Rajiv Gandhi assassination case
This case analysis is written by Krishna Gururaj Hallur, Ramaiah College of Law, BBA LLB, during his internship at LeDroit India.
Citations: 1999 Cri. LJ 3124 (SC), 1999 5 SCC 253, 1999 SCC (Cri) 691, 1999 SCC OnLine SC 571.
INTRODUCTION
The State of Tamil Nadu v. Nalini case revolves around the assassination of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi on May 21, 1991, in Sriperumbudur, Tamil Nadu, by a suicide bomber linked to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). Nalini, one of the key accused in the conspiracy, was charged with multiple offenses, including murder and involvement in terrorist activities under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA). This case highlights the application of counter-terrorism laws, the role of confessions, and the challenges in proving intent and conspiracy in high-profile criminal cases. The following analysis delves into the legal issues, judicial decisions, and the ultimate verdict that shaped the course of this landmark case.
BACKGROUND
After the assassination of his mother, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, in 1984, Rajiv Gandhi became India’s youngest Prime Minister at the age of 40. He served from 1984 until 1989, during which he implemented various reforms aimed at modernizing India’s economy and bureaucratic systems.
A key aspect of his time in office was his involvement in the Sri Lankan Civil War. In 1987, his government signed the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord, which resulted in the deployment of the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) in Sri Lanka. The mission’s goal was to disarm multiple militant groups, including the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), and to maintain peace. However, the IPKF soon encountered direct conflict with the LTTE, leading to casualties on both sides and straining relations. The LTTE viewed the actions of the IPKF as betrayals, which fostered deep resentment towards Rajiv Gandhi.
Following his term as Prime Minister, Rajiv remained active in politics and was campaigning for the upcoming elections in 1991. On May 21, 1991, during an election rally in Sriperumbudur, Tamil Nadu, he was assassinated by a suicide bomber named Dhanu, later identified as Thenmozhi Rajaratnam, who was affiliated with the LTTE. This attack resulted in the deaths of Rajiv Gandhi and 14 others, marking a tragic moment in India’s history.
The accused in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case were charged under TADA, given the nature of the attack and its implications on national security. The use of TADA in this case reflected the Indian government’s strict approach towards terrorism and its efforts to deter extremist activities. However, TADA was later criticized for alleged misuse, leading to its eventual repeal in 1995.
The assassination triggered extensive investigations, leading to the conviction of several individuals, including Nalini Sriharan. Nalini was arrested shortly after the incident and, in 1998, was sentenced to death along with others involved. However, in 1999, her death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment, taking into account her age and status as a mother. Over the years, discussions regarding the fairness of the death penalty and the lengthy incarceration of convicts have persisted, highlighting the case’s lasting impact on India’s legal and political landscape.
The assassination of Rajiv Gandhi had significant implications for both Indian politics and international relations, particularly in relation to India’s foreign policy towards Sri Lanka and its strategies for counter-terrorism.
FACTS OF THE CASE
- The Assassination:
- Rajiv Gandhi was assassinated on May 21, 1991, in Sriperumbudur, Tamil Nadu, while attending a political rally.
- A female suicide bomber, Dhanu, posing as a supporter, detonated an explosive device hidden in her belt as she approached him.
- The blast killed Rajiv Gandhi and 14 others, including police officers, party workers, and innocent bystanders.
- The assassination was orchestrated by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) as retaliation for Gandhi’s decision to send the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) to Sri Lanka during the civil war.
- Role of Nalini Sriharan:
- Nalini Sriharan was a key conspirator in the assassination plot and a close associate of Murugan, another major accused.
- She played a crucial role in logistics and planning, ensuring that Dhanu had access to the rally.
- Nalini actively participated in smuggling Dhanu to the venue and was present at the site when the attack took place.
- Following the assassination, she attempted to evade arrest but was soon captured by law enforcement.
- Charges Against Nalini:
- Nalini was charged with conspiracy to commit murder under Sections 120-B and 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
- Additionally, she was charged under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) for involvement in terrorist activities.
ISSUES RAISED:
- Is Nalini accountable for the assassination even if she did not directly carry out the act?
- Can Nalini and the other accused be charged under the provisions of the TADA Act?
- Is the confession made by one accused admissible as evidence against another co-accused?
- Was the imposition of the death penalty on the accused justified given their actions?
TRIAL OF NALINI SRIHARAN AND CO-ACCUSED
The trial of Nalini Sriharan and her co-accused was a lengthy and complex legal process spanning over a decade. A special court was established under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), a law enacted in 1987 to address terrorism-related offences. This special TADA court had the authority to conduct the trial in camera (in secret) to protect witness identities and ensure their safety.
LEGAL AND PROCEDURAL CHALLENGES
Throughout the proceedings, several legal and procedural challenges arose. The accused contested the constitutionality of TADA, arguing that it violated their fundamental rights. They also raised objections regarding the admissibility of evidence and the credibility of certain witnesses. The trial faced multiple delays due to procedural issues, frequent adjournments, and the illness of some defendants.
Although TADA was repealed in 1998, the trial continued under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). In 1999, the trial court convicted all the defendants, including Nalini Sriharan, for murder, conspiracy, and terrorism, sentencing her to death.
TRIAL PROCEDURES
The trial commenced in 1994, with 41 individuals charged under various laws, including the IPC, the Explosive Substances Act, and TADA. The special court in Chennai, Tamil Nadu, oversaw the proceedings.
Nalini was charged with multiple offences, including criminal conspiracy, murder, and attempted murder. She pleaded not guilty, claiming she had been coerced into participating in the conspiracy. The prosecution, however, presented a compelling case supported by multiple witness testimonies.
During the trial, Nalini confessed before a magistrate about her involvement. However, she later retracted her confession, alleging that it had been made under duress. The legal battle continued for years, with the accused filing numerous challenges and appeals.
