Ready To Release Perarivalan If Centre Has Nothing To Argue, Says Supreme Court

Rajiv Gandhi Assassination Case: The Supreme Court refused to agree with the Centre’s suggestion that the court should wait till the President decides on the issue.

Supreme Court | Credit: PTI ( Image Source :PTI )

New Delhi: The Supreme Court Wednesday said the Tamil Nadu Governor was bound by the decision of the state cabinet on the release of A G Perarivalan, who has served 36 years of his life term in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case and disapproved of his action sending the mercy plea to the President saying it cannot shut eyes to something against the Constitution.

The top court refused to agree with the Centre’s suggestion that the court should wait till the President decides on the issue.

A bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao and B R Gavai told the Centre that the Governor was bound by the aid and advice given by the Tamil Nadu Council of Ministers under Article 161 of the Constitution while directing the Centre to submit its response by next week.

“It is a matter to be decided by the court, the decision of the Governor was not even needed, he is bound by the decision of the council of ministers. We will have to look into this,” the bench told the Additional Solicitor General K M Nataraj, appearing for the Centre.

Natraj submitted that the file has been referred by the Governor to the President.

 

“If the President refers it (mercy plea) back to the Governor, there is no need to discuss this issue at all… The President himself will decide if the Governor could have referred the file to him or not. Whether the reference is right or not, that call must be taken by the President first,” he said.

 

“We will pass the order to release him from jail as you are not ready to argue the case on merits…We cannot shut our eyes to something that is happening against the Constitution and will have to go by the Bible which is the Constitution. There is nobody above law. There are certain powers conferred to dignitaries, but the working of the Constitution should not come to a grinding halt,” the apex court said.

 

The top court said, “We thought it was our duty to interpret the law and not the President… The question of whether the Governor was right in referring the State Cabinet’s wish to the President, instead of exercising his duty under Article 161, has to be decided by the court.

 

The apex court also negated the submission of the ASG that the file of the mercy plea recently came to them and said there had been ample time for the Centre to return the mercy plea file to the Governor.

 

“The Governor decided to send the file to the President on January 27, 2021… It is May 5, 2022 today… And you are saying it came to you only ‘recently’? This is a matter concerning personal liberty,” the bench said.

 

On March 9, the top court had granted bail to Perarivalan while taking note of his long incarceration of over 35 years and no history of complaints when out on parole.

 

It had said the pleas have to be heard finally because of the stand taken by the Centre that the state government does not have the power to entertain the mercy petition under Article 161 (power of the governor to grant remission) of the Constitution since the convict has already taken the benefit of remission earlier when his death penalty was commuted to life imprisonment.