NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court docket dismissed a plea on Friday filed by two of the 11 convicts within the Bilkis Bano case, who challenged the January 8 verdict that cancelled their remission, calling it “completely misconceived”.
Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Sanjay Kumar questioned how they might sit in attraction over an order handed by one other bench of the apex courtroom.
“What is that this plea? How is that this plea maintainable? That is completely misconceived. How can an Article 32 petition be filed? We will not sit in attraction over an order handed by one other bench,” the bench stated.
Radheyshaym Bhagwandas Shah and Rajubhai Babulal Soni, the convicts, have been represented by advocate Rishi Malhotra, who requested permission to withdraw the plea, which the bench granted. Shah has additionally utilized for interim bail.
Each convicts approached the apex courtroom in March, arguing that the January 8 verdict cancelling their sentence remission was “within the enamel of” a 2002 Structure bench order. They sought the problem to be referred to a bigger bench for a remaining determination.
Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Sanjay Kumar questioned how they might sit in attraction over an order handed by one other bench of the apex courtroom.
“What is that this plea? How is that this plea maintainable? That is completely misconceived. How can an Article 32 petition be filed? We will not sit in attraction over an order handed by one other bench,” the bench stated.
Radheyshaym Bhagwandas Shah and Rajubhai Babulal Soni, the convicts, have been represented by advocate Rishi Malhotra, who requested permission to withdraw the plea, which the bench granted. Shah has additionally utilized for interim bail.
Each convicts approached the apex courtroom in March, arguing that the January 8 verdict cancelling their sentence remission was “within the enamel of” a 2002 Structure bench order. They sought the problem to be referred to a bigger bench for a remaining determination.