In 1998, the trial court found all defendants guilty and sentenced them to death, including Nalini. She appealed her conviction and sentence before the Madras High Court, which upheld her conviction but commuted her sentence to life imprisonment. The case was then taken to the Supreme Court of India, where Nalini filed a review petition against the High Court’s decision.
ARREST AND TRIAL
Nalini, along with 25 other conspirators, was arrested in connection with the assassination. All were charged and tried under TADA. The trial court sentenced Nalini and three others—Santhan, Murugan, and Perarivalan—to death. The remaining accused were sentenced to life imprisonment or lesser sentences by the trial court.
APPEAL IN THE MADRAS HIGH COURT
An appeal was filed in the Madras High Court challenging the decision of the trial court. However, the High Court upheld the trial court’s decision, rejecting the appeal.
APPEAL IN THE SUPREME COURT
Aggrieved by the decision of the Madras High Court, Nalini approached the Supreme Court seeking relief.
ARGUMENTS BEFORE THE COURT
- Nalini’s Contentions:
- Delay in Clemency Decision:
Nalini argued that the prolonged delay in adjudicating her clemency petition infringed upon her fundamental right to life. - Inapplicability of the Death Penalty:
She contended that her actions did not constitute a “rarest of rare” case, a criterion established by Indian jurisprudence for the imposition of capital punishment. - Coerced Confession:
Nalini asserted that her confession was obtained under duress and should not have been admitted as evidence during the trial.
B. Prosecution’s Arguments:
- Reasonable Clemency Processing Time:
The prosecution maintained that the time taken to decide on the mercy petition was reasonable and did not violate constitutional rights. - Severity of the Crime:
Emphasizing the heinous nature of the offense, the assassination of a former Prime Minister, the prosecution argued that it warranted the death penalty. - Voluntary Confession:
It was asserted that Nalini’s confession was made voluntarily, without coercion, and was thus admissible as evidence.
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGEMENT
The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions of all accused and confirmed the death sentences of Murugan, Santhan, and Perarivalan, while commutating Nalini’s sentence to life imprisonment.
- Constructive Liability: The court ruled that even if the accused did not directly carry out the assassination, they were guilty under the principle of “constructive liability,” which holds individuals responsible if they facilitate or abet a crime.
- Common Intention: The court determined that the accused shared a common purpose to commit the offence. Evidence showed multiple meetings where the conspiracy was discussed, and logistical support was provided for the assassination.
- Justification for Death Sentences: The court stated that the killing of a former Prime Minister was an act that jeopardized national security and stability. The lack of remorse and non-cooperation with the investigation justified capital punishment for some of the accused.
Impact and Recent Developments
The case significantly influenced India’s legal framework regarding terrorism and national security. It highlighted the role of the LTTE in Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination and led to the enactment of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) in 2002.
In a significant development in 2022, the Supreme Court ordered the release of Nalini, Santhan, Murugan, and three other convicts, marking the end of a decades-long legal battle.
CONCLUSION
The State of Tamil Nadu v. Nalini case remains a landmark in Indian legal history, reflecting the complexities of counter-terrorism laws, judicial discretion, and the principles of criminal liability. The verdict reinforced the doctrine of constructive liability, underscoring that individuals involved in a conspiracy can be held accountable even if they do not directly commit the crime. It also highlighted critical legal debates surrounding the admissibility of confessions, the imposition of the death penalty, and the prolonged incarceration of convicts.
Beyond its legal dimensions, the case had profound political and security implications, influencing India’s counter-terrorism policies and shaping public discourse on justice and clemency. The Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to release Nalini and other convicts marked the conclusion of a prolonged legal battle, closing a significant chapter in India’s judicial history. However, the case continues to serve as a reference point in discussions on legal accountability, human rights, and national security.
REFERENCES
- Full Judgment Text – https://indiankanoon.org/doc/194120/
- State of Tamil Nadu vs. Nalini (1999) – iPleaders – https://blog.ipleaders.in/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-nalini-1999/
- Supreme Court judge who sentenced Rajiv Gandhi’s killers in 1999 calls for their release – India Today – https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/rajiv-gandhi-assassination-case-supreme-court-judge-kt-thomas-release-convicts-nalini-perarivalan-1950998-2022-05-18
- State Through Superintendent of Police, CBI/SIT vs. Nalini and Others – Digital Supreme Court Reports – https://digiscr.sci.gov.in/view_judgment?id=Mjc5ODE%3D
- The Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, and why Supreme Court has released the convicts – The Indian Express – https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/rajiv-gandhi-assassination-case-explained-supreme-court-releases-convicts-8262742/
- State of Tamil Nadu vs. Nalini – NIA – https://www.nia.gov.in/writereaddata/Portal/LawReference/30_1_State_of_Tamil_Nadu_vs_Nalini.pdf
- Case Analysis: State of Tamil Nadu v Nalini – Aishwarya Sandeep – https://aishwaryasandeep.in/case-analysis-state-of-tamil-nadu-v-nalini/
- State v. Nalini: A Detailed Examination of Evidence and Legal Proceedings – https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4799394
- Rajiv Gandhi Assassination case – Indian National Bar Association – https://www.indianbarassociation.org/rajiv-gandhi-assassination-case-remission-plea-deferred-to-july-21-by-constitution-bench/
- “Assassination of Rajiv Gandhi & Remission of Sentence – NEXT IAS” – https://www.nextias.com/ca/current-affairs/12-11-2022/assassination-of-rajiv-gandhi-remission-of-sentence
- Rajiv Gandhi assassination: SC orders premature release of Nalini, 5 other convicts – https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/supreme-court-sets-free-six-convicts-in-rajiv-gandhi-assassination-case/articleshow/95446731.cms
