Live
- Six Useful Strategies to Control Your Heart During the Pollution Season
- Phalodi Satta Bazar Predicts Close Race in Maharashtra Assembly Election 2024
- Federer Pays Heartfelt Tribute to Nadal Ahead of His Retirement: "An Epic Career"
- Odisha holds successful mega investors roadshow in Singapore
- PGTI Tour: Top stars to fight for honours in Servo Masters Golf
- SC upholds termination of LIC employee for absenting himself without intimation
- ‘Stone me or shoot me, won’t spare anyone,’ says Anil Deshmukh after discharge
- Siddaramaiah, Shivakumar turning Karnataka into Pakistan: K’taka BJP
- Zimbabwe records 70 suspected cholera cases, one death amid new outbreak
- Babri demolition day: No Assembly proceedings in Bengal on Dec 6
Rajiv killers to stay in jail till Govt consent for release
Highlights
The Supreme Court is likely to pronounce on Wednesday its verdict on constitutional issues arising from Tamil Nadu government\'s decision to set free the convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, including the power of states to remit sentences.
.jpg)
The Supreme Court is likely to pronounce on Wednesday its verdict on constitutional issues arising from Tamil Nadu government's decision to set free the convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, including the power of states to remit sentences.
A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice HL Dattu, who would be demittimg office on Wednesday, would authoritatively deal with questions raised by the smaller bench while staying the state government's decision to set free seven convicts in the sensational case.
The bench, also comprising justices FMI Kalifulla, Pinaki Chandra Ghosh, Abhay Manohar Sapre and UU Lalit, had reserved the judgement on August 12 after hearing for eleven days the arguments advanced by Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar, who appeared for the Centre, and others including senior advocates Ram Jethmalani and Rakesh Dwivedi, representing V Sriharan alias Murugan, one of the seven convicts, and Tamil Nadu government respectively. The court would be dealing with seven issues framed by the smaller bench on the scope of the Executive's power of remission.
It would decide whether state governments also have power of remission in cases where central agencies like CBI are the prosecutor.
"The issue of such a nature has been raised for the first time in this court which has wide ramification in determining the scope of application of power of remission by the Executives, both the Centre and the State.
"Accordingly, we refer this matter to the Constitution Bench to decide the issue pertaining to whether once power of remission under Article 72 (by the President) or 161 (by Governor) or by this Court exercising Constitutional power under Article 32 is exercised, is there any scope for further consideration for remission by the Executive," the apex court had said while referring the matter to the Constitution bench.
It had said the Constitution bench would decide whether the sentence of a prisoner, whose death penalty has been commuted to life, can be remitted by the government. The bench would also decide whether life imprisonment meant jail term for rest of the life or a convict has a right to claim remission, it had said.
Another issue for the constitution bench to decide is whether a special category of sentence could be provided for cases where death penalty might be substituted by imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term in excess of 14 years and to put that category beyond application of remission.
The bench will also decide whether the Union or the State has primacy over the subject matter enlisted in concurrent list of 7th Schedule of the Constitution for exercise of power of remission.
During the hearing, Centre had said that repeated mercy pleas before the President and the Governor by convicts seeking remission or commutation of their sentences violated the principle of finality. It had also asserted that the killers of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi did nor deserve any mercy as the assassination was the result of a conspiracy involving foreign nationals.
The Tamil Nadu government, on other had, had asserted the states have power to grant remission under the law and trashed accusations that its decision to release seven convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case was "political and arbitrary".
The state government had wanted to know as to why Congress governments at the centre delayed the decision on their mercy pleas that led to commutation of their death sentence in the first place.
Jethmalani, appearing for one of the convicts, had sought dismissal of Centre's plea, contending that the citizens could file writ petitions for enforcement of their fundamental rights and "Union of India is not a citizen but State under Article 12; it has no such rights vested in it". The apex court had on February 20 last year stayed the state government's decision to release three convicts - Murugan, Santhan and Arivu, whose death sentence had been commuted to life term by it two days before.
It had later also stayed the release of four other convicts -- Nalini, Robert Pious, Jayakumar and Ravichandran, saying there were procedural lapses on part of the state government.
Santhan, Murugan and Arivu are currently lodged in the Central Prison, Vellore. The other four are also undergoing life sentence for their role in Gandhi's assassination on May 21, 1991 in Sriperumbudur, Tamil Nadu.
Next Story
ADVERTISEMENT
