- Home
- /
- Top Stories
- /
- Rajiv Gandhi Assassination Case :...
Rajiv Gandhi Assassination Case : Tamil Nadu Governor Will Decide On Perarivalan's Pardon With 3-4 Days, Centre Tells SC
Mehal Jain
21 Jan 2021 9:17 AM GMT
In the matter of release of A.G. Perarivalan, the convict in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, SG Tushar Mehta on Thursday informed the Supreme Court that the Tamil Nadu Governor will decide, "as per the Constitution", on the remission of the sentence in exercise of his discretionary power under Article 161 within the next 3-4 days.Though the SG said that the decision will come within 3-days...
In the matter of release of A.G. Perarivalan, the convict in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, SG Tushar Mehta on Thursday informed the Supreme Court that the Tamil Nadu Governor will decide, "as per the Constitution", on the remission of the sentence in exercise of his discretionary power under Article 161 within the next 3-4 days.
Though the SG said that the decision will come within 3-days , in the order which was released by evening, the Court directed that the Governor should take a decision within 4 weeks.
The bench headed by Justice L. Nageswara Rao was hearing the petition filed by Perarivalan seeking release from the prison based on the recommendation made by the State Government in September 2018. The bench had earlier expressed unhappiness over the fact that the recommendation made by the Tamil Nadu state government for the remission of the sentence had been pending before the Governor for over two years. In 2014, the Supreme Court had commuted Perarivalan's death sentence to life imprisonment citing the long pendency of his mercy petition.
Appearing before the bench on Thursday at 2 PM, SG Mehta advanced, "My friend, ASG K. M. Nataraj is appearing for the Union of India in the matter. But I have received instructions to tell Your Lordships that we have received information from the Governor of the State of Tamil Nadu that he will decide the issue as per the Constitution within the next 3-4 days"
Appearing before the bench on Thursday at 2 PM, SG Mehta advanced, "My friend, ASG K. M. Nataraj is appearing for the Union of India in the matter. But I have received instructions to tell Your Lordships that we have received information from the Governor of the State of Tamil Nadu that he will decide the issue as per the Constitution within the next 3-4 days"
"So we will not be needed to decide this plea? It is good that the Governor is deciding...If this was done earlier, it would have spared us of all this effort. We have been doing a lot of homework on this...", observed Justice Rao.
"Yes, Your Lordships will not be needed to decide this...Sorry, I am approaching the court late", said Mr. Mehta.
The bench inquired from Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, for the petitioner, if this arrangement was acceptable to him.
"If the authority is deciding, it is alright", he replied.
When the bench considered adjourning the matter by 4 weeks, Mr. Sankaranarayanan advanced, "Since Your Lordships have heard the matter at length, could you mark it as part-heard and give us a specific date, in case the decision is not conducive..."
"Let it come after 4 weeks. Once the decision is taken, you will have to pursue other remedies", noted Justice Rao.
In dictating the order, the bench initially proceeded to record the aforesaid submission of the SG that the "proposal submitted by the Cabinet of the Government of Tamil Nadu shall be considered and final orders be passed" in 3-4 days.
"Could Your Lordships only say 'considered in accordance with the Constitution'? I don't know how the Governor will proceed", prayed the SG.
The bench then finally recorded that the proposal submitted by the Cabinet shall be considered in accordance with the Constitution in the next 3-4 days, and listed the matter after 4 weeks.
Interestingly, only on Wednesday, the Centre being represented by ASG K. M. Nataraj, submitted that it is the President under Article 72 and not the Governor under Article 161 who is competent to grant pardon/remission.
"If the entire representation was given to an authority which lacks the jurisdiction to consider the representation, then the right, which is being urged on account of the inaction of the Governor which, he says, infringed his Article 21 right, cannot be recognized at all", Mr. Nataraj had advanced.
"The state government had recommended the release. There were no orders passed by the Governor for over two years. The Governor is acting for the Executive. Now he can't say… If you are aggrieved by the decision of the government, challenge it. This is an extraordinary situation where the recommendation was made by the government and the orders were not passed", observed Justice Rao on Wednesday.
"Not once has his objection been raised by the Union of India before Your Lordships all these years. In your September 6, 2018 order (in Sriharan's case), Your Lordships said that an application under Article 161 to the Governor has been made and that the Governor will decide the same as deemed fit. There was no objection to it by the Union of India then. They pop up every five years whenever liberty arises and raise objections. From Nanavati till today, for 70 years, all such questions have been within the executive domain of the Governor and have been dealt with by him. Today, the Union of India is saying that what we have been doing for 70 years is wrong, for all the 90 lakh convicts across all jails in the country, the mercy petitions can lie only to the President of India?! They are saying that since the IPC is a Central act, every exercise of every Governor for the last 70 years is wrong?!", Mr. Sankaranarayanan had argued.
"It is obnoxious on the part of the Centre. The Union of India can take up this question, Your Lordships can leave this question open, but this is not a fit case for this. A man who has been languishing in jail long enough cannot be asked to wait for an answer to this question of law raised orally at the last minute on behalf of the Union of India!",he had pressed
[Read Order]
Next Story
