Rajiv Gandhi assassination case: SC orders release of A G Perarivalan

The Supreme Court invoked its extraordinary powers to declare on Wednesday that Rajiv Gandhi assassination case convict AG Perarivalan’s life term would be “deemed to have been served” and ordered his immediate release. The bench cited his prolonged incarceration, satisfactory conduct in jail and parole, chronic medical ailments and educational qualifications acquired in jail to direct that he “is deemed to have served his sentence in connection with the crime”. “The appellant already on bail is set at liberty forthwith. His bail bonds are cancelled,” the court ruled on Wednesday.

Perarivalan was on bail under the court’s earlier orders. He was 19 in 1991 when he bought batteries that were used in the bomb that killed the former Prime Minister. He has since spent 31 years in jail. He was charged under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and also Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act provisions and sentenced to death. The top court intervened to have his death sentence commuted to life in 2014 after his mercy petitions, to the governor and later the President, were rejected.

In 2018, the Tamil Nadu government took into account the fact that Perarivalan had already spent 23 years in jail to recommend that his life term be considered for remission by the governor under Article 161 of the Constitution.


The governor did not take a decision on this for two and a half years and referred the case to the President for his consideration after Perarivalan moved the top court for relief. After the court sought an explanation on this, the Centre claimed that the powers of remission would lie in this case with the President as the offence was tried by the Central Bureau of Investigation under central government statutes.

A bench led by justice L Nageshwar Rao rejected this plea on the grounds that this view would render many such decisions taken by successive governors illegal. The other two judges on the bench were BR Gavai and AS Bopanna. The bench said that in a constitutional democracy, the governor would not have any discretion in exercising his remission powers and would be bound by the decision of the council of ministers.