The Hindu: Chennai: Saturday,
June 01, 2013.
A.G.
Perarivalan, one of the three convicts on death row in the Rajiv Gandhi
assassination case, has written to the Central Information Commission (CIC)
seeking to know why his mercy petition was rejected while the death penalty of
Nalini Sriharan, first accused in the case, was commuted to life imprisonment.
In a written
submission sent to the CIC from Vellore Central Prison, Perarivalan said that
going by the case of the prosecution, Nalini was arrayed as the first accused
and was present at the place of occurrence (when the bomb blast took place in
Sriperumbudur in May 1991). The death penalty awarded to her was commuted to
life sentence.
“On the other
hand, being the 18 accused in the case, my mercy petition has been rejected
without assigning any reason. It is well settled law that the death penalty
shall be inflicted only in ‘rarest of rare cases’. In other words, those
awarded death penalty are considered to fall under one category. In such case,
I want to know whether the fact of commutation of the sentence of the first
accused [Nalini] was considered before disposing my mercy petition and if it
was considered, I would like to know the basis for treating me on a different
platform,” he asked.
Perarivalan
had a 30-minute video conference with Central Information Commissioner Sushma
Singh and Joint Secretary (Judicial), Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), J.L.
Chugh on May 9, 2013. He was advised by the CIC to make a written submission of
his prayer.
Pointing out
that he was in prison since June 12, 1999 as a death row convict, Perarivalan
said his mercy plea was rejected by the President. “However, I have been placed
in complete darkness with regard to the reasons behind the rejection of my
clemency petition...it is a duty cast upon every public authority under Section
4(1) (d) of the RTI Act to proactively communicate the reasons for any
administrative or quasi-judicial decisions to the affected party.”
He said
neither the MHA nor the President’s Secretariat provided him with the reasons
for the rejection of his mercy plea. Since his execution was temporarily stayed
and that he was at the verge of being hanged, the convict emphasised that the
information sought by him directly pertained to his life and liberty.
Referring to
a statement made by Justice K.T. Thomas, who headed the three-member Bench of
the Supreme Court that awarded the death penalty, Perarivalan said the former
judge had said the judgment had “errors” and that the antecedents, nature and
character of the persons involved in the case were not considered and hence any
decision to hang them could be termed constitutionally incorrect.
By law, the
advice of the Council of Ministers to the President on the clemency issue could
not be inquired into by any court. But that does not mean that the citizens or
the affected person would not have the right know the reasons for the rejection
of the mercy plea.
Perarivalan
appealed to the CIC to furnish the copies of all documents that were considered
for taking a decision on his mercy petition.
.JPG)
.JPG)
