SC: Harsh law repeal basis for clemency?
Amidst the sharpening of the politics on the execution of former Punjab chief minister Beant Singh’s
assassin Balwant Singh Rajoana, the Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the government whether
repealing of harsh laws Tada and Pota could be a ground for considering the mercy petitions of death
row convicts given capital punishment under these laws.
“Tada was considered a harsh law by Parliament and repealed. Then Pota, considered to be less harsh, was passed but it was also repealed. Several mercy petitions are pending while the whole circumstances on these legal factors changed,” a bench of Justices G.S. Singhvi and S.J. Mukhopadhaya said, asking the government why it had not taken any action on the mercy petition of Punjab militant Devinder Pal Singh Bhullar since 2005 till he moved the Supreme Court in May 2011.
The court wanted to know from Additional Solicitor-General Harin Raval whether the repeal of Tada by Parliament under which Bhullar was convicted should make a case for considering his mercy petition as per the changed legal factors after Parliament had considered the law as harsh.
“There is no denying the fact that the government is seriously dealing with terrorism. No government can afford to be soft on it. But why was the file (of Bhullar’s mercy petition) not put up since 2005?” the bench asked, reminding that Tada was repealed long back.
The top court poser came after perusing the report of the home ministry to the President recommending the execution of Bhullar. The bench expressed surprise why the ministry had
become hyperactive only after Bhullar filed a petition in the top court on May 3, 2011 highlighting his agonised existence in the condemned cell.
“There is no reference in the (MHA) report whether any report was called from the jail authorities that his mental condition was not good. We are saying not good but he had said that it had deteriorated. In all these years he was in the gallows in his dreams every day.
And his family knew that he was physically before them but did not know when he will go,” the top court said while pointing towards the “agonising” existence of the death row convicts in the condemned cell.
Post new comment