Supreme Court To Hear Death Row Convict Balwant Singh's Plea To Decide Mercy Petition Next Week
Gursimran Kaur Bakshi
18 Nov 2024 11:30 AM IST
Update - The report was updated after the Supreme Court agreed to not upload the order which was dictated, following a request made by the Solicitor General at 1 PM. The report was prepared on the basis of the oral dictation. At 1 PM, the Court agreed to not upload the order and posted the matter to hear the Union on November 25.
The Supreme Court today (November 18) directed the Secretary, President of India, to place the mercy petition filed by Balwant Singh Rajoana, 57 years, Babbar Khalsa terrorist and a death row convict, before the President with a request that it be considered within 2 weeks.
The Court added that if the mercy petition is not considered within the time stipulated, the Court will consider the petition for granting interim relief.
A special bench of Justices B.R. Gavai, Prashant Kumar Mishra and K.V. Viswanathan heard a petition filed by Rajoana under Article 32 seeking commutation of the death sentence on the grounds of 'extraordinary' and 'inordinate delay' in deciding his mercy petition.
Singh, a police officer in Punjab, was convicted on July 27, 2007 by a special Central Bureau of Investigation Court, under Sections 120-B, 302, 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3(b), 4(b) and 5(b) r/w 6 of the Explosives Substances Act, 1908 for an incident involving a deadly suicide bombing at the Chandigarh secretariat complex on August 31, 1995, wherein the then Chief Minister of Punjab, Beant Singh along with 16 others, lost their lives.
On September 27, the bench had issued notice on this petition. It came up for hearing on November 4 but the Union sought some time to take instructions in regards to how much time the President of India will decide the mercy petition.
Today, at the outset, when the Court was apprised that there was no response from the Union of India, Justices Gavai and Viswanathan expressed their dismay and stated that the special bench was constituted for this purpose only and the Court had deferred hearing the matter on the last occasion only because Union sought some time.
Justice Viswanathan orally remarked: "[The Union] has taken [the matter] so casually."
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi (for Rajaona) submitted that there has been no reply from the Union. The counsel for the State of Punjab responded that the Union has to respond in this case. He added, "we have no role to play. We are State of Punjab. The mercy petition is with the President."
On this, Justice Gavai said: "The Solicitor had to appear in this matter. On the last date, we were told..."
Considering the absence of the Union, Rohatgi suggested: "If the State has no objection, let's proceed further. Because the communication was addressed to them many years ago...They have not responded. 28/29 years have gone by. Persons who are in the same batch, who were convicted for death in Bulhar's case, was converted to life by a curative petition on the grounds of unexplained delay for 8 years. My mercy petition by Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee is from 2012. We are in 2024. This man his not seen the light of the day outside jail."
He added: "With due respect to the judgment of this Court, in our case, I don't expect the death of the current prisoner to say that I have not moved the mercy petition. There is no difference...Somebody can move it on my behalf or it could be suo moto. We have the example of the same batch where this Court has converted death into life [imprisonment].The Government says this is not the time to decide. When will you decide? When his life is over? This is not a case of national security...He's only one left on death row,"
Specifically on Rohatgi's arguments on national security, Counsel for Punjab responded: "An affidavit was filed by the Union, wherein a national threat was stated in the affidavit that there is national threat on release of this person."
Justice Gavai first questioned why the State of Punjab says it has no role in this case. To this, the Counsel responded that the notice was issued to them because the petitioner is in one of the jails in Punjab. He added that the offence took place in Punjab but the trial and conviction took place in Chandigarh. That's why, Chandigarh is also a party.
The bench stated that the special bench was constituted only for this matter but refused to grant any interim relief as sought by Rohatgi.
The Court ordered: "The bench has been specifically assembled only for this matter. On the last date, the matter was adjourned so as to enable the Union of India to take instruction from the office of the hon'ble President of India as to within how much period the mercy petition of the petitioner would be decided. We therefore direct, Secretary, the President of India to place the matter before the hon'ble President within a request to consider the same within 2 weeks from today. We clarify that in the event no decision is taken on the next date, we will consider the prayers made by the petitioner for interim relief."
