Mercy powers hold significant importance in a legal framework as they address situations where the rigid application of law may result in unjust consequences. These powers allow for consideration of mitigating factors and individual circumstances, providing a path for clemency in exceptional cases.
In India, Article 72 of the Constitution empowers the President to grant pardons, reprieves, respites, or remit punishments. Equally, Article 161 bestows similar powers upon State Governors, ensuring a dual mechanism for mercy at both national and state levels.
The constitutional mercy powers outlined in Articles 72 and 161 are broader and operate independently from statutory remission powers. Previously governed by Sections 432 and 433 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), statutory remission is now encapsulated under Section 473 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).
This landmark case established that the President and Governors must act based on the advice of the respective government when exercising their mercy powers. It affirmed the validity of Section 433A of the CrPC, which stipulates a minimum of 14 years of imprisonment for life convicts before statutory remission can be considered. Importantly, this restriction does not extend to pardons under Article 72 or 161.
In this ruling, the Supreme Court determined that while the State Government can grant remission under the BNSS after the stipulated 14-year period, the Governor's authority under Article 161 is not constrained by this minimum. Consequently, the Governor has the discretion to grant remission even before 14 years, provided it aligns with the state government’s recommendations.
This distinction is crucial as it ensures that both the structured legislative framework of the BNSS and the constitutional prerogative represented by Articles 72 and 161 operate effectively. It strikes a balance between justice and mercy, allowing room for flexibility in extraordinary situations.
The judiciary plays a vital role in ensuring that mercy powers are exercised justly and within constitutional boundaries. Significant rulings like Maru Ram and Raj Kumar have delineated the relationship between statutory provisions and constitutional mandates, shaping the legal landscape for clemency and premature release decisions.
Kutos : AI Assistant!
