UPSC Mains 2014 GS Paper 2 Q5: model answer

Devender Pal Singh Bhullar waited eight years for his mercy petition to be decided. In 2014 his death sentence was commuted, partly because of that delay. When the State takes years to say yes or no, the waiting becomes a second punishment.

The power

Article 72 lets the President pardon, commute, remit, respite or reprieve; he acts on the advice of the Union Cabinet (Maru Ram, 1980). The decision is open to limited judicial review (Kehar Singh, 1989; Epuru Sudhakar, 2006).

The problem

Petitions in the 2000s waited up to 12 years; the Home Ministry often sat on files.

The case for a time limit

• Article 21: inordinate delay is cruel; Shatrughan Chauhan (2014) commuted 15 death sentences on this ground.
• Certainty for victims' families too.
• Prevents political use of timing.

The case against

• Each case needs care, especially new evidence or mental illness.
• A rigid limit might push hasty rejections.
• It may intrude into a constitutional discretion.

A middle path

• A fixed guideline (say three months) in the Home Ministry's rules, not the Constitution.
• Shatrughan Chauhan's guidelines: 14 days' notice before execution, copies of rejection to the convict, mental health checks.
• In 2022–23 the Supreme Court also pressed States to decide petitions quickly.

A time frame for the government, not a stopwatch on the President, gives justice without haste. That also protects the dignity of the office, which should never look like it is waiting for a convenient date.