Legally present
  • Home
  • Article
  • Latest News Update
  • Law Schools
  • Supreme Court
  • Weekly Digest
Reading: Supreme Court Refuses to Entertain Swami Shraddhanand’s Plea Seeking Expeditious Decision on Mercy Petition
Share
Legally present
  • Home
  • Latest News Update
  • Supreme Court
  • Article
  • know your lawyer
  • Weekly Digest
  • Home
  • Article
  • Latest News Update
  • Law Schools
  • Supreme Court
  • Weekly Digest
Follow US
Legally Present > Supreme Court > Supreme Court Refuses to Entertain Swami Shraddhanand’s Plea Seeking Expeditious Decision on Mercy Petition
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Refuses to Entertain Swami Shraddhanand’s Plea Seeking Expeditious Decision on Mercy Petition

Last updated: 2025/12/05 at 3:59 PM
Published December 5, 2025
Share

Introduction

In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India on 5 December 2025 refused to entertain a plea seeking an expeditious decision on the pending mercy petition of Swami Shraddhanand, the 87-year-old convict serving life imprisonment without remission for the sensational murder of his wife, Shakereh Khaleeli. The case, which has been in the public eye for decades, has returned to headlines as the apex court expressed strong displeasure over the manner in which the plea was litigated.

Contents
IntroductionBench Questions Six Adjournments: “Would Have Dismissed on First Day”Petitioner’s Arguments: Age, Illness, and 31 Years Without ParoleCourt Recalls Past Litigation AttemptsASG Informs Court of Pending State OpinionComparison to Rajiv Gandhi Assassination Case RejectedPlea Withdrawn; No Liberty Granted by the CourtBackground: The Shakereh Khaleeli Murder CaseTimeline of the CaseCurrent Case DetailsConclusion

A bench comprising Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice Vijay Bishnoi heard the matter at length before dismissing it as withdrawn. Justice Maheshwari’s sharp remarks on repeated adjournments and the futility of the plea became the defining moment of the hearing.

Bench Questions Six Adjournments: “Would Have Dismissed on First Day”

During the proceedings, the bench questioned why the case had been adjourned six times, expressing dissatisfaction with how long the matter had remained pending.

Justice Maheshwari observed:

“We don’t understand why 6 adjournments were given in this case. If it had come before us, we would have dismissed it on the first day.”

These remarks indicated the bench’s firm view that the case did not merit judicial intervention from the very beginning.

Petitioner’s Arguments: Age, Illness, and 31 Years Without Parole

Advocate Varun Thakur argued that Shraddhanand, now 87, has been in jail for 31 years without a single day of parole and is seriously ill. He requested the Supreme Court to direct an expedited decision on the mercy petition pending with the Union Government.

However, the bench remained unconvinced. Justice Maheshwari pointed out that Shraddhanand has repeatedly approached courts over the years, and many of those pleas have been dismissed.

Court Recalls Past Litigation Attempts

The bench highlighted Shraddhanand’s long history of dismissed or withdrawn petitions, including:

  1. Review Petition – seeking reconsideration of the 2008 Supreme Court judgment that commuted his death penalty to life imprisonment without remission.
  2. 2014 Writ Petition – seeking parole and a stay on the Amazon Prime documentary “Dancing on the Grave”, which depicted the murder of Shakereh Khaleeli. The plea was not entertained and was ultimately withdrawn.
  3. Another Writ Petition (2024) – seeking parole, dismissed by the Supreme Court.

Given this background, the bench appeared disinclined to intervene once again.

ASG Informs Court of Pending State Opinion

Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, appearing for the Union, informed the Court that:

  • The State Government’s opinion is awaited, since the State is the prosecuting authority.
  • Once the State’s reply is received, the Union Government will process the mercy petition.

He assured that there would be no delay from the Centre’s side once the State responds.

Comparison to Rajiv Gandhi Assassination Case Rejected

Advocate Thakur, attempting to emphasize the gravity of the situation, remarked that Shraddhanand had been incarcerated for 30 years without parole while individuals convicted in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case were released.

However, this argument did not persuade the bench. The judges indicated that the circumstances of each case differ and cannot be equated casually, especially when Shraddhanand’s own past conduct and litigation history were considered.

Plea Withdrawn; No Liberty Granted by the Court

Sensing the Court’s reluctance, Advocate Thakur sought permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to approach the appropriate State authorities. The bench, however, merely dismissed the case as withdrawn without granting any liberty.

Justice Maheshwari reiterated:

“We are unable to understand why 6 adjournments have been given in this case. Don’t know why this was pending here. If this had come before us, first day only we would have dismissed.”

