LexDEVENDER PAL SINGH BHULLAR versus STATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c [2013] 6 S.C.R. 676 DEVENDER PAL SINGH BHULLAR v. STATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI (Writ Petition (Criminal) D. No. 16039 of 2011) APRIL 12, 2013 [G.S. SINGHVI AND SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, JJ.] Constitution of India, 1950: Articles 72 and 161 - Petition under- For grant of pardon - Delay is disposal of - Whether sufficient ground for commuting the death sentence to life imprisonment by judicial forum - Held: The Court cannot exercise power of judicial 0 review only on the ground of undue delay - the rule that long delay may be the ground for commutation of death sentence, cannot be invoked in the case where conviction is under TADA - In the present case, the petitioner having been convicted under TADA, the decision taken by the President not to grant pardon, cannot be quashed by taking resort to E judicial review - Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987. Articles 72 and 161 - Power under - Nature of - Held: The power is neither a matter of grace nor a matter of privilege F - It is an important constitutional responsibility to be discharged by the highest executive, keeping in consideration larger public interest and welfare of the people - The power has to be exercised by taking into cognizance, the relevant G H facts after taking aid and advice of the Council of Minister. Articles 72 and 161 - Decision under - Judicial review of - Scope of - Held: The scope of judicial review of the decision passed u/Arts. 721161 is very limited - The Court in such cases can neither sit in appeal nor exercise the power 676 ' DEVENDER PAL SINGH BHULLAR v. STATE OF 677 N.C.T. OF DELHI of review - It can interfere only where it finds that the decision A is taken without application of mind to the relevant factors, or the decision is founded on the extraneous or irrelevant considerations, or is vitiated due to malafides or patent arbitrariness - In the facts of the present case, there is no valid ground to interfere with the decision of the President not to B grant pardon u!Art. 72 - Judicial Review. Art. 72 - Petition under - Delay in disposal - About 18 petitions filed between the years 1999 and 2011 remained pending for a period ranging from 1 year to 13 years - Courts C showed its concern with the hope that such petitions would be disposed of in future without undue delay. The questions for consideration in the present petitions were: (a) What is the nature of power vested in the President under Article 72 and the Governor under Article 161 of the Constitution? (b) Whether delay in deciding a petition filed under Articles 72 or 161 of the Constitution is, by itself, sufficient for issue of a judicial fiat for commutation of the sentence of death into life imprisonment irrespective of the nature and magnitude of the crime committed by the convict and the fact that the delay may have been occasioned due to direct or indirect pressure brought upon the Government by the convict through individuals, groups of people and organizations from within or outside the country or failure of the concerned public authorities to perform their duty? D E F (c) Whether the parameters laid down by the G Constitution Bench in Triveniben vs. State of Gujarat 1989 (1) SCR 509 for judging the issue of delay in the disposal of a petition filed under Articles 72 or 161 of the Constitution can be applied to the cases in which an accused has been found guilty of committing offences H 678 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 6 S.C.R. A under TADA and other similar statutes? (d) What is the scope of the Court's power of judicial review of the decision taken by the President under Article 72 and the Governor under Article 161 of the 8 Constitution, as the case may be? Dismissing the petitions, the Court HELD: 1. The power vested in the President under Article 72 and the Governor under Article 161 of the c Constitution is manifestation of prerogative of the State. It is neither a matter of grace nor a matter of privilege, but is an important constitutional responsibility to be discharged by the highest executive, keeping in view the considerations of larger public interest and welfare of the 0 people. While exercising power under Article 72, the President is required to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers. In tendering its advice to the President, the Central Government is duty bound to objectively place the case of the convict wi
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.