Pendency Of Co-Convicts' Appeals Irrelevant; Supreme Court Directs Centre To Decide Balwant Singh Rajoana's Mercy Petition Within 2 Months

The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Central Government to decide the mercy plea of death row convict Balwant Singh Rajoana within 2 months, without being influenced by the fact that the appeals filed by other convicts in the Chief Minister Beant Singh assassination case are pending.

On March 24, the Court, taking a serious note of the delay in the processing of the mercy petition filed before the President in 2013, had directed the Ministry of Home Affairs to place an action taken report by April 30, failing which the Home Secretary and the Director (Prosecution) of the CBI were directed to be personally present before the Court on May 2.

In the affidavit filed on April 30, the MHA took two preliminary objections :

• the mercy petition cannot be considered as it has been filed by another organization and not the convict himself.
• the mercy petition cannot be decided until the appeals filed by other convicts in the case before the Supreme Court are not disposed (Rajoana has not challenged his conviction or sentence, either before the High Court or the Supreme Court).

Today, a bench comprising Justices UU Lalit, S Ravindra Bhat and PS Narasimha rejected the stand taken by the Ministry of Home Affairs. The bench noted that though another organization has filed the mercy petition, the authorities have on many occasions sent official communications to Rajoana that the matter is under consideration. Also, the convict himself has filed the present writ petition under Article 32. Hence, the bench observed that the fact that another organization has filed the mercy petition is not an obstruction to the consideration of the matter.

The bench further noted that way back in 2020, on 04.12.2020, the Court had observed that the pendency of the appeals of other convicts is not a relevant consideration.

"In the light of the order dated 04.12.2020, the matter could be and had to be considered despite the pendency of appeals by co-accused", the bench observed today.

The bench further directed :

• In terms with directions issued by this Court on 04.12.2020, the matter be considered by the concerned authority without being influenced by the fact that appeals by co-accused is pending consideration.
• Let the decision be taken as early as possible, preferably within 2 months from today.

The matter will be heard next in the second week of July.

Rajoana filed the writ petition in 2020 saying that the Central Government had in 2019 announced its decision to commute his death penalty and grant remission to 8 other convicts to mark the occasion of the 550th birth anniversary of Guru Nanak. He sought for the implementation of that decision. He also sought an alternate prayer to commute his death sentence on the ground of long delay in considering the mercy petition.

Court room exchange

Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, appearing for the Union Government, disputed that petitioner's submission that in 2019 a final decision was taken to commute his death sentence. The ASG said that the communication was to the effect that it has been decided that the proposal for commotion of death sentence is to be processed under Article 72.

But the bench pointed out that the communication had directed the State to grant remission to other convicts. The ASG said that the States decided exercising their independent power under Article 161.

"Show us the orders which shows states have decided independent of this communication... either this was communication was made without rational application or it was an empty exercise. Has it to be taken as a populist announcement with no follow up action?", Justice Lalit asked.

The ASG said that as per his instructions, only 4 out of the other 8 persons were given remission. He also submitted that the petitioner cannot take shelter under a petition filed by another organization.

The bench asked has this fact been told to the petitioner officially. The bench also pointed out that the petitioner is relying on communications from the authorities pursuant to the mercy petition stating that the matter is under consideration.

"In any case, he has filed this writ petition under Article 32 and we can take it that he has endorsed the mercy petition", Justice Lalit observed.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that he has been in jail for over 26 years and in death row since 2007.

"Mercy petitions filed by several organizations on my behalf, and when I enquired from government what has happened, I have been informed by govt time and again that those mercy petitions are under consideration and that I will be informed", Rohatgi submitted.

"This court has also held that the non-consideration of mercy petition is a ground to commute death penalty. I am agitating that prayer too...I don't want to wait for the President...your lordships can decide", Rohatgi urged.

"We will certainly consider your prayer that delay will entitle you for commutation from this court. But before that we will put the ball once again to them...", Justice Lalit said.

The ASG submitted that Rajoana had given a statement to the trial court that he had no faith in the Indian judiciary and the Constitution.

"The stand taken by the petitioner is that he has no faith in the Indian judiciary and Constitution.  These are all part of record", the ASG said.

"These are all our citizens, we have to consider their rights... somebody may somethings in indignation...these things may be irrelevant", Justice Lalit said.

The bench also turned down a plea made by an intervenor, the approver in the case, to oppose the mercy petition.

"In mercy petitions, that is not the rule, it can't be converted into an inter-party hearing", Justice Lalit said.

Case Title: Balwant Singh v Union of India and Ors| WP(Crl) 261/2020

Click Here To Read/Download Order