Article:
The Curative Petition: A Key Legal Tool in India
Recently, two convicts in the Nirbhaya case made headlines when they filed curative petitions in the Supreme Court. This came after previous mercy and review petitions had been rejected.
The concept of a curative petition is a unique legal provision in India, emerging from the landmark judgement of Rupa Ashok Hurra vs. Ashok Hurra and another case in 2002. This article dives into its origins, objectives, constitutional background, the procedure to be followed, and potential grounds for rejection.
The Origin of the Curative Petition
The concept of the curative petition was first conceived by the Supreme Court of India in 2002. The court was reflecting on whether an aggrieved person could seek relief against a final judgement or order from the Supreme Court itself, even after a review petition had been dismissed. This led to the creation of the curative petition.
Objectives of the Curative Petition
The curative petition serves two critical functions. Firstly, it helps prevent a miscarriage of justice, offering aggrieved individuals a chance to seek redress even after exhausting all other legal avenues. Secondly, it acts as a safeguard to prevent the abuse of process and ensure fair judicial procedures.
Constitutional Support for the Curative Petition
The curative petition draws its validity from Article 137 of the Indian Constitution. Article 137 empowers the Supreme Court to review its own judgements or orders regarding laws and rules made under Article 145. This petition needs to be filed within 30 days from the judgement date or order.
Procedure for Filing a Curative Petition
A curative petition can be pursued once a review plea against the final conviction has been dismissed. It can only be considered if the petitioner can prove a violation of the principles of natural justice, and that they were not heard by the court before passing an order.
This procedure should be rare rather than regular, and it must first be circulated to a Bench of the three senior-most judges and the judges who passed the concerned judgement, if available. Only when a majority of these judges agree that there is a need for hearing, should it be listed before the same Bench.
Moreover, the Bench can ask a senior counsel to assist it as a friend of the court (amicus curiae) at any stage of considering the curative petition. Such petitions are usually decided by judges in private unless there’s a specific request for an open-court hearing is allowed.
Table: Curative Petition Fast Facts
“`
| Fact | Description |
|---|---|
| Origin Year | 2002 |
| Constitutional Support | Article 137 |
| Primary Objective | Avoid miscarriage of justice, prevent abuse of process |
| Filed within | 30 days from the date of judgement or order |
“`
Grounds for Rejection
In some instances, a curative petition might be rejected. If the Bench concludes at any stage that the petition is without merit, it has the power to impose a penalty on the petitioner. This serves to prevent frivolous petitions and uphold the integrity of the judicial process.