Supreme Court ruling on A G Perarivalan release

The Supreme Court on May 18 ordered the release of A G Perarivalan, one of the seven convicts in the former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, exercising its special powers under Article 142 of the Constitution.

Key highlights

  • A bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao, BR Gavai and AS Bopanna exercised its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to order Perarivalan’s release after noting that there was considerable delay by the Governor of Tamil Nadu in deciding the convict’s plea for remission under Article 161.
  • A G Perarivalan was only 19 when he was arrested on June 11, 1991. He was accused of having bought two 9-volt ‘Golden Power’ battery cells for Sivarasan, the LTTE man who masterminded the conspiracy to assassinate Rajiv Gandhi.
  • The batteries were used in the bomb that killed the former Prime Minister. Rajiv Gandhi was assassinated at a rally in Sriperumbudur, Tamil Nadu, on 21 May, 1991, in a suicide bombing.
  • Only 19 years old at the time, Perarivalan was arrested on 11 June, 1991. On 28 January, 1998, 26 people, including Perarivalan and fellow accused Nalini, were sentenced to death.
  • The Supreme Court upheld the death sentence of four people — Murugan, Santhan, Perarivalan, and Nalini — on 11 May, 1999.
  • Perarivalan was sentenced to death for the crime, but in February 2014 the top court commuted it to life.
  • Perarivalan took steps to secure his release in December 2015 when he moved his clemency petition before the Governor.
  • His plea for remission of his sentence stayed pending even thought the Tamil Nadu State Government had recommended the same in 2018.
  • The Supreme court on May 18 held that the Tamil Nadu Council of Ministers’ advice on September 9, 2018 to pardon Perarivalan was binding on the Governor under Article 161 (Governor’s power of clemency) of the Constitution.
  • The court dismissed the Centre’s argument that the President exclusively, and not the Governor, had the power to grant pardon in a case under Section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code.

Maru Ram v Union of India

  • In Maru Ram v Union of India, the Supreme Court had held that in the matter of exercise of the powers under Articles 72 and 161, the President and the Governor respectively must act not on their own judgment but in accordance with the aid and advice of the ministers.
  • The law laid down by it in said judgment makes it clear that the advice of the State Cabinet is binding on the Governor, unless the Governor has been expressly authorised, by or under a constitutional provision, to discharge the function concerned, in his own discretion.

(Compiled from different sources)

GS TIMES UPSC PRELIMS & MAINS CURRENT AFFAIRS BASED BASICS  DAILY ONLINE TEST CLICK HERE

CLICK HERE DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS QUIZ FOR STATE CIVIL SERVICES

Written by 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *