Senior advocates slam delay in disposal of mercy petitions

August 31, 2011 12:13 pm | Updated November 29, 2021 01:11 pm IST - CHENNAI:

A REPRIEVE: A crowd celebrating the Madras High Court stay on the execution of three convicts for eight weeks in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, on the court campus on Tuesday. Photo: Special Arrangement

A REPRIEVE: A crowd celebrating the Madras High Court stay on the execution of three convicts for eight weeks in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, on the court campus on Tuesday. Photo: Special Arrangement

Senior advocates representing the three death row convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case assailed the undue delay in the disposal of their mercy petitions and contended that this rendered the death penalty imposed on them illegal and unconstitutional.

Ram Jethmalani, senior counsel, arguing for Murugan, submitted that every country in Europe was free from death penalty. However, India had not abolished capital punishment. He traced the facts starting from the assassination of the former Prime Minister on May 21, 1991 till the completion of the judicial process on May 11, 1999 (the day on which the Supreme Court delivered its verdict).

The first clemency petition was dismissed by the Governor in 10 days. His second petition was also rejected. Later, a mercy plea was sent to the President in 2000. This was followed by reminders. After 11 years and four months, the petition was rejected.

Citing various judgments, he said the delay in disposing of mercy petitions was a ground for commutation of sentence. Unless the delay was properly explained and justified, it rendered the death penalty illegal and unconstitutional. R. Vaigai, senior counsel, appearing for Santhan, submitted that delay in disposal of the mercy petition by 11 years made the execution of death sentence unconstitutional.

Colin Gonsalves, counsel for Perarivalan, said as per Article 21, no person should be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. Taking 11 years for disposing of the mercy petition was not a procedure established by law.

Anbumani, sister of Perarivalan, said she had faith in the judiciary. She was hopeful that her brother would ultimately be released from prison. The prisoner's father, Kuyilthasan, said various parties and people of different strata of society had come together for saving the three lives.

Film director Manivannan was among those present in the court complex.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.