Order

D.P. Wadhwa, J.-There are two sets of review petitions. They are against judgment of this Court dated May 11, 1999 in Death Reference Case No. 1 of 1998 and Criminal Appeal Nos. 321-325 of 1998. One set has been filed by the convicts Nalini (A-1), Murughan (A-3), Santhan (A-2) and Arivu (A-18). Death sentence awarded to them by the Desig­nated Court has been confirmed by this Court. Petitioners in their review petitions are not challenging their conviction. The review is only on question of sentence. There were, however, 26 accused who faced trial and they were all sentenced to death under the provisions of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act (TADA) and Indian Penal Code (IPC) and also sentenced to varying terms of imprisonment on various other charges. Sentence of death awarded to them by the Desig­nated Court was submitted to this Court for confirmation. The convicts also filed appeals against their conviction and sentence. After hear­ing elaborate arguments and examining the record, this Court passed the following order :-

“The conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court of the offences of Section 3(3), Section 3(4) and Section 5 of the TADA Act are set aside in respect of all those appellants who were found guilty by the trial Court under the said counts.

The conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court of the offences under Sections 212 and 216 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, Section 25(1-B) of the Arms Act, Section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, Section 12 of the Passport Act and Section 6(1-A) of the Wireless and Telegraphy Act, 1933, in respect of those accused who were found guilty of those offences, are confirmed. If they have already undergone the period of sentence under those counts it is for the jail authorities to release such of those against whom no other conviction and sentence exceeding the said period have been passed.

The conviction for the offence under Section 120-B read with Section 302 Indian Penal Code as against A-1 (Nalini), A-2 (Santhan @ Raviraj), A-3 (Murugan @ Thas), A-9 (Robert Payas), A-10 (Jayakumar), A-16 (Ravi­chandran @ Ravi) and A-18 (Perarivalan @ Arivu) is con­firmed.

We set aside the conviction and sentence of the offences under Section 302 read with Section 120-B passed by the trial Court on the remaining accused.

The sentence of death passed by the trial Court on A-1 (Nalini), A-2 (Santhan), A-3 (Murugan) and A-18 (Arivu) is confirmed. The death sentence passed on A-9 (Robert), A-10 (Jayakumar) and A-16 (Ravichan­dran) is altered to imprisonment for life. The reference is answered accordingly.

In other words, except A-1 (Nalini), A-2 (Santhan), A-3 (Murugan), A-9 (Robert Payas), A-10 (Jayakumar), A-16 (Ravichandran) and A-18 (Arivu), all the remaining appellants shall be set at liberty forth­with.”

2. While the four petitioners are aggrieved by the award of sentence of death to them, State, through CBI in the second set of review petitions filed by it, is aggrieved with that part of the judgment where this Court held that the offence was not committed by the ac­cused with intent to strike terror in people or any section of people and on that account no offence under Section 3(3) of TADA had been made out. State in its review petitions is not challenging findings of this Court that offence under Section 3(3) of TADA is not committed with intent to overawe the Government as by law established or that no offence under Section 4 of TADA which provides punishment for disrup­tive activities, has been committed.

3. Review petitions have been filed under Article 137 of the Constitu­tion read with Order XL of the Supreme Court Rules, 1966 as amended. Under Article 137 of the Constitution Supreme Court has power to review any judgment pronounced or order made by it subject to the provisions of any law made by the Parliament or any Rule made under Article 145 of the Constitution. Supreme Court Rules have been framed in exercise of t