Article 72 of Indian Constitution of Indian1949 states as under:

Power of President to grant pardon, etc and to suspend, remit, or commute sentences in certain cases.

As per this section, if read with Article 21 of the constitution

The main object of filing mercy petition by a prisoner is to commute, remit or suspend the punishment, rather not to avail additional torture. In the case at bar, Mercy petition was filed by the petitioner which was to be decided in an expeditious manner. But an unexplained and unreasonable delay in the above said case by the executive leads to additional mental agony to the victim. The president dealt with the mercy petition in a lackadaisical manner where the question was for a man’s life on stake. For a period of more than 7 years, the president doesn’t even bother to decide the matter timely. Even after it was decided and then upheld by the Honorable Supreme Court of Indian, the concerned person was not executed for a period of 3 more years, which is totally unexplained. Giving death penalty to a person is not a bad judgment, as it states what the Law is, but what bad judgment is, the manner in which the government dealt with the prisoner which has caused injustice to the accused. Such an injustice has infringed the fundamental right of the person enshrined under Article 21 of Constitution. This is totally against the intend of the drafters of the Indian Constitution. However if the person would have been executed after the Supreme Court’s order of upholding President’s decision, there would have been no question of injustice. Double Jeopardy is not permitted in our Legal System. The person is not only subjected to punishment but also to mental agony for more than 2 decades which is a total injustice in regard to the rights of the prisoners.