SC reserves order on plea by death row accused

The trial court had convicted all the 26 of participating in the conspiracy to assassinate Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, who was killed by a human bomb at Sriperumbudur in Tamil Nadu on May 21, 1991, and awarded them death sentence.

The Supreme Court had confirmed the death sentence of the four, commuted to life imprisonment for three and acquitted 19 others of all charges.

The three-judge bench also reserved its verdict on a CBI application pointing out that it was wrong on the part of the court to acquit them of charges under Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA).

Arguing for the accused, senior advocate N Natrajan said that these four accused knew nothing more than the other accused in the matter who were either acquitted or their sentence commuted to life imprisonment and pleaded with the court to review the order confirming the death sentence.

Arguing for CBI, Attorney General Soli J Sorabjee said that it was not a mere act of revenge as the assassination was carried out by a human bomb at a public meeting where it had the potential to take away innocent human lives.

He said it was also to send a message to the Indian leadership by killing a former Prime Minister that any act of intereference in LTTE’s operations would not be tolerated.

Sorabjee said it was clear from the above that the act clearly fell within the meaning of the terrorist acts as enumerated in TADA.

The court has stayed the execution of the four, who were to be hanged to death on June nine, after the Apex Court pronounced its order on May 11, till further orders.

Thiryfive-year-old Nalini, her 29-year-old husband Santhan alias Murugan are both lodged at central prison, Vellore while 27-year-old Suthenthiraja alias Santhan and 27-year-old G Perarivalan alias Arivu are lodged at central prison, Salem.

The four condemned prisoners in their review petition moved through advocate V Ramasubramaniam pleaded that as the Apex Court has held that the killing of Rajiv was due to personal animosity not amounting to a terrorist act, the case could be regarded as an ordinary murder case not falling in the category of `rarest of rare cases’ in which event the court would not award death penalty.

The petitioners pleaded that they could not be branded as “a menace to the society” as after achieving their objective, (of killing Rajiv) they did not indulge in any crime or terrorist activities.