Swamy Shraddananda says hanging better than jail till death; SC says not convict’s right to decide sentence

PTI, Sep 11, 2024, 7:35 PM IST

Representative Image (credit: PTI)

New Delhi: “You want your sentence to be changed to hanging” – the Supreme Court asked on Wednesday as Swamy Shraddananda, who is incarcerated for 30 years for killing his wife and has pleaded for release, said that the imprisonment till death awarded to him is far worse than the capital punishment.

The Shraddananda alias Murali Manohar Mishra, 84, whose wife was the grand-daughter of a former Dewan of the princely state of Mysore, sought the relief, saying he has been in “continuous incarceration” without any parole or remission and nothing adverse has been reported against him during his stay in jail.

A bench headed by Justice B R Gavai, which dismissed his writ petition seeking release from jail, however, agreed to hear his separate plea seeking review of the apex court’s July 2008 verdict which had directed that he shall not be released from prison till rest of his life.

During the arguments on his fresh writ petition, Shraddananda’s counsel referred to the orders directing the premature release of some convicts who were serving life terms in the former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi assassination case.

“I (Shraddananda) am 84-year-old and I am in 30 years of continuous incarceration,” the counsel said, adding, “It may be worse than the death sentence”.

The lawyer argued that it was more of torture. The argument seeking release went to the extent where the lawyer vehemently said that even a death penalty could be better than this kind of life imprisonment.

“You want this to be changed to hanging?” the bench, also comprising Justices P K Mishra and K V Viswanathan, retorted.

His lawyer said if possible “hanging could be a better situation for the convict as on date”.

“Have you spoken to your client?” the bench asked.

The lawyer responded, “I have not spoken to him”.

He argued that such a sentence, as has been awarded to Shraddananda, was not provided under the erstwhile Indian Penal Code.

Advocate Varun Thakur, who was also appearing for the convict, said conviction in this case was based on judicial confession.

“Now, should we re-open everything?” the bench wondered, adding that his conviction was already upheld by the Karnataka High Court as well as the apex court.

“No accused can have a right on conviction to ask for a death sentence. You can’t take your own life. Attempt itself is an offence. So you can’t say the court will have to impose. The court will impose the appropriate sentence,” the bench said.

His counsel said the sentence imposed by the apex court blocks Shraddananda’s right to apply for premature release under Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

“That (life imprisonment till rest of life) was done in order to save you from hanging,” the bench said.

The lawyer said if it was a reprieve from capital punishment, it should not be “worse than death”.

He said furlough and parole were granted even to convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case but Shraddananda was not entitled for that also.

His counsel referred to alleged violation of Articles 14 (equality before law) and 21 (protection of life and personal liberty) of the Constitution.

The bench rejected his petition observing that he had earlier filed a writ petition which was not pressed and was allowed to be withdrawn by the court.

“We, therefore, find that a fresh writ petition for the very same relief would not be maintainable,” it said, while asking him to pursue his review petition.

Shraddananda’s counsel referred to a web series released on an OTT platform based on the incident. “I had committed one crime. What about my right to be forgotten?” he said.

When the review plea came up for hearing, Shraddananda’s counsel said nothing adverse has been reported against him during his stay in jail and he has also got five awards for being the best prisoner.

“In such a situation, the question is whether I am still the same person… as I was at the time of commission of the crime,” he said.

The bench agreed to hear his review plea and sought responses from the state of Karnataka and others. It posted the plea for hearing after four weeks.

Shakereh, the wife of Shraddananda, was the grand daughter of Sir Mirza Ismail, a former dewan of the erstwhile princely state of Mysore.

They got married in April 1986 and Shakereh suddenly disappeared by the end of May 1991, the apex court had noted in its July 2008 verdict.

It had also noted that in March 1994, the Central Crime Branch, Bengaluru, took over the investigation of the complaint about ‘missing’ Shakereh and under intense interrogation, Shraddananda broke down and owned up to having killed her.

Her body was exhumed and Shraddananda was arrested in the case.

A trial court had in 2005 convicted Shraddananda and sentenced him to death. In September 2005, the Karnataka High Court had confirmed the conviction and death sentence awarded to him.

Shraddananda’s appeal against the high court order came up before a two-judge bench of the apex court, which unanimously upheld his conviction but differed on his sentence.

While one of the judges said he should not released from prison till the end of his life, the other judge said he deserved nothing but death.

The matter then travelled to a three-judge bench which delivered its verdict on July 22, 2008.