Explained | Article 142 of the Constitution under which Supreme Court ordered release of Perarivalan

The story so far: The Supreme Court on Wednesday exercised the power conferred on it under Article 142 of the Constitution to order the release of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi assassination case convict A.G. Perarivalan. Article 142 reads: “Subject to the provisions of any law made in this behalf by Parliament, the Supreme Court shall, as respects the whole of the territory of India, have all and every power to make any order for the purpose of securing the attendance of any person, the discovery or production of any documents, or the investigation or punishment of any contempt of itself.” In the case of Perarivalan, the Supreme Court invoked Article 142 under which it was empowered to pass any order necessary to do complete justice in any matter pending before it. Important instances when Article 142 was invoked Bhopal Gas tragedy case: The Supreme Court awarded a compensation of $470 million to the victims and held that “prohibitions or limitations or provisions contained in ordinary laws cannot, ipso facto, act as prohibitions or limitations on the constitutional powers under Article 142.” Babri Masjid demolition case: The Supreme Court ordered framing of a scheme by the Centre for formation of trust to construct Ram Mandir at the Masjid demolition site in Ayodhya. The upshot is that the State government, whether the Governor likes it or not, can advise and act under Article 161, the Governor being bound by that advice.” The Bench also said: “The action of commutation and release can thus be pursuant to a governmental decision and the order may be issued even without the Governor’s approval although, under the Rules of Business and as a matter of constitutional courtesy, it is obligatory that the signature of the Governor should authorise the pardon, commutation or release.” However, in so far as the State Cabinet’s September 9, 2018 recommendation to release all seven convicts involved in the assassination case was concerned, the Governor had kept it pending for long and forwarded it to the President in January 2021. Disapproving of such a reference, the Supreme Court on Wednesday wrote: “The reference of the recommendation of the Tamil Nadu Cabinet by the Governor to the President of India, two and a half years after such recommendation had been made, is without any constitutional backing.” It is after such a ruling that the court thought it fit to invoke its extraordinary power under Article 142 to order release of Perarivalan.