Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

13 It is well settled that while exercising constitutional power under Article 161 of the Constitution of India to grant remission, the Governor acts on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers as contemplated under Article 163, ibid. This position is made clear by the decision of the Supreme Court in Maru Ram vs. Union of India and others2, wherein, it is observed thus:

“The power under Articles 72 and 161 of the Constitution can be exercised by the Central and State Governments, not by the President or Governor on their own. The advice of the appropriate Government binds the Head of the State. No separate order for each individual case is necessary but any general order made must be clear enough to identify the group of cases and indicate the application of mind to the whole group.” 14 Instances have, however, not been found wanting where the exercise of power under Article 161, coming as it does from a high constitutional functionary, have been tainted with irrelevant and extraneous considerations. The decision in Epuru Sudhakar vs. State of Andhra Pradesh3 is a good example where a “pariah became a messiah” on account of a change in Government, and had obtained clemency largely on account of the fact that the prisoner’s wife was a sitting MLA in the then ruling dispensation.