Select the incorrect statement from the following :

Question

UnlockIAS · Accepted Answer

Correct — option (2) is the incorrect statement, and the stem prints 'incorrect' in bold precisely so that the negation is not missed. The President is NOT bound to give reasons for an order made under the pardoning power. This is one of the settled propositions the Supreme Court laid down when it examined Article 72, and it follows from the nature of the power itself: mercy is an act of grace standing outside the judicial process, exercised after the courts have finished, and a duty to give reasons would turn it into a further tier of adjudication reviewable on those reasons. The other three statements are all accurate statements of the law, which is what makes option (2) the odd one out. Option (1) states a real difference between Article 72 and Article 161: the President's pardoning power expressly extends to punishments and sentences inflicted by a court martial, and the Governor's does not — the President is also alone in being able to pardon a sentence of death. Option (3), printed with 'oral bearing' where 'oral hearing' is plainly meant, states another of the Supreme Court's propositions: a mercy petitioner has no right to be heard orally by the President. Option (4) states the constitutional convention that governs the power: like the President's other functions, it is exercised on the advice of the Council of Ministers, so a mercy petition is in practice processed by the Union Home Ministry and decided on the Cabinet's advice. Three true statements and one false one; the false one is option (2).

Why the other options are wrong — (a) This statement is correct, so it cannot be the answer to a question asking for the incorrect one. Article 72 gives the President the power to grant pardons, reprieves, respites and remissions, and to suspend, remit or commute sentences, in three classes of case: where the punishment or sentence is by a court martial; where the offence is against a law relating to a matter within the Union's executive power; and in all cases where the sentence is a sentence of death. Article 161 gives the Governor a parallel power, but only for offences against laws relating to matters within the State's executive power. Court martial sentences and death sentences are the two heads on which the Governor's power falls short of the President's, and this statement names the first of them accurately.  (c) Correct as a statement of law, and therefore not the answer. The Supreme Court has held that a petitioner for mercy has no right to an oral hearing before the President — the word printed in the paper is 'bearing', evidently a misprint for 'hearing'. The reasoning is of a piece with the rest of the doctrine on Article 72: the mercy power is not a judicial proceeding, so the safeguards that attach to a trial, including the right to be heard in person, do not follow it. The petition is considered on the record and on the advice tendered by the government. The same body of propositions holds that the President may examine the evidence afresh and reach a different view from the court's.  (d) Correct, and therefore not the answer. Although Article 72 is worded as a power of the President, it is not a personal discretion. Like the great bulk of the President's functions, it is exercised on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister, and the Supreme Court has stated this expressly in the context of the pardoning power. In practice a mercy petition is examined by the Ministry of Home Affairs, which places its recommendation before the President, and the President acts upon it. This is the single most tested proposition in the whole topic — UPSC set a statement in 2025 asserting the opposite, that the President can exercise the power without the advice of the Central Government, and keyed it false.

Concept: Article 72 confers on the President the power to grant pardons, reprieves, respites and remissions of punishment, and to suspend, remit or commute the sentence of any person convicted of any offence. The five kinds of relief are distinct and are regularly asked apart. A PARDON removes both the conviction and the sentence and absolves the convict of all punishments and disqualifications. COMMUTATION substitutes one form of punishment with a lighter form — a death sentence for rigorous imprisonment, for instance. REMISSION reduces the period of the sentence without changing its character. RESPITE awards a lesser sentence in place of the one originally awarded because of some special fact, such as the physical disability of the convict or the pregnancy of a woman offender. REPRIEVE stays the execution of a sentence, particularly a death sentence, for a temporary period, so that the convict may seek pardon or commutation. The purpose of the whole power is twofold: to keep a door open where an evident mistake has been made that the appellate process cannot correct, and to allow relief where a sentence, though lawful, is unduly harsh.

State PCS 2026 Q72 — Polity & Governance PYQ with Answer

State PCS 2026 Q72 — Polity & Governance PYQ with Answer