CJI for all his erudition is working over time to let off the killers of Rajiv for whatever reasons. I refuse to believe that is sheer humanitarian consideration  for to offer such relief to such criminals require him to be a Jesus Christ or Lord Budhdha which I am sure he is neither. He worked over time to offer commutation of death sentence to all criminals charged and sentenced to death by the same court on the ground of inexplicable delays on the part of President to dispose their mercy petititons.Mercy   by the very word, is the prerogative of those who have been the victims. The President is authorised by the constitution of India to offer clemency considering the various factors and the constitution does not offer for judicail review whatever the CJI could argue for. It should be established that the delay was malafide in all these cases there have been serious administrative lapses. CJI commuted death sentences of scores of men including those who killed a convoy of policemen injuring many of them. This judgment was used to grant relief to killers of Rajiv. He went on to offer more to his select men - more than what they prayed for. Commutation is what they wanted and it was granted automatically.But CJI said that this reduced sentence of life term impriosonment was subject to revisional powers of the State. What happened thereafter was history. TN Government announced in the floor of the house that they will set free these convicts stating that they had shot off a letter containing the proposal to Union of India to be replied in 3 days. Centre then approached the SC for a revision of the order praying for interim stay. SC stayed and ordered status quo. In the hearing of petition challenging the letting of the other 4 convicts serving life sentences, CJI remarked that it was the court's mistake to have said that the reduced sentence is subject to revisional powers of the State and they will set right this confusion. He had also remarked that he will look in to the admissibility of the petition itself as sought by Counsel for TN Government.

Unfortunately, the solicitor General Mohan Parasaran had drafted a petition stating that the powers of remission of sentences lie with UnionGovernment without questioning the validity of the SC trespassing in to the powers vested with the President under article 72 which can under no stretch of imagination be overridden by Article 24. Article 24 is for an ordinary citizen wherein the orders of the state seeks to curtail his fundamental rights as enshrined and not to convicts. That is perverted logic. So long as death sentence is there in the statutue and so long as the SC awards Death sentences under rarest of rare cases, SC has no business in to meddle with the powers of the President.

The issue needs to be posted before a 5 member constitutional bench and CJI should not a part of the proceeding for his perceived symapathies with the convicts rather than with those victims waiting for justice