(a) Examine the power of the Governor to grant pardons, reprieves, respites or remissions of punishment, or to suspend, remit or commute the sentence of any person convicted of any offence against any law relating to a matter to which the executive p

Question

(a) Examine the power of the Governor to grant pardons, reprieves, respites or remissions of punishment, or to suspend, remit or commute the sentence of any person convicted of any offence against any law relating to a matter to which the executive power of the State extends. (20 marks)

(b) What are the significant changes introduced by the Constitution (Forty-fourth Amendment) Act, 1978 to emergency provisions contained in Part XVIII of the Constitution of India? Are they efficacious enough to prevent the possible abuse of power under Article 352 of the Constitution? Elaborate. (15 marks)

(c) "Lokpal and Lokayukta have roots in Indian governance culture." Explain, how the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 ensures transparency and accountability in public governance, both within and outside India. (15 marks)

UPSC Answer Check · Accepted Answer

Governor’s clemency power 
Article 161 lets the Governor grant pardons, reprieves, respites or remissions, or suspend, remit or commute sentences for offences against laws relating to matters to which State executive extends. A pardon extinguishes conviction and sentence; a reprieve delays execution; a respite gives temporary relief; a remission shortens sentence; suspension stays execution; commutation substitutes a lesser punishment. The power is limited by State executive competence and is distinct from the President’s Article 72 power over Union matters and courts-martial. Maru Ram v. Union of India held the Governor’s power independent; Epuru Sudhakar clarified that in concurrent-list matters no presidential assent is needed, but once either executive has validly exercised its clemency power, the other cannot ordinarily reopen the matter, and disputes go to the Supreme Court. Judicial review is narrow: mala fide, irrelevant considerations, arbitrariness or violation of law. In death-penalty cases, the Governor must consider relevant factors, and the 2015 Supreme Court guidelines require mercy petitions to be disposed of within a reasonable time, with delay explained. Thus, the power is wide but constitutionally bounded.

44th Amendment and emergency safeguards 
The Forty-fourth Amendment Act, 1978, responded to the 1975-77 Emergency. Article 352 replaced “internal disturbance” with “armed rebellion”; the proclamation requires the written recommendation of the Council of Ministers, not merely the Prime Minister, ceases after one month unless approved by special-majority resolution, and may be revoked at any time. Article 358 permits suspension only of Articles 14, 19 and 22; Articles 20 and 21 are protected. Article 359 cannot suspend the right to move court for enforcement of Articles 20 and 21. These changes are substantially efficacious: they raise the threshold, add collective Cabinet responsibility, parliamentary approval and revocation, and protect life and liberty. Yet they are not absolute. The President’s satisfaction remains political; “armed rebellion” can be stretched; a dominant-party Parliament may grant special majority; there is no independent pre-declaration review; and Articles 358 and 359 still permit suspension of other rights. Judicial review can check abuse but cannot replace political restraint.

Lokpal and Lokayuktas 
The idea has roots in Indian governance culture: the Arthashastra and Rigveda contemplated public accountability; the First Administrative Reforms Commission in 1966 recommended Lokayuktas; the Second ARC in 2004 recommended a Lokpal. The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, creates the Lokpal and State Lokayuktas. The Lokpal has jurisdiction over public functionaries, including the Prime Minister, Ministers, MPs and Group A/B/C officers, and over corruption connected with public office, including by public functionaries outside India. The Selection Committee appoints the Lokpal and Lokayuktas; it includes the Prime Minister, Leader of Opposition, Chief Justice of India, Union and State legislators and an eminent person, while the State committee includes the Chief Minister, Leader of Opposition, High Court Chief Justice, State legislators and an eminent person. The Lokpal, not the Selection Committee, directs the Inquiry Wing, Prosecution Wing and CBI referrals. Transparency comes from any person’s right to file a complaint, acceptance or rejection disclosed to the complainant, reasoned orders, annual reports to Parliament and State Legislatures, and the multi-party, judicially represented Selection Committee; though the Act creates no public registry of complaints, annual reports and reasoned decisions provide public accountability. The Act aligns India with the UN Convention Against Corruption and has strengthened the anti-corruption architecture, consistent with improved Transparency International CPI rankings in the mid-2010s, though later slippage shows limits. The 2014 amendment clarified CBI referral, but delay in constituting the Lokpal and uneven State Lokayuktas remain weaknesses.

In sum, these mechanisms collectively strengthen constitutional governance by adding procedural checks, protecting fundamental rights and creating an independent anti-corruption mechanism. Reforms should ensure timely mercy-petition disposal, vigilant judicial review of emergencies, prompt constitution of Lokpal and Lokayuktas, and more transparent annual reporting.

(a) Examine the power of the Governor to grant pardons, reprieves, respites or remissions of punishment, or to suspend, remit or…

Model answer

What "Examine" is asking you to do

Structure that answers it

Where marks are lost

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

Key points expected

Evaluation rubric

Must cover

Loses marks

Earns more

Extra mark

Must cover

Loses marks

Earns more

Extra mark

Must cover

Loses marks

Earns more

Extra mark

Practice this exact question

More from Law 2025 Paper I