CASE COMMENTARY ON BILKIS YAKUB RASOOL V. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
AUTHOR – SYED UWEZ, STUDENT AT RAMAIAH INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES
BEST CITATION – SYED UWEZ, CASE COMMENTARY ON BILKIS YAKUB RASOOL V. UNION OF INDIA & ORS., INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (9) OF 2026, PG. 334-339, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/IJLRV6I938
Abstract
The Supreme Court in Bilkis Yakub Rasool v. Union of India & Ors., Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 491 of 2022 (8 Jan 2024) quashed Gujarat’s 2022 remission orders for eleven convicts in the 2002 gang‑rape of Bilkis Bano and the murder of 14 members of her family. The Court held the petitions maintainable under Article 32 and clarified that, in transferred trials, the “appropriate government” empowered to consider remission under Section 432(7) CrPC is the State where conviction and sentence were recorded (Maharashtra), not the State where the crime occurred. The remission grants were set aside for jurisdictional error, non‑application of mind and procedural illegality: authorities ignored negative recommendations from the CBI, the trial court and local officials, relied on a rescinded policy, and suppressed material facts. The judgment reaffirmed that executive clemency is amenable to judicial review when exercised arbitrarily, mala fide, or beyond jurisdiction, and emphasized that victims’ interests, constitutional morality and the public interest in accountability must inform remission decisions—particularly in cases of grave sexual and communal violence. The decision strengthens limits on state remission powers, clarifies inter‑state remission jurisdiction, and underscores courts’ role in protecting rule of law and victims’ rights.
Key words: Bilkis Yakub Rasool, remission, murder, violence.