(1.) These matters came up before us because of the conflict in the two decisions of this Court : T. V. Vatheeswaran v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1983 (2) SCR 348 : 1983 (2) SCC 68, Sher Singh v. State of Punjab, 1983 (2) SCR 582 : 1983 (2) SCC 344, and observations in the case of Javed Ahmed Abdul Hamid Pawala v. State of Maharashtra, 1985 (2) SCR 8 : 1985 (1) SCC 275. In Vatheeswaran case [1983 (2) SCR 348 : 1983 (2) SCC 68], a Bench of two Judges of this Court held that two years delay in execution of the sentence after the judgment of the trial Court will entitle the condemned prisoner to ask for commutation of his sentence of death to imprisonment for life. The Court observed that :
(2.) In Sher Singh case [1983 (2) SCR 582 : 1983 (2) SCC 344] which was a decision of a three Judges' Bench it was held that a condemned prisoner has a right of fair procedure at all stages, trial, sentence and incarceration but delay alone is not good enough for commutation an two years rule could not be laid down in cases of delay. It was held that the Court in the context of the nature of offence and delay could consider the question of commutation of death sentence. The Court observed :
(3.) In Javed case, [1985 (2) SCR 8 : 1985 (1) SCC 275] it was observed that the condemned man who had suffered more than two years and nine months and was repenting and there was nothing adverse against him in the Jail records, this period of two years and nine months with the sentence of death heavily weighing on his mind will entitle him for commutation of sentence of death into imprisonment for life. It is because of this controversy that the matter was referred to a five Judges' Bench and hence it is before us.