The selective application of the remission policy in the Bilkis Bano case refers to the question of why certain individuals involved in the case were granted remission while others were not. Here are some possible reasons behind the selective application: 1. Lack of evidence: The remission policy may have been selectively applied based on the availability of sufficient evidence against each individual. Those with stronger evidence against them may not have been eligible for remission. 2. Different levels of involvement: The level of participation and responsibility in the crime could have played a role in the selective application of the remission policy. Those individuals who were found to have a higher level of involvement may not have been granted remission. 3. Cooperation with law enforcement: It is possible that remission was only granted to individuals who cooperated fully with the investigation and prosecution of the case. This may have been seen as a sign of remorse and willingness to reform. 4. Severity of crime: The nature and severity of the crimes committed may have influenced the selective application of the remission policy. Individuals involved in more heinous acts may not have been considered for remission. It is important to note that without specific information on the Bilkis Bano case and the Supreme Court's reasoning, these points are purely speculative and for informational purposes only.