Background: The Shakereh Khaleeli Murder Case

The murder of Shakereh Khaleeli remains one of the most chilling crimes in India’s criminal history.

Timeline of the Case

  • 1986: Shakereh Khaleeli, granddaughter of Sir Mirza Ismail (former Dewan of Mysore), marries Shraddhanand after ending her first marriage.
  • 1994 (April-May): Shakereh disappears under mysterious circumstances.
  • June 1994: Her daughter files a missing persons complaint in Bengaluru.
  • 1994 (June): After three years of investigation, police find her body buried inside her own home.
  • Investigation Findings:
  • Shraddhanand had allegedly drugged Shakereh.
  • She was buried alive in a pit constructed inside the house.
  • Prior to this, she had executed a general power of attorney and a will in his favour, which raised suspicion of motive.
  • 1994: Shraddhanand is arrested.
  • 2000: Convicted and sentenced to death by the trial court.
  • 2005: Karnataka High Court upholds the death sentence.
  • 2007: A split verdict in the Supreme Court leads to reference to a larger bench.
  • 2008: Supreme Court commutes his death sentence to life imprisonment without remission, ensuring he remains in prison for the rest of his life.

Current Case Details

  • Title: Swamy Shraddananda @ Murali Manohar Mishra v. Union of India
  • Case Number: W.P.(Crl.) No. 5/2025
  • Bench: Justice JK Maheshwari, Justice Vijay Bishnoi
  • Outcome: Dismissed as withdrawn; no liberty granted.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s refusal to entertain Swami Shraddhanand’s plea adds yet another chapter to the decades-long legal saga surrounding the Shakereh Khaleeli murder case. The bench’s strong observations—particularly on the six adjournments and the repeated litigation—indicate a clear stance against reopening issues repeatedly settled by courts.

While the convict’s age and health were highlighted, the Court balanced those considerations against the gravity of the crime, past judicial findings, and misuse of court processes. For now, the mercy petition’s fate hinges on the State’s response, and Shraddhanand’s legal battle continues outside the Supreme Court.

Also Read

Three Credit Course on Law, Technology, and Vulnerability – Academic Opportunity at National Law University Odisha (January 2026) | Apply Now

Work From Home Does Not Give Parent an Edge in Child Custody Cases: Supreme Court

You Might Also Like

West Bengal SSC Case: Supreme Court Stays Calcutta High Court Order Granting Age Relaxation to Unappointed 2016 Candidate

NLU Degrees Are Not a Shortcut to Supreme Court Practice: CJI Surya Kant Urges Young Lawyers to Begin in District Courts

Supreme Court Flags Disparity in National Highways Act Land Acquisitions, Urges Centre to Revisit Compensation Framework

Bikram Singh Majithia Interim Bail Plea: Supreme Court Seeks Punjab Government’s Response Over Threat to Life

Supreme Court Directs Madhya Pradesh Government To Decide On Sanction To Prosecute Minister Vijay Shah Over Remarks Against Colonel Sofiya Qureshi

TAGGED: Mercy Petition, Supreme Court, Swami Sharaddhanand
Share This Article
Facebook Twitter Whatsapp Whatsapp LinkedIn Telegram
Leave a comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Weekly Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter to get our newest articles instantly!

[mc4wp_form]
Popular News
High Court

Kerala High Court: Physiotherapists & Occupational Therapists Cannot Use ‘Dr.’ Prefix Without Recognised Medical Qualification

Vanita Vanita November 6, 2025
Criminal Contempt Action Sought Against Advocate Who Attempted to Hurl Shoe at CJI BR Gavai: Legal and Constitutional Implications
Kerala Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act: Supreme Court Clarifies That Landlord Need Not File Fresh Section 12(1) Application in Tenant’s Appeal
What are my rights if I get detained by the police?
Supreme Court Stays Relocation of Deer from Hauz Khas Deer Park in Delhi: Wildlife Laws, Conservation Ethics, and Legal Oversight
lawferAd image
lexibalAd image

Categories

  • Supreme Court
  • Latest News Update
  • High Court
  • Article
  • know your lawyer

About US

Legally Present is an Indian legal news platform covering court judgments, legal rights, and insights for law professionals and students.
Quick Link
  • My Bookmark
  • InterestsNew
Top Categories
  • Advertise with us
  • Newsletters
  • Deal

Subscribe US

Subscribe to our newsletter to get our newest articles instantly!

[mc4wp_form]

© Legally Present All Rights Reserved.
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Lost your password?