The Tamil Nadu Cabinet, during the pendency of the petition, in September 2018, recommended the release of the seven convicts including Perarivalan for their involvement in the 1991 assassination.
Citing inaction on part of the Governor, in deciding on his clemency plea moved Article 161 of the Constitution, Perarivalan came to Supreme Court looking for necessary directions.
The Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for the Governor before the bench which constituted of Justice L. Nagswara Rao, Justice S. Abdul Nazeer, and Justice Indu Malhotra. Though the Governor is not a party in Perarivalan’s petition, the court wished to know his stand.
The court has been informed that the decision will be taken ‘as per the Constitution’ within a span of time of three to four weeks.
The matter, therefore, was adjourned for four weeks.
The court order stated,
“The learned Solicitor General submitted that the application filed by the petitioner under Article 161 of the Constitution of India shall be considered within four weeks from today.”
Perarivalan was among seven persons convicted by a Special TADA court for being part of the conspiracy to assassinate former PM Rajiv Gandhi on May 21, 1991. In November 2020, during the arguments on Perarivalan’s petition, the Centre took a legal objection to the Governor having the power to decide on the mercy plea. Additional Solicitor General (ASG) KM Nataraj who represented the Centre argued that the entire issue of granting remission in such a case lies with the President under Article 72 and not the Governor under Article 161.
As critical as the court has been of mercy petitions in the past, in this case, Perarivalan has spent almost three decades in jail.
Article 161 gives the Governor the “power to grant pardons, reprieves, respites or remissions of punishment or to suspend, remit or commute the sentence of any person convicted of any offence against any law relating to a matter to which the executive power of the state extends”.
Senior Advocate, Gopal Shankarnaraynan is representing Perarivalan in the court. he objected to the Centre taking this objection for the first time in these proceedings. He pointed out that in September 2018, the state Cabinet had already decided on the petitioner’s release. If this submission of Centre was accepted, Shankarnaraynan wondered what would happen to the pardon powers exercised by Governors over the past 70 years.
Perarivalan in his petition told the Court that after filing his mercy petition, the investigating officer in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case made a disclosure that he made a mistake by excluding the exculpatory parts of the statement given by Perarivalan during the recording of his evidence. Perarivalan has maintained throughout that he had no knowledge of the plot while supplying the battery that would go on to power the belt bomb used by the suicide bomber.
Tamil Nadu’s Additional Advocate General Balaji Srinivasan informed the apex court on November 3 last year that the Governor had sought a report from the Union Home Ministry under which a multi-disciplinary probe is underway on the larger conspiracy behind the former PM’s assassination.
In Tamil Nadu, both the rulings AIADMK and the Opposition DMK have previously spoken in support of the convict’s release.
The DMK President earlier urged the Governor to release the convicts on Humanitarian Grounds.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgement from the court. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can also contribute blog, articles, story tip, judgment and many more and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.