Ms. Kavitha K T, Adv. Mr. Simarjeet Singh Saluja, Adv. Mr. Ajay Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Vishnu Kant, AOR Mr. Surjit Nehra, Adv. Mr. Rahul Meena, Adv. Mr. Satya Ranjan Swain, Adv. Mr. V Chitambaresh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Praneet Pranav, Adv. Mr. Alabhya Dhamija, Adv. Ms. Megha Sharma, Adv. Ms. Akanksha Gupta, Adv. Mr. Amit Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Shoumendu Mukherji, AOR Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pashupathi Nath Razdan, AOR Mr. Santosh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, Adv. Ms. Maitreyee Jagat Joshi, Adv. Mr. Astik Gupta, Adv. Mr. Sheezan Hashmi, Adv. Mr. Mihir Joshi, Adv. Mr. Udbhav Sinha, Adv. Ms. Akanksha Tomar, Adv. Mr. K P Jayaram, Adv. Mr. Prakhar Shrivastav, Adv. Mr. Rajan K. Chourasia, AOR Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Adv. Ms. Sneh Lata Mishra, Adv. Ms. Ankita Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ashish Chaurasia, Adv. Mr. Prashant Padmanabhan, AOR Mr. S. Guru Krishna Kumar, Sr. Adv. Ms. Ankita Chaudhary, AOR Mr. Santosh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. Mr. K Ashwin, Adv. Mr. Shreyas Balaji, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Dwivedi, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

NAGARATHNA, J.

Table of Contents

S. No.

Particulars

1

Preface

2

Details of the writ petitioners

3

Factual Background

4

Counter affidavit of State of Gujarat

5

Submissions

6

Reply Arguments

7

Points for consideration

(A)

Re: Point No. 1: Whether the petition filed by one of the victims in Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 491 of 2022 under Article 32 of the Constitution is maintainable?

(B)

Re: Point No. 2: Whether the writ petitions filed as Public Interest Litigation (PIL) assailing the impugned orders of remission dated 10.08.2022 are maintainable?

(i) Remission : Scope & Ambit

(C)

Re: Point No. 3: Whether the Government of State of Gujarat was competent to pass the impugned orders of remission?

(D)

Re: Point No. 4 : Whether the impugned orders of remission passed by the respondent - State of Gujarat in favour of respondent Nos.3

(i) Section 432(2) of the CrPC: Opinion of the Presiding Judge of the convicting court

(ii) Sentence in default of fine

            Click Here to Read the rest of this document
            1
            2
            3
            4
            5
            6
            7
            8
            9
            10
            11
            SupremeToday Portrait Ad
            supreme today icon
            logo-black

            An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

            Please visit our Training & Support
            Center or Contact Us for assistance

            qr

            Scan Me!

            India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

            For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

            whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
            whatsapp-icon Back to top