Slideback on mercy for Rajiv Gandhi’s killers: Retd Judge

Many cases hold that consultation does not mean consent. So, a possibility exists, of the state government even after getting the CBI’s opinion deciding the matter on its own, as the power to release convicts undergoing sentence is vested solely with the state government. Whatever be the outcome of consultation and the resulting decision, what is clear is that this case has undergone twists and turns in the country’s criminal justice system.

Never in the country’s history has a state legislature passed resolutions seeking clemency for accused facing sentence in the case relating to murder of a former PM. Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi was killed at Sriperumbudur on May 21, 1991.The accused Santhan, Murugan and Perarivalan are in jail for the last 24 years facing cases regarding their release. They were tried before a special court under the TADA (Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act. The court sentenced 26 accused to death in January 1998. 

Deciding on an appeal, a Supreme Court bench annulled death sentence for 22 persons and confirmed it for 4 others, who applied for mercy. After rejection of the four mercy petitions by the Governor, and the commutation of Nalini’s (another accused) death sentence, the death row convicts filed a mercy petition with the President.

Two successive Presidents did not deal with the mercy petitions. After 11 years, a third President rejected their request so they approached the courts again. The SC converted death penalty to life sentence.

Countering it, the central government filed an application to review the earlier judgment granting reduction of sentence to them. This was dismissed and reduced sentence was confirmed. When the state government tried to exercise its power under Section 435 Cr.P.C (and release them), the Centre moved the Supreme Court, which referred the matter to a five judge bench.

The apex court’s decision that TN had no power to release the convicts on its own and that it had to consult the central government as the case was investigated by CBI only restates what’s found in section 435 Cr.P.C. It cannot be a set back to the case of the three undergoing life sentence. It is a unique case where the Centre has filed a case against the state government in the Supreme Court before taking a decision.