A.G . Perarivalan. File
| Photo Credit: S. Siva Saravanan
The Madras High Court has directed the Regional Passport Office (RPO) in Chennai to consider a representation made by Rajiv Gandhi assassination case convict A.G. Perarivalan for the expeditious disposal of his passport application pending with the passport seva kendra (PSK) in Tambaram.
Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy issued the direction while disposing of a writ petition filed by the convict, seeking a direction to both the RPO and the PSK to consider a representation made by him on September 1, 2026, for taking a time-bound decision on his application for the issuance of an Indian passport.
The petitioner was listed as the 18th accused in the case registered pursuant to the assassination of the former Prime Minister by a suicide bomber at Sriperumbudur in Tamil Nadu on May 21, 1991. The case against him was tried before a Special Court for Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987.
The trial court convicted him for offences under the Indian Penal Code, the Arms Act, the Explosive Substances Act, the Passports Act, the Foreigners Act, as well as Indian Wireless Telegraph Act, and sentenced him to death. The conviction, as well as the death sentence, was confirmed by the Supreme Court on May 11, 1999.
The top court dismissed his review plea on October 8, 1999, and thereafter, the Tamil Nadu Governor had rejected his mercy petitions, under Article 161 of the Constitution, on October 27, 1999, and April 25, 2000. His mercy plea to the President, under Article 72 of the Constitution, was also rejected on August 12, 2011.
Perarivalan’s release
Aggrieved over it, he moved the Madras High Court by way of a writ petition, which was transferred to the Supreme Court in 2012, and the latter commuted his death sentence to life imprisonment on February 18, 2014. Thereafter, on September 9, 2018, the State Cabinet recommended his release from prison.
On January 25, 2021, the Governor forwarded the Cabinet recommendation to the President for determination and on May 18, 2022, the Supreme Court held that the Governor was bound by the advice of the State Cabinet, whether he likes it or not, and he ought not to have forwarded the recommendation to the President.
Taking into account the convict’s long incarceration for nearly 32 years, his satisfactory conduct in jail and also during the period when he was on parole, his chronic ailments and educational qualifications, the top court invoked its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to order that he should be set at liberty forthwith.
Bar enrolment
After his release from prison, the petitioner completed his law degree and got enrolled with the Bar council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry (BCTNP) on April 27, 2026. Congress Member of Parliament R. Sudha, representing the Mayiladuthurai constituency, objected to such enrolment.
However, BCTNP enrolment committee chairman K. Balu replied that the Advocates Act, 1961, permits the enrolment of convicts after the cooling-off period of two years from their release and hence, there was no illegality in including the writ petitioner in the rolls of the bar council.
The Centre, too, had taken a similar stand in a counter affidavit filed in response to Ms. Sudha’s writ petition filed against the enrolment.
Published – October 02, 2026 11:21 am IST
