Supreme Court grants life term to death convicts in Rajiv Gandhi case
Moneylife Digital Team 18 February 2014

Rejecting the Centre’s view, the apex court commuted the death sentence of three convicts – Santhan, Murugan and Perarivalan – to imprisonment for life, subject to remission by the government

The Supreme Court on Tuesday commuted death sentence of three condemned prisoners in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case to life imprisonment on the ground of 11 years delay in deciding their mercy plea by the Centre.

 

A bench headed by Chief Justice P Sathasivam rejected the Centre’s submission that there was no unreasonable delay in deciding their mercy plea and the condemned prisoners did not go through an agonising experience as they were enjoying life behind the bars.

 

The bench, also comprising Justices Ranjan Gogoi and SK Singh, said they are unable to accept the Centre’s view and commuted the death sentence of convicts – Santhan, Murugan and Perarivalan – to imprisonment for life subject to remission by the Government.

 

It asked the Centre to give timely advice to the President so that mercy petitions can be decided without unreasonable delay.

 

“We implore the Government to render advice in reasonable time to the President,” the bench said, adding that “the executive should exercise its power one way or other in reasonable time”.

 

It said the Government should handle the cases of mercy petitions in a more systematised manner.

 

“We are confident that mercy plea can be decided at much faster speed than what is being done now,” the bench said.

 

Rajiv Gandhi was killed in May 1991. His assassins were convicted by a TADA court in January 1998 and were awarded death sentence, which was confirmed by the apex court on 11 May 1999.

 

The bench had reserved its verdict on 4th February on the petition of the three convicts for commutation of their death sentence to life imprisonment on ground of delay in deciding their mercy plea.

 

Their plea was strongly opposed by the Centre, which had said that it was not a fit case for the apex court to commute death sentence on the ground of delay in deciding mercy plea.

 

Admitting that there has been delay in deciding the mercy petitions, the Government, however, had contended that the delay was not unreasonable, unexplainable and unconscionable to commute the death penalty.

 

The convicts’ counsel had contested the Centre’s arguments, saying they have suffered due to the delay and the apex court should intervene and commute their death sentence to life term.

 

The convicts had submitted that mercy plea of other condemned prisoners, which were filed after them, were decided but their petitions were kept pending by the government.

 

The apex court had in May 2012 decided to adjudicate the petitions of Rajiv Gandhi killers against their death penalty and had directed that their plea, pending with the Madras High Court, be sent to it.

Comments
Simple Indian
1 decade ago
In my view, the very provision of mercy pleas to be decided by the President of India is a travesty of justice. When the Supreme Court, as the highest Court of the country awards the death sentence in the 'rarest of rare' cases and considers all social, psychological, and circumstantial evidence and all aspects in such cases, the verdict should be upheld in law. The only recourse for death row convicts should be a revision petition in the SC, to be decided by a 5-member SC judge panel. Letting the President decide on mercy pleas is opening the SC verdicts to political manipulations, which is undesirable and certainly not respectful of the judiciary. We have known that most Presidents dither on deciding on mercy pleas one way or the other, purely on political grounds. Even the MHA which forwards such pleas to the President, does so only for select death-row convicts, again for political considerations. With the Constitution not even providing the timeline or reasons for the President to decide on mercy pleas, this provision has been left to gross misuse & abuse, as is seen in this case, and in many such cases in the past. Even Ajmal Kasab was finally executed in secrecy, after much dithering and expenses of over Rs. 50 crores, for political reasons. Law will take its own course is just a meaningless cliche's statement parroted by our politicians and the powers-that-be.
Simple Indian
1 decade ago
In my view, the very provision of mercy pleas to be decided by the President of India is a travesty of justice. When the Supreme Court, as the highest Court of the country awards the death sentence in the 'rarest of rare' cases and considers all social, psychological, and circumstantial evidence and all aspects in such cases, the verdict should be upheld in law. The only recourse for death row convicts should be a revision petition in the SC, to be decided by a 5-member SC judge panel. Letting the President decide on mercy pleas is opening the SC verdicts to political manipulations, which is undesirable and certainly not respectful of the judiciary. We have known that most Presidents dither on deciding on mercy pleas one way or the other, purely on political grounds. Even the MHA which forwards such pleas to the President, does so only for select death-row convicts, again for political considerations. With the Constitution not even providing the timeline or reasons for the President to decide on mercy pleas, this provision has been left to gross misuse & abuse, as is seen in this case, and in many such cases in the past. Even Ajmal Kasab was finally executed in secrecy, after much dithering and expenses of over Rs. 50 crores, for political reasons. Law will take its own course is just a meaningless cliche's statement parroted by our politicians and the powers-that-be.
Vinay Joshi
1 decade ago
Hello Ms. Sucheta,

Please restrain from such type of posts.

If at all please enumerate all aspects from the time of death penalty awarded till the present SC Judgement.

MLF SHOULD RESIST FROM SUCH ASPECTS!

Regards,
Array
Free Helpline
Legal Credit
Feedback