Union Of India v. V. Sriharan Alias Murugan And Others, Supreme Court Of India, Judgment, Law, casemine.com

Factual and Procedural Background

The proceedings arise out of Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 48 of 2014 and connected matters. On 27-2-2014 the Supreme Court issued notice to the State of Tamil Nadu and other respondents and ordered that the petitions be listed together on 6-3-2014, directing Respondents 8-10 to maintain status quo regarding Respondents 4-7 in the interim.

Subsequently, by an interim order dated 9-7-2014 ((2016) 7 SCC 1), the Court restrained all State Governments from exercising their statutory powers of remission and commutation under Sections 432 and 433 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in respect of life convicts. Notices were issued to every State Government.

After hearing State counsel, a Constitution Bench delivered the present order on 23-7-2015, modifying the earlier blanket restraint.

Legal Issues Presented

Whether the blanket restraint imposed on 9-7-2014 on State Governments’ powers of remission and commutation for life convicts should be continued or modified.

The relationship between the modified restraint and the constitutional clemency powers of the President under Article 72 and Governors under Article 161.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent	Rule or Principle Cited For	Application by the Court
Order dated 9-7-2014, (2016) 7 SCC 1	Earlier interim direction restraining States from exercising remission/commutation powers for life convicts.	Modified; restraint now limited to specified categories.
Referral Order, (2014) 11 SCC 1	Pending reference on the scope of executive power to remit sentences.	Present order declared provisional and subject to the final decision on this reference.

Precedent

Rule or Principle Cited For

Application by the Court

Order dated 9-7-2014, (2016) 7 SCC 1

Earlier interim direction restraining States from exercising remission/commutation powers for life convicts.

Modified; restraint now limited to specified categories.

Referral Order, (2014) 11 SCC 1

Pending reference on the scope of executive power to remit sentences.

Present order declared provisional and subject to the final decision on this reference.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

After hearing counsel for multiple State Governments, the Bench concluded the earlier blanket restraint required refinement. Its analysis proceeded as follows:

The restraint of 9-7-2014 is confined to four categories:

Sentences explicitly directing life imprisonment “till the end of life” without remission or commutation.
Sentences fixing a minimum non-remittable period (e.g., 20 or 25 years).
Cases in which no application for remission or commutation has been moved or considered suo motu.
Cases investigated by a central agency, or sentences under Central laws, Section 376 IPC, or similar offences.

Clarified that the President’s powers under Article 72 and Governors’ powers under Article 161 are untouched even in these categories.

Specified that the modification does not apply to the respondents in W.P. (Crl.) No. 48 of 2014.

Emphasised the provisional nature of the order, pending final determination of issues raised in the referral order.

Directed the Registry to circulate the order to all States and Union Territories.

Holding and Implications

The interim restraint order of 9-7-2014 is modified. State Governments may exercise their statutory powers of remission and commutation for life convicts except in the four enumerated categories. Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions Nos. 21421 of 2014, 7510 and 11179 of 2015 are disposed of.

Implications: States regain authority to consider remission/commutation outside the specified exceptions. Constitutional clemency powers remain fully operative. The order is interim and subject to the Supreme Court’s eventual ruling on the broader constitutional questions, thereby setting no final precedent at this stage.

Union Of India v. V. Sriharan Alias Murugan And Others

Order dated 27-2-2014

(Before P. Sathasivam, C.J. and Ranjan Gogoi and N.V. Ramana, JJ.)

Writ Petition (Cri) No. 48 of 2014

1. Issue notice. Mr Rakesh Dwivedi, learned Senior Counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the State of Tamil Nadu. Mr Sanjay Hegde, learned counsel, accepts notice on behalf of Respondents 1, 2, 3 and 6. Mr P.R. Kovilan Poongkuntran, learned counsel, accepts notice on behalf of Respondents 4, 5 and 7.

2. Post this matter and WP (Crl.) No. 105 of 2008, along with Crl. MP No. 4622 filed in Transferred Case (Crl.) No. 1 of 2012, etc. on 6-3-2014, at the top of the list.

3. Respondents 8 to 10 are directed to maintain status quo in respect of Respondents 4 to 7 also, till 6-3-2014.

Order dated 23-7-2015

(Before H.L. Dattu, C.J. and F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla, Pinaki Chandra Ghose, Abhay Manohar Sapre and Uday U. Lalit, JJ.)

Writ Petitions (Crl.) No. 48 of 2014 with Nos. 185, 150, 66 of 2014 and 1215 of 2011

4. Vide the order dated 9-7-2014 (2016) 7 SCC 1, we had restrained the State Governments from exercising their powers of remission and commutation of sentence under Sections 432 and 433 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to life convicts. The relevant paragraph of the order passed by this Court reads as under:

“In the meanwhile, the State Governments are restrained from exercising their power of remission to life convicts.”

We had issued notice to all the State Governments through their Standing Counsel.

5. After hearing the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the respective State Governments for some time, we are of the considered view that our order dated 9-7-2014 (2016) 7 SCC 1 requires to be modified. Accordingly, we modify our order dated 9-7-2014 (2016) 7 SCC 1, whereby we had restrained the State Governments from exercising their power of remission or commutation to life convicts. The said order dated 9-7-2014 (2016) 7 SCC 1 shall only apply to cases:

(i) where life sentence has been awarded specifying that:

(a) the convict shall undergo life sentence till the end of his life without remission or commutation;

(b) the convict shall not be released by granting remission or commutation till he completes a fixed term such as 20 years or 25 years or the like;

(ii) where no application for remission or commutation was preferred, or considered suo motu by the State Governments/authorities concerned;

(iii) where the investigation was not conducted by any central investigating agency like the Central Bureau of Investigation;

(iv) where the life sentence is under any Central law or under Section 376 of the Penal Code, 1860 or any other similar offence.

6. However, we clarify that the President of India in exercise of his powers under Article 72 of the Constitution of India and the Governors of the States in exercise of their powers under Article 161 of the Constitution of India are not prevented from exercising their power(s), insofar as the cases referred to in para 2 above are concerned.

7. We further make it clear that this order shall not be applicable to the respondents in Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 48 of 2014.

8. It is also clarified that this order is subject to the final orders that may be passed by us while answering the referral order (2014) 11 SCC 1.

9. The order passed by us today shall be communicated by the Registry of this Court to all the State Governments and Union Territories.

10. Accordingly, Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions Nos. 21421 of 2014, 7510 and 11179 of 2015 are disposed of.

(Record of Proceedings), Writ Petitions (Crl.) No. 48 of 2014, Writ Petitions (Crl.) No. 48 of 2014 with Nos. 66, 150, 185 of 2014 and Crl. A. No. 1215 of 2011

Union Of India v. V. Sriharan Alias Murugan And Others

Supreme Court of India – Summary of Key Orders

Factual and Procedural Background

Legal Issues Presented

Arguments of the Parties

Table of Precedents Cited

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

Holding and Implications

Union Of India v. V. Sriharan Alias Murugan And Others

Comments