President Pratibha Patil goes on mercy overdrive

June 22, 2012

Prathiba_OverdriveNew Delhi, June 22: Ahead of demitting office, President Pratibha Patil has scored a new record. She has commuted the death sentence of as many as 35 convicts to life — among them are those convicted of mass murder, kidnapping, rape and killing of children.

On June 2, Patil gave her pardon to four more — Bandu Baburao Tidke from Karnataka, Buntu from Uttar Pradesh and Lalchand alias Laliya Dhoom and Shiv Lal from Rajasthan. As a swami of Sadashiva Appana Math, Bagalkot, Tidke abducted a 16-year-old schoolgirl, raped and murdered her. UP's Bantu, on death row since July 2008, was convicted of raping and killing a five-year-old girl.

In fact, almost all the convicts pardoned are guilty of the most blood-curdling crimes. Piara Singh, Sarabjit Singh, Gurdev Singh and Satnam Singh had massacred 17 of a family at a marriage function. Gopi and Mohan (Tamil Nadu) and Molai Ram and Santosh (Madhya Pradesh) had raped and murdered little girls.

The large scale of presidential pardons is seen as surprising. That is because India has not yet abolished the death penalty.

Were these pardons diluting the legal provision through the backdoor? Archana Dutta, Rashtrapati Bhavan spokesperson, said the President was well aware of constitutional provisions as she was a lawyer herself. "The President only takes a decision to commute a death sentence or reject it after she is satisfied by the advice tendered by the government. The President ensures that the government has put in certain application of mind to give mitigating and extenuating circumstances for their advice,'' she said.

Notwithstanding Dutta's assertion, the speed with which Patil has granted pardons would indicate haste. Those shown clemency have been held guilty of barbaric crimes. These appear to have met the criterion of the "rarest of the rare" crimes that attract death penalty. While Patil has shown mercy to mass killers and rapists and killers of children, she has not given the same treatment to political assassins like the killers of former Punjab chief minister Beant Singh or Rajiv Gandhi.

With the June 2 decision to grant four more pardons, the President boasts of a disposal rate of 200%. In recent times President K R Narayanan received 10 petitions and disposed of only one in his tenure. A P J Abdul Kalam inherited nine petitions with another 16 added in his term, taking the total to 25. He disposed of only two — rejecting one and pardoning the other.

Presidential pardon

Article 72 empowers President to pardon, grant reprieve or suspend, remit, commute sentence of person convicted of any offence

President guided by home minister, council of ministers

Exercise of the executive prerogative subject to judicial review

Pratibha Patil has granted clemency to 35 convicts — a record 22 of those killed by these 35 were women and children

Patil rejected 3 pleas

Afzal Guru's among pending mercy petitions

Since 1981, more than 90 have pleaded for clemency

Patil's disposal rate is about 200% unlike K R Narayanan who only disposed of one petition of the 10 he received and Kalam who had a disposal rate of 12.5%

Clemency call

APJ Abdul Kalam | Had 25 mercy petitions. Rejected plea of Dhananjoy Chatterjee, India's last recorded execution. Commuted one to life. Returned others

K R Narayanan | Sat on all pleas. Used delay as tactic. Received about 10 mercy pleas

S D Sharma | Rejected all 14 mercy petitions presented to him

Some sentences commuted

SATISH | Killed & brutalized Visakha, 6, a UP resident, in 2001

MOLAI RAM & SANTOSH YADAV | Raped and killed 10-yr-old daughter of jailor in MP prison in 1996

DHARMENDRA SINGH and NARENDRA YADAV | UP duo killed couple and their 3 minor kids in 1994

PIARA SINGH and HIS THREE SONS| From Punjab, massacred 17 of a wedding party

SHOBHIT CHAMAR | Of Bihar. Jailed for killing 6 of an upper caste landlord's family, including 2 kids

R GOVINDSWAMY | From Kerala, sentenced for murder of his paternal uncle, aunt, their three children over a land dispute

SHYAM MANOHAR, SHEO RAM, PRAKASH, RAVINDER SURESH and HARISH | Killed five, including a 10-yr-old boy, over a property dispute

OM PRAKASH | From Uttarakhand, murdered retired brigadier and two family members

SUSHIL MURMU | Sacrificed a 9-yr-old boy in Jharkhand for his own prosperity

MOHAN and GOPI | From TN, kidnapped 10-yr-old boy, strangled him, got Rs 5 lakh as ransom

JAIKUMAR | Murdered pregnant sister-in-law and niece

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 8,2020

New Delhi, May 8: The Supreme Court on Friday suggested that states should consider indirect sale and home delivery of liquor as per its statute and law to avoid crowding at liquor shops amid the ongoing coronavirus-induced lockdown.

