Case Note & Summary
The case involved a writ petition concerning the judicial review of the exercise of prerogative power in granting pardons. The petitioners, Epuru Sudhakar and another, challenged the actions of the Government of Andhra Pradesh regarding pardons. The Supreme Court, led by Justice S. H. Kapadia, emphasized the importance of judicial review in the context of executive clemency, stating that pardons are not acts of grace but part of the constitutional framework. The court noted that the power to grant pardons, vested in the President and Governors under Articles 72 and 161 of the Constitution, must be exercised with public welfare in mind and is subject to the Rule of Law. The court highlighted that considerations of religion, caste, or political loyalty are irrelevant and prohibited grounds for such decisions. The judgment underscored that while the exercise of this power is discretionary, it must be based on manageable standards and not arbitrary or capricious reasoning. The court concluded that the exercise of prerogative power must be consistent with fairness and legal certainty, and that judicial review serves as a mechanism to ensure adherence to these principles. The court agreed with the conclusions of Justice Arijit Pasayat, reinforcing the need for a clear symmetry between the constitutional rationale for review of statutory and prerogative powers.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Judicial Review of Prerogative Power - Scope of Judicial Review - Constitution of India, 1950, Articles 72, 161 - The court clarified that the exercise of prerogative power in granting pardons is not immune from judicial review, and must adhere to the Rule of Law. The decision must reflect manageable standards and not be based on irrelevant considerations such as religion or political loyalty. Held that the exercise of this power must be consistent with fairness and legal certainty (Paras 1-2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the exercise of prerogative power in granting pardons is subject to judicial review.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court clarified that the exercise of prerogative power in granting pardons is subject to judicial review and must adhere to the Rule of Law, emphasizing the need for manageable standards in such decisions.
Law Points
- judicial review
- prerogative power
- executive clemency
- Article 72
- Article 161
- Rule of Law
- manageable standards
