Admitting the PIL, Justice P.P.S.Janaradhana Raja and Justice N.Duraiswamy ordered notice to the Union Home Secretary.
Petitioner I Michael sought to quash the March 5, 1991 order of the Union Home Secretary which said once the President had rejected a plea for clemency under Article 72 of the Constitution in a particular case involving death sentence, then a state Governor cannot subsequently exercise his jurisdiction under Art.161 of the Constitution with respect to the same case.
Senior Counsel for the Petitioner N.Elango submitted that the order was issued when the mercy petition of Daya Singh, a death row convict, was pending before the Haryana Governor after it was rejected by the President.
He contended the order virtually sought to amend Art.161 by curtailing the authority of the Governor and depriving people of their right to seek mercy before the Governor.
The "unwarranted restriction" imposed by the Home Secretary was prejudicial to the life and personal liberty of numerous convicts across the country, and thus required immediate interference by the court, he submitted.
He claimed the Home Secretary order also coerced the State Governments to comply with a direction that was per se unconstitutional and void and against the Federal Structure envisaged by the Constitution.
More From This Section
A combined reading of the Art.72(3) and 161 would reveal that the pardoning power of the Governor was placed in an equal pedestal with that of the President, he contended.
He sought a stay of the order as several convicts and public in general would be prejudiced.