The Madras High Court has indicated that it is not inclined to hear the bail application of the Rajiv Gandhi Assassination case convict, S. Nalini, at the current stage.The first bench was hearing a writ petition filed by S.Nalini, convicted for murdering the former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi to declare the unconstitutionality in the failure of the governor to act in accordance with the...
The Madras High Court has indicated that it is not inclined to hear the bail application of the Rajiv Gandhi Assassination case convict, S. Nalini, at the current stage.
The first bench was hearing a writ petition filed by S.Nalini, convicted for murdering the former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi to declare the unconstitutionality in the failure of the governor to act in accordance with the advice of the council of ministers, who recommended the release from prison. The petition also sought direction to the state to release the petitioner from prison immediately without the approval of the Governor of Tamil Nadu.
While hearing the petition, when the bail application was bought up, the bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy had asked under what provision the convicted had sought bail.
"Supreme Court is Supreme. We are not. You should have approached the Supreme Court with the same relief, it would have granted it. We cannot grant it".
The court was not in favour of considering the bail application at this stage when the mercy petition was pending.
"First convince us that bail application is maintainable. Then we'll consider the bail application", the court further stated.
The court added that the main petition seeking the premature release of the petition without approval from the Governor could be heard day after tomorrow.
The petitioner's case was that she was convicted and sentenced to death for the assassination of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi by the trial court. On appeal, she was convicted and sentenced to death under Section 120B read with Section 302 of IPC. Subsequently, her death sentence was commuted to imprisonment for life.
The petitioner further states that even though she became eligible for premature release way back in 2001 itself, she has still not been released. She states that he repeated representations were not considered by the respondents.
Later on 09.09.2018, the Council of Ministers of Tamil Nadu had advised the Governor under Article 161 of the Constitution to release the petitioner.
However, the Governor has still not acted upon this advice even though he is bound by the advice of the State Government as held by the Supreme Court in Maru Ram v. Union of India AIR 1980 SC 2147.
Thus, the present petition is filed seeking to declare that the failure of the governor to act in accordance with the advice of the council of ministers recommending the release of petitioner from prison is unconstitutional and to direct the state to release the petitioner from prison immediately without the approval of Governor of Tamil Nadu.
The court told Mr M Radhakrishnan, counsel appearing for the petitioner that it shall hear the main matter on Thursday.
Case Title: S. Nalini v. The State of Tamil Nadu and Anr
Case No: WP 27936 of 2020 and WP(MD) 16658 of 2020