Tamil Nad

Nalini withdraws plea for 6 months’ leave

S. Nalini

S. Nalini  

more-in

She had made the request last year for her daughter’s marriage

Rajiv Gandhi assassination case convict S. Nalini on Friday withdrew a writ petition filed in July last year seeking a direction to the State government to consider her plea for six months of ordinary leave so that she could make arrangements for the marriage of her 26-year-old daughter residing in the United Kingdom.

Justice P.N. Prakash permitted her counsel M. Radhakrishnan and P. Pugalenthi to withdraw the writ petition on the basis of a letter given on her behalf to the High Court Registry.

The petition had been filed on the strength of representations made by her to the government in November 2016 and January 2017.

However, the State government had opposed the writ petition, stating that the offence committed by her was barbaric and therefore she could not claim equality with other life convicts who were entitled to ordinary leave as well as special leave as per the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules of 1982.

Gravity of offence

In a counter affidavit filed in reply to Nalini’s writ petition, D. Daniel, Deputy Secretary to Government, Home Department, said: “In view of the gravity of the offence, having international ramification, committed by the petitioner, she may escape from the lawful custody if released on leave. Hence, it is humbly submitted that the request of the petitioner deserves no merit and therefore it is prayed that this honourable court may please dismiss the writ petition as devoid of merits and thus render justice.”

The officer also recalled that a Division Bench of the High Court, while dismissing a writ appeal filed by her for premature release in 2010, observed that “the offence proved against the appellant is of a higher magnitude sending shock waves throughout the world.

“By committing such an inhuman act, the petitioner and other co-convicts have taken away the life of a former Prime Minister. She constitutes a distinct class and cannot claim equality with those sentenced to life imprisonment.”

The Bench went on to state: “If all prisoners, irrespective of the gravity of the offences for which they are convicted, are classified and considered similarly, it will have serious repercussions on the safety and security of the society besides shaking the foundation of entire criminal justice system.”