New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday declined to consider the plea of interim relief for Balwant Singh Rajoana, seeking commutation of his death penalty in the 1995 assassination case of former Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh and others, in view of over 12 years delay in deciding a mercy petition.
Granting two more weeks to the Punjab government to file its response, a bench presided over by Justice BR Gavai said that it was not inclined to grant any interim relief at this stage.
The matter will be heard next on November 18.
Earlier, the top court had declined to grant relief on Rajoana’s plea seeking commutation of his death penalty and had said “it is within the domain of the executive to take a call on such sensitive issues”.
It had noted that the Rajoana himself never submitted any mercy petition and the alleged mercy petition of 2012, was filed by the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC).
Disposing of the plea, the Supreme Court had directed that the competent authority, in due course of time, would again as and when it is deemed necessary, deal with the mercy petition, and take a further decision.
Former Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh, along with 16 others, lost their lives while a dozen others were injured in a bomb blast in August 1995. Rajoana was arrested on January 27, 1996. Rajoana, along with eight others, who had hatched a conspiracy and had executed the bomb blast, were put to trial.
In July 2007, the trial court convicted Rajoana along with co-accused Jagtar Singh Hawara, Gurmeet Singh, Lakhwinder Singh, Shamsher Singh and Nasib Singh. The petitioner along with co-accused Jagtar Singh Hawara was awarded the death sentence.
In death reference, the high court vide judgment dated December 10, 2010, confirmed the conviction and sentence of the petitioner. However, while confirming the conviction of co-accused Jagtar Singh, it commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment.
The other co-accused preferred to appeal before the top court. However, Rajoana did not file any appeal after the judgment of the high court.
–IANS
Comments are closed.