DRAFT CONSTITUTION 499
[Article 58 was added to the Constitution without any amendment.]
ARTICLE 59
- Mr . Vice-President : Does Dr. Ambedkar wish to say anything on this amendment moved by Mr. Tajamul Husain ?
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Yes, Sir. It might be desirable that I explain in a few words in its general outline the scheme embodied in article 59. It is this : the power of commutation of sentence for offences enacted, by the Federal Law is vested in the President of the Union. The power to commute sentences for offences enacted by the State Legislatures is vested in the Governors of the State. In the case of sentences of death, whether it is inflicted under any law passed by Parliament or by the law of the States, the power is vested in both, the President as well as the State concerned. This is the scheme.
With regard to the amendment of my friend Mr. Tajamul Husain, his object is that the power to commute sentences of death permitted to the Governor should be taken away. Now, sub-clause ( 3 ) embodies in it the present practice which is in operation under which the power of commuting the death sentences is vested both in the Governor as well as in the President. The Drafting Committee has not seen any very strong arguments for taking away the power from the Governor. After all, the offence is committed in that particular locality. The Home Minister who would be advising the Governor on a mercy petition from an offender sentenced to death would be in a better position to advise the Governor having regard to his intimate knowledge of the circumstances of the case and the situation prevailing in that area. It was therefore felt desirable that no harm will be done if the power which the Governor now enjoys is left with him. There is, however, a safeguard provided. Supposing in the case of a sentence of death the mercy petition is rejected, it is always open under the provisions of this article, for the offender to approach the President with another mercy petition and try his luck there. I do not think there is any great violation of any fundamental principle involved or any inconvenience that is likely to arise if the provisions in the draft article are retained as they are.
Mr. Vice-President: Now I will put the amendment of Mr. Tajamul Husain to vote. The question is :
“That clause (3) of article 59 be deleted.”
The amendment was negatived.
*CAD, Vol. VII, 29th December 1948, pp. 1119-20.