Supreme Court Declines Commutation of Death Sentence Due to Pending Appeals and Security Concerns
In a significant judgment delivered on May 3, 2023, the Supreme Court of India declined to commute the death sentence of Balwant Singh into life imprisonment due to the pendency of appeals filed by co-accused and security concerns. The case, Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 261 of 2020, raised the issue of inordinate delay in deciding the mercy petition filed by Singh.
Background:
Balwant Singh was convicted for his involvement in a bomb blast that resulted in the death of the then Chief Minister of Punjab, along with several others. The trial court awarded Singh the death penalty, which was later confirmed by the High Court. However, while the death sentence of his co-accused was commuted to life imprisonment, Singh did not file any appeal after the High Court’s judgment.
The Mercy Petition:
Singh claimed that a mercy petition was filed on his behalf in 2012. However, the Union of India disputed receiving any such petition. The Ministry of Home Affairs had issued a letter in September 2019, proposing the commutation of Singh’s death sentence to life imprisonment under Article 72 of the Indian Constitution. The letter, sent to the Chief Secretaries of several states, including Punjab, listed Singh as one of the prisoners whose case was to be considered for commutation.
Delay in Decision and Pending Appeals:
Singh’s counsel argued that the delay of over 10 years in deciding the mercy petition warranted the commutation of his sentence. However, the Additional Solicitor General representing the Union of India contended that Singh had not expressed remorse and had used contemptuous language before the High Court, justifying the refusal of mercy. Moreover, as the appeals filed by the co-accused were still pending before the Supreme Court, their outcome could potentially impact Singh’s case.
Court’s Decision:
The Supreme Court, in its judgment, noted that Singh had not personally filed any mercy petition and that the alleged petition was filed by the Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee (SGPC) on his behalf. The court further observed that the Ministry of Home Affairs had decided to defer the consideration of Singh’s mercy petition due to the pending appeals and concerns about national security and law and order.
In its order, the court declined to issue further directions, stating that it was within the domain of the executive to make decisions on sensitive issues. The competent authority was directed to reconsider the mercy petition at a later stage, when deemed necessary.
D.D-3.May.2023
BALWANT SINGH vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
