Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court addressed the appeal filed by Kehar Singh against his death sentence for the assassination of then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Following his conviction under sections 120-B and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, Kehar Singh's appeals and review petitions were dismissed. Subsequently, his son petitioned the President of India for clemency under Article 72, asserting his father's innocence and requesting an oral hearing. The President declined the request, stating he could not review the merits of a case already decided by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court examined whether the President could consider the merits of the case and whether the condemned had a right to an oral hearing. The Court held that the President could scrutinize evidence and reach a different conclusion without altering the judicial record, emphasizing that this power is distinct from judicial authority. It ruled that there is no right to an oral hearing before the President, and the manner of consideration is at the President's discretion. The Court also found that specific guidelines for exercising this power are unnecessary due to its broad scope. Ultimately, the Court directed that Kehar Singh's petition for pardon be treated as pending before the President and that his death sentence remain in abeyance. The decision underscored the constitutional significance of the pardon power and the balance between executive discretion and judicial review.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Presidential Power to Pardon - Scope of Presidential Power - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 72 - The Supreme Court held that the President has the authority to scrutinize evidence and come to a different conclusion regarding guilt and sentence, without altering the judicial record. This power is distinct from judicial power and is not subject to judicial review on merits. (Paras 1111C-D, 1115G) B) Constitutional Law - Right to Oral Hearing - Entitlement to Hearing - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 72 - The Court ruled that there is no right for a condemned person to insist on an oral hearing before the President, as the proceedings are executive in nature and the manner of consideration lies within the President's discretion. (Paras 1116A-B) C) Constitutional Law - Guidelines for Pardon - Need for Guidelines - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 72 - The Court determined that specific guidelines for the exercise of the President's power under Article 72 are unnecessary due to the wide amplitude of the power and the varying circumstances of each case. (Paras 1116F-F) D) Constitutional Law - Judicial Review of Presidential Orders - Scope of Judicial Review - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 72 - The Court clarified that while the area of the President's power can be examined by the judiciary, the merits of the President's decision cannot be subjected to judicial review except under strict limitations. (Paras 1115G; 1113B-C)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the President can enter into the merits of a case decided by the Supreme Court under Article 72 of the Constitution.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court held that the petition invoking the President's power under Article 72 shall be deemed pending before the President for fresh consideration, and the death sentence imposed on Kehar Singh shall remain in abeyance meanwhile.
Law Points
- Constitutional power
- Pardon
- Article 72
- Judicial review
- Executive discretion