A bench headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan refused to pass any orders on a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking clarity on the sale of liquor and to ensure social distancing while it is being sold in liquor shops during the lockdown.

"We will not pass any order but the states should consider indirect sale/home delivery of liquor to maintain social distancing norms and standards," Justice Ashok Bhushan said while disposing of the petition.

The PIL, filed by one Sai Deepak, sought directions for closure of liquor shops for failing to enforce social distancing, which is essential to prevent the spread of coronavirus.

The petitioner told the apex court that he only wants that the life of common people is not affected because of crowding at liquor shops during COVID-19.

Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, another judge in the bench, said that discussion on home delivery is already going on.

The top court, after hearing the petition complaining about flouting of safety norms at liquor shops, observed that it cannot pass any orders to different states but they should consider online sale and home delivery of liquor.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 4,2020

Mumbai, Mar 4: BJP leader Devendra Fadnavis on Tuesday said Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray should not give "vague" replies on the 5 per cent Muslim quota issue and declare "with courage" that his government will not bring law granting reservation to the minority community.

Mr Fadnavis made the remark after Mr Thackeray, during a press conference earlier in the day, said he has not yet received the proposal regarding giving quota to Muslims and that the Shiv Sena-led government is yet to take any decision on it.

Mr Thackeray made the comments after Maharashtra Minority Affairs Minister Nawab Malik recently said in the legislative council that thestate government will provide 5 per cent quota to Muslims in education.

Mr Malik, an NCP leader, had also said the state government will ensure that a legislation to this effect is passed soon.

The NCP and the Congress, both proponents of Muslim quota, are constituents of the Sena-led Maha Vikas Aghadi government.

Asked about Mr Thackeray's remarks on the issue, Mr Fadnavis said instead of making comments at the press conference, the chief minister should make a statement in the legislature which is currently having its budget session.

The Leader of the Opposition in the assembly said that Mr Malik's opinion is the official position of the government as the minister had talked about giving quota in the council.

"So, instead of making vague comments in the press conference, the chief minister should say in the council that it is not his view (the one expressed by chief minister).

"The chief minister gave vague answers during the press conference, saying the proposal has not come to him. Your minister (Malik) only has said it," Mr Fadnavis told reporters outside the legislature building complex.

The BJP leader maintained there is no provision in the Constitution for religion-based reservation in government jobs or education.

"Say with courage that you will not give the quota, that the Constitution doesn't accept quota based on religion. Hence, we (the government) will not bring law granting quota," the former Chief Minister said.

Mr Fadnavis claimed that if given within the 50 per cent ceiling set by the Supreme Court, the Muslim quota will affect the existing reservation granted to OBCs.

"And if given outside it, it will affect Maratha quota," he added.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
August 6,2020

New Delhi Aug 6: In a new twist in the Vijay Mallya case, a certain document connected with the case in the Supreme Court has gone missing from the apex court files. 

A bench comprising Justices U.U. Lalit and Ashok Bhushan adjourned the hearing to August 20.

It was hearing the review plea filed by Mallya against a July 14, 2017 judgment wherein he was found guilty of contempt for not paying Rs 9,000 crore dues to banks despite repeated directions, although he had transferred $40 million to his children.

The bench was looking for a reply on an intervention application, which it seemed has gone missing from the case papers.Parties involved in the case sought more time to file fresh copies.

On June 19, the Supreme Court sought explanation from its registry regarding Mallya's appeal against the May 2017 conviction in the contempt case for not repaying Rs 9,000 crore dues to banks not listed for the last 3 years.

A bench comprising Justices Lalit and Bhushan had asked the Registry to furnish all the details including names of the officials who had dealt with the file concerning the Review Petition for last three years.

The bench said according to the record, placed before it, the review petition was not listed before the court for last three years. "Before we deal with the submissions raised in the Review Petition, we direct the Registry to explain why the Review Petition was not listed before the concerned Court for last three years," said the bench.In May 2017, the apex court held him guilty of contempt of court for transferring $40 million to his children, and ordered him to appear on July 10 to argue on the quantum of punishment.

The bench said let the explanation be furnished within two weeks. "The Review Petition shall, thereafter, be considered on merits," it added.In 2017, the apex court passed the order on a contempt petition against Mallya by a consortium of banks led by the SBI. 

The banks claimed Mallya transferred $40 million from Daigeo to his children's accounts, and did not use this money to clear his debt. Banks cited this as violation of judicial orders.

stm88 info live rtp slot

slot auto scatter hitam

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.