<p>The Supreme Court on Monday issued a notice to the Centre on a public interest litigation filed by a journalist seeking immediate reversal of former President Pratibha Patil’s decision to grant pardon to five people who were awarded death sentence for rape and murder in four different cases.<br /><br /></p>.<p>A three-judge bench presided over by Chief Justice P Sathasivam sought response from those pardoned. The petition also urged the court to lay down guidelines for the President to exercise the power to grant pardon in such cases.<br /><br />Appearing for the petitioner, Pinki Virani, senior advocate Shekhar Naphade submitted that the crimes were committed in an extremely brutal manner in all the four cases but shockingly, the offenders were pardoned. The petition questioned the discretion exercised by the President and governors of states concerned “without objectively verifiable parameters.” “We have to issue notice in this case. We have already held in Kehar Singh’s case that the President’s decision is open to judicial review if the exercise of granting pardon was done without taking into account definite factors,” the bench said.<br /><br />According to the petitioner, the cases listed were glaring example of how routinely the files were forwarded by the state governments and Ministry of Home Affairs proposed pardon to the President without application of mind. “In all the four cases minor children were violated and murdered with cold-blooded savagery. The magnitude of the crime committed by the convicts in the said four cases did not deserve pardon,” the petition said.<br /><br />She contended that the grant of pardon on ad hoc basis and without any objectively verifiable parameters constituted abuse of power and violation of the fundamental rights of the victims and their near and dear ones. In one case, condemned prisoners Molai Ram, who was a guard in the Central Jail, and Santosh Kumar Yadav, a prisoner serving his sentence, had raped assistant jailor’s 16-year-old daughter. They killed her and dumped her body in the jail’s septic tank. <br /><br />In 1997, the trial court granted life imprisonment but it was enhanced to death sentence by the High Court and the punishment was confirmed by the Supreme Court in 1999. In 2011, Pratibha Patil commuted the death sentence.<br /><br />In another case, convict Satish had raped a six-year-old girl who was on her way to school. Satish was awarded death sentence by a trial court in 2002 which was upheld by the apex court but it was commuted by the President in 2012.<br /><br />In the third case, convict Bantu took a five-year-old girl from a religious ceremony to a field and raped her. He tortured her in the most barbaric manner and the child died of profuse bleeding. Bantu was awarded death sentence in 2005 which was upheld by the high court in 2006 and by the apex court in 2008. But in 2012, his sentence was commuted by the President.<br /><br />In the fourth case, convict Sushil Murmu chopped off the head of a nine-year-old as a religious sacrifice. Medical confirmation could not be conducted for sexual violation.<br /> Murmu was awarded death penalty by trial court in 2002 and it was upheld by the High Court and the Supreme Court in 2003. His death sentence was commuted by the President in 2012.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Monday issued a notice to the Centre on a public interest litigation filed by a journalist seeking immediate reversal of former President Pratibha Patil’s decision to grant pardon to five people who were awarded death sentence for rape and murder in four different cases.<br /><br /></p>.<p>A three-judge bench presided over by Chief Justice P Sathasivam sought response from those pardoned. The petition also urged the court to lay down guidelines for the President to exercise the power to grant pardon in such cases.<br /><br />Appearing for the petitioner, Pinki Virani, senior advocate Shekhar Naphade submitted that the crimes were committed in an extremely brutal manner in all the four cases but shockingly, the offenders were pardoned. The petition questioned the discretion exercised by the President and governors of states concerned “without objectively verifiable parameters.” “We have to issue notice in this case. We have already held in Kehar Singh’s case that the President’s decision is open to judicial review if the exercise of granting pardon was done without taking into account definite factors,” the bench said.<br /><br />According to the petitioner, the cases listed were glaring example of how routinely the files were forwarded by the state governments and Ministry of Home Affairs proposed pardon to the President without application of mind. “In all the four cases minor children were violated and murdered with cold-blooded savagery. The magnitude of the crime committed by the convicts in the said four cases did not deserve pardon,” the petition said.<br /><br />She contended that the grant of pardon on ad hoc basis and without any objectively verifiable parameters constituted abuse of power and violation of the fundamental rights of the victims and their near and dear ones. In one case, condemned prisoners Molai Ram, who was a guard in the Central Jail, and Santosh Kumar Yadav, a prisoner serving his sentence, had raped assistant jailor’s 16-year-old daughter. They killed her and dumped her body in the jail’s septic tank. <br /><br />In 1997, the trial court granted life imprisonment but it was enhanced to death sentence by the High Court and the punishment was confirmed by the Supreme Court in 1999. In 2011, Pratibha Patil commuted the death sentence.<br /><br />In another case, convict Satish had raped a six-year-old girl who was on her way to school. Satish was awarded death sentence by a trial court in 2002 which was upheld by the apex court but it was commuted by the President in 2012.<br /><br />In the third case, convict Bantu took a five-year-old girl from a religious ceremony to a field and raped her. He tortured her in the most barbaric manner and the child died of profuse bleeding. Bantu was awarded death sentence in 2005 which was upheld by the high court in 2006 and by the apex court in 2008. But in 2012, his sentence was commuted by the President.<br /><br />In the fourth case, convict Sushil Murmu chopped off the head of a nine-year-old as a religious sacrifice. Medical confirmation could not be conducted for sexual violation.<br /> Murmu was awarded death penalty by trial court in 2002 and it was upheld by the High Court and the Supreme Court in 2003. His death sentence was commuted by the President in 2012.</p>