Background
Out of 15 accused persons named in the FIR, Balwant Singh Rajoana along with 08 others, were put to trial and convicted for the aforesaid offences. In contrast, others were sentenced to life imprisonment. Along with Rajoana, co-accused Jagtar Singh Hawara, who was reportedly the mastermind behind the operation, was also sentenced to death
At the same time, co-accused Shamsher Singh, Gurmeet Singh, and Lakhwinder Singh were awarded life imprisonment. The verdict was delivered inside the high-security Burail jail in Chandigarh. In total, 15 were convicted.
The assailant was one Dilawar Singh, a police officer, who along with two other officials of the Punjab police, namely, Rajoana and one Lakhwinder Singh, had, allegedly in response to Operation Bluestar and the anti-Sikh pogrom in Delhi in 1984, was tasked with executing the Congress leader, known for his robust counterterrorism policies. Rajoana, a police constable, was not only responsible for ensuring that Singh reached the chief minister after crossing the security ring in the complex but was also equipped with a backup explosive device in case the first plan failed. Separatist group Babbar Khalsa International, whose primary goal is to establish a sovereign homeland called Khalistan for people of their faith, took responsibility for the assassination.
The Punjab & Haryana Court confirmed Rajoana's conviction on October 12, 2010. However, while confirming the conviction of a co-accused Jagtar Singh Hawara, the High Court commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment.
Singh did not file an appeal against the High Court's order. He counsel and refused to defend himself against the charges levelled by the State, in a display of open derision of the Indian judicial system. Thereafter, on March 5, 2012, a death warrant for executing his sentence was issued. However, on March 25, the same year, the Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee ('SGPC') preferred a mercy petition under Article 72 of the Constitution of India seeking clemency on Singh's behalf.
Subsequently, the mercy petition was processed for consideration in the Home Ministry, and a stay against its execution was intimated to the state authorities on March 28, 2012.
The petitioner claimed that the Union government had announced in 2019 that it would commute Rajoana's death sentence to life imprisonment, besides sanctioning the premature release of eight Sikh prisoners serving life and other sentences as a humanitarian gesture to mark the 550th birth anniversary of Guru Nanak Dev. However, the Union Home Minister Amit Shah later informed the Lok Sabha that Rajoana had not been freed from death row.
In 2020, Singh filed a writ petition seeking the commutation of the death penalty. On March 24, 2022, a bench of Justices UU Lalit, SR Bhat and PS Narasimha directed the Central Government to take a call by April 30, 2022 with respect to the mercy petition. In May, the same year, the bench directed that the mercy petition be decided within 2 months irrespective of the appeals pending before the Court.
The Home Ministry had filed an affidavit stating that the mercy petition could not be considered as it had been filed by another organization and not the convict himself. It was also stated 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).
Rohatgi before the Court firmly contested the State's claim that Rajoana's sentence had not been commuted yet because of 'security concerns' and the pendency of an appeal filed by a co-accused. He argued: “To keep a prisoner on death row for so long violates their fundamental rights according to judgements of this court and is a ground for their sentence to be commuted. Rajoana is entitled to be released from death row forthwith. The moment he gets his commutation order, he can apply to be released since he has already spent 27 years behind bars. It is inhuman. Alternatively, if you wish to wait for the government's response to the mercy appeals, then at the very least, grant the petitioner parole. He wants to go to his village, and he will stay there.”
On May 3, 2023, the Supreme Court bench of Justices BR Gavai, Vikram Nath, and Sanjay Karol declined to commute the death penalty but directed that the mercy petition be decided by a competent authority in due course of time. However, the President has yet to decide on the mercy petition.
Case Details: Balwant Singh v. UOI & Ors, W.P.(Crl.) No. 414/2024
Appearances: Senior Advocate Mukul Rohagti (for Balwant Singh)
