SC orders release of Rajiv killing convict
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered the release of AG Perarivalan, one of the convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, who was arrested at the age of 19 years in June 1991 and spent over 31 years in jail as part of his life sentence.
A three-judge bench headed by justice L Nageswara Rao said, “We direct that the appellant (Perarivalan) is deemed to have served the sentence in connection with Crime No. 329 of 1991 (pertaining to the assassination case). The appellant, who is on bail (since March 9 this year), is set at liberty forthwith.” Perarivalan approached the court in 2016 after he had filed a mercy petition before the Tamil Nadu governor in December 2015 seeking remission under Article 161. In September 2018, the Tamil Nadu government recommended his release but the governor did not act on the recommendation. Instead, on January 25, 2021, the governor referred the matter to the President. These decisions were challenged by Perarivalan and supported by the Tamil Nadu government which felt such an exercise of power by the governor was unconstitutional.
After the verdict, Perarivalam’s relatives gathered at his residence in Jolarpettai, 200km from Chennai. “I have just come out. It has been 31 years of legal battle. I have to breathe a bit. Give me some time,” was quoted as saying by news agency PTI when he was asked about his future plans. DMK chief and Tamil Nadu chief minister M K Stalin said the verdict could find a place in the “justice-law-political-administrative history”.
The Congress expressed pain and disappointment over the release. Congress spokesperson Randeep Surjewala said that it is condemnable and very unfortunate that the assassin of a former PM has been released.
The outcome in this case means that the other accused in the case V Sriharan alias Murugan, T Suthendraraja alias Santhan, Jayakumar, Robert Payas, P Ravichandaran and Nalini
will also benefit similarly as the state government in September 2018 recommended to release them all. The bench, also comprising justices BR Gavai and AS Bopanna said, “Given that his petition under Article 161 remained pending for two-anda-half years following the recommendation of the State Cabinet for remission of his sentence and continues to remain pending for over a year since the reference by the Governor, we do not consider it appropriate to remand the matter for the Governor’s consideration.” In addition to the delay, the court took into consideration Perarivalan’s prolonged incarceration,
his satisfactory conduct in jail as well as during parole, chronic ailments borne out from his medical records, his educational qualifications acquired during incarceration for exercising its powers under Article 142 to do complete justice in a given case.
It said, “In the absence of any other disqualification and in the exceptional facts and circumstances of this case, in exercise of our power under Article 142 of the Constitution, we direct that the appellant is deemed to have served the sentence… The appellant, who is on bail, is set at liberty forthwith.”