In which of the following cases did the Supreme Court say that the Governor cannot exercise his power of suspension of sentence under Article 213 of the Constitution for the period when the Supreme Court is seized of the case?

Correct option is C

In K. M. Nanavati vs. State of Bombay (1961), the Supreme Court held that once the Supreme Court is seized of a matter, the Governor’s power to suspend the sentence is held in abeyance till the final decision by the Court.
Information Booster:
· Article 161 gives the Governor the power to grant pardons, reprieves, respites, or remissions of punishment.
· However, this power becomes restricted when the Supreme Court is already hearing the case under its appellate jurisdiction.
Additional Information:
· K. M. Nanavati case is one of India's landmark cases, also significant for discussions about jury trials and executive clemency.
· The jury system was abolished in India soon after this case due to perceived flaws exposed during the trial.