Presidential powers to grant mercy are independent from judicial decisions, requiring careful individual consideration without undue delay.

1. The mother of the condemned prisoner, who is the petitioner herein has filed this Special Criminal Application under Art.226 of the Constitution read with Arts.14 and 21 for issuing a writ, of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions directing His Excellency the President of India to consider again the Mercy Petitions of the convict dated 7-8-1982, 18-10-1985 and 10-5-1989 preferred by the petitioner in the light of the judgement of Kerharsingh reported in 1989 (1) SCC 204 . Consequently, the prayer for staying the execution and implementation of the order of hanging the accused Shashikant Keshavlal Parmar to death scheduled on 23-6-1989 at 7-00 a.m. at Rajkot District Jail is prayed for. The petitioner had earlier filed Special Criminal Application No. 1286 of 1988 praying the very same relief, but in relation to the Mercy Petition dated 18-10-1985. There also, the petitioner had prayed that until the President of India decides the Mercy Petition dated 18-10-1985 fully and finally, the execution had to be stayed. While considering the prayer in that petition, the Bench of the High Court of which I was one of the Judges, in detail, considered and rejected the prayer made therein.

2. This is a case in which the condemned prisoner was sentenced to death in Sessions Case No. 57 of 1980, by the Sessions Court, Rajkot for committing triple murder. The said decision of the Sessions Court was confirmed by the High Court in Confirmation Case No. 1 of 1981 and Criminal Appeal No. 826 of 1981 arising out of the said decision was dismissed by the High Court in 1982 itself. On 26-7-1982, the Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition. Subsequent to all these things, the petitioner preferred Special Criminal Application No. 1286 of 1988. According to the petitioner in that case, she preferred Mercy Petition dated October, 18, 1985 and presented at the registry of the President on that day. It is further stated that on December 13, 1985, the then President of India Hon'ble Shri Gnyani Zailsingh visited the State of Gujarat and Shri Haribhai Panchal handed over the Mercy petition personally to the President of India. According to the petitioner, that Mercy Petition was not decided as yet and therefore till it is decided, the execution of death sentence should be stayed. In that case, Mr. M.D. Pandya, learned public prosecutor appearing for the State stated that the Mercy Petition submitted to the Governor of Gujarat on August 7, 1982 was rejected on August, 16, 1982 and the Mercy Petition submitted to the President of India was rejected on April, 21, 1983. The previous Mercy Petitions to the Governor of Gujarat and the President of India were, therefore, rejected quite in reasonable time and therefore no grievance can be made by the petitioner.

3. The Supreme Court considered various aspects of the procedural fairness under Art.21 of the Constitution of India in the case of Triveniben v. State of Gujarat , 1989 (1) SCC 678 : AIR 1989 SC 1335. The present petitioner Triveniben preferred Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 1566/1985 in the Supreme Court and that was heard by the five Judges of the Supreme Court along with other petitions. The Supreme Court dismissed the writ petition observing : -
"The delay which would be material for consideration will be, subsequent to the final decision of the Court, the delay in disposal of the mercy petition or delay occurring at the instance of the executive. Therefore, when such petitions under Art.72 or 161 arc received by the authorities concerned it is expected that the petitions shall be disposed of expeditio