Presidential Pardon and Judicial Review in India
The power to grant a presidential pardon is a significant legal authority in India. Article 72 of the Indian Constitution gives the President the authority to grant pardons, reprieves, and remissions of sentences. However, this power raises important questions, especially when it comes to its interaction with judicial review.
Understanding Presidential Pardon and Judicial Review
A presidential pardon is an act of mercy granted by the President to individuals convicted of crimes. It can take various forms:
- Pardon: This completely absolves the convict of both the crime and its consequences.
- Remission: This reduces the severity of the sentence.
- Reprieve: This postpones the execution of the sentence.
Notably, the remission power of the President differs from the pardon power. While a pardon erases the conviction, remission only shortens the sentence.
The Epuru Sudhakar Case: A Landmark Judgment on Judicial Review
In the Epuru Sudhakar & Ors. vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. (2006) case, the Supreme Court explored the boundaries of judicial review over presidential pardons. The Court ruled that, while the President holds the power to grant pardons, this authority is not absolute. In fact, the President must exercise this power fairly and reasonably, ensuring that it is not influenced by irrelevant factors such as political considerations.
Key Insight: This landmark ruling affirmed that judicial review plays an important role in preventing the misuse of presidential powers.
Arguments For and Against Judicial Review
Supporters of Judicial Review argue that it:
- Prevents Abuse of Power: Judicial review serves as a safeguard against arbitrary or politically motivated pardons.
- Upholds Public Trust: By ensuring transparency, judicial review helps guarantee that pardons are granted in a fair and just manner.
On the other hand, those who oppose judicial review believe that it:
- Undermines Executive Authority: Excessive judicial scrutiny may undermine the President’s power to grant clemency.
- Challenges the Separation of Powers: Excessive judicial intervention may be perceived as an encroachment on the executive’s role.
The Road Ahead: Striking a Balance
The debate surrounding presidential pardons and judicial review is likely to persist. However, it is crucial to find a balance between the President’s authority to grant pardons and the need for judicial oversight to ensure fairness.
- One solution is to introduce clearer guidelines for granting pardons. This will help promote transparency and accountability in the decision-making process.
- Moreover, while judicial review should not be overly intrusive, public scrutiny remains essential to prevent misuse of power.
Outlook: When the power of pardon is exercised thoughtfully and in accordance with the law, it can serve the cause of justice effectively.
LawCrust Legal Consulting Services: Your Guide Through Legal Complexities
LawCrust Legal Consulting Services, a subsidiary of LawCrust Global Consulting Ltd., litigation finance legal protection, litigation management, startup solutions, funding solutions, hybrid consulting, and mergers & acquisitions, and many more offers expert legal advice and solutions customised to your needs.
For personalized legal assistance, contact us at +91 8097842911 or email bo@lawcrust.com.