Decide or we will consider it: SC to Centre on Beant assassination convict Rajoana's mercy plea
New Delhi, Nov 4: The Supreme Court on Monday said it would consider the mercy petition of death row convict Balwant Singh Rajoana in the 1995 assassination case of then Punjab chief minister Beant Singh, if the Centre does not decide on it "either way".
Refusing to give any interim relief to Rajoana without hearing the Centre and the Punjab government on the issue, a bench of Justices B R Gavai, P K Mishra and K V Viswanathan adjourned for two weeks the former Punjab Police constable's plea seeking commutation of his death sentence to life term due to an "inordinate delay" in deciding his mercy petition.
"Decide it either way or we will consider it (Rajoana's plea)," the bench told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, after he informed the court that Rajoana's mercy plea was pending with the president's house.
Rajoana has been in custody for 29 years, said his counsel Mukul Rohatgi, while seeking his release till the mercy petition is decided.
"His mercy petition has been pending with the president's house for the past 12 years. Please release him for six or three months. At least let him see what the outside world looks like," Rohatgi submitted.
The bench was informed by the Punjab government represented by advocate Nupur Kumar that they need some time to file their counter affidavit in the case.
Mehta also submitted that Rajoana was convicted for assassinating the sitting chief minister of Punjab and he needs to seek instructions on the issue.
The bench, which refused to pass any interim orders, told Rohatgi, "We will give them two weeks time to file their counter-affidavit. We need to see their response."
On September 25, the top court had sought responses from the Centre, the Punjab government and the administration of the Union territory of Chandigarh on Rajoana's plea.
The then Punjab chief minister and 16 others were killed in a blast at the entrance of the civil secretariat in Chandigarh on August 31, 1995.
A special court sentenced Rajoana to death in July 2007.
Rajoana has said that a mercy petition under Article 72 of the Constitution was moved by the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC) on his behalf in March 2012.
On May 3 last year, the apex court had refused to commute his death sentence and said the competent authority could deal with his mercy plea.
In his fresh plea filed in the top court, Rajoana has said he has undergone a total sentence of about 28 years and eight months, of which he served 17 years as a death row convict. It has been over a year since the top court directed the competent authority to decide on his mercy petition, he said.
The plea referred to an April 2023 order of the top court in a separate matter in which it directed all states and appropriate authorities to decide the pending mercy petitions at the earliest and without any inordinate delay.
"Despite the above directions, the mercy petition of the petitioner herein has been kept pending," the plea stated.
"It is submitted that this extraordinary and inordinate delay in deciding his mercy petition, for reasons beyond the petitioner's control and not attributable to him, is an infringement of his right to life guaranteed under Article 21," it said.
According to the plea, the issue of keeping mercy petitions pending for long and the incarceration of the convict has come up for consideration before the apex court in numerous cases.
In one of the cases, the plea said, the top court had directed to commute the death sentence to life imprisonment taking into consideration the delay of over five years in the disposal of mercy petition.
"It is respectfully submitted that an inordinate delay in decision of a death row convict's mercy petition (as in the present case) has consistently been recognised by this court as a valid enough ground for commutation of his death sentence," it said.
"The petitioner, a death row convict, has been awaiting a decision on his mercy petition for an inordinately prolonged period, being subjected to unimaginable mental agony on account of uncertainty over the fate of his life for an inordinate and unreasonably prolonged period, which is an assault on his right to life recognised under Article 21," the plea said.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Sujit Nair raises concerns over speculation of DMK-AIADMK understanding to block TVK
Chennai: Journalist and political commentator Sujit Nair has expressed concern over speculation that the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam could explore a post-poll understanding to prevent Vijay-led Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam from forming the government in Tamil Nadu.
In a social media post, Sujit Nair said the election verdict in Tamil Nadu reflected a clear public demand for political change and argued that the mandate should be respected irrespective of political preferences.
Referring to reports and political discussions surrounding a possible understanding between the DMK and AIADMK, he said he hoped such developments remained only speculative conversations and did not turn into reality.
Nair stated that if such an alliance were to take shape, it would raise serious questions about ideological politics in the country. He said TVK had emerged through a democratic electoral process and that the legitimacy to govern in a parliamentary democracy comes from the people’s verdict.
According to him, attempts to prevent an electoral winner from forming the government through unexpected political arrangements may be constitutionally valid, but many people could view them as politically opportunistic.
He further said that such a move could particularly affect the political image of the DMK, which has historically projected itself around ideology, social justice and opposition politics. Nair said that in ideological terms, the DMK appeared closer to TVK than to the AIADMK, and joining hands with its long-time political rival only to remain in power could weaken its broader political narrative.
He added that the same questions would apply to the AIADMK as well, as the party had spent decades positioning itself against the DMK and such an arrangement could create discomfort among its cadre and supporters.
Drawing a comparison with Maharashtra politics in 2019, Nair said he had expressed similar views when the Shiv Sena formed an alliance with the Indian National Congress and the Nationalist Congress Party after the Assembly elections.
He said post-poll alliances between long-standing political rivals often create a public perception that ideology and electoral mandates become secondary when political power equations come into play.
Nair also said such developments increase public cynicism towards politics and reinforce the belief among voters that ideology is often sidelined after elections.
He maintained that the Tamil Nadu verdict was emphatic and said respecting both the spirit and substance of the mandate was important for the credibility of democratic politics.
