- 10 Jan 2020
- 3 min read
Why in News
Recently the two Nirbhaya case convicts have filed Curative petitions in the Supreme Court.
- Earlier, the convicts had filed a mercy petition and review petition which has been rejected.
- The concept of the curative petition was first evolved by the Supreme Court of India in Rupa Ashok Hurra vs. Ashok Hurra and another case (2002) on the question whether an aggrieved person is entitled to any relief against the final judgement/order of the Supreme Court, even after the dismissal of a review petition.
- It’s objectives are twofolds- avoid miscarriage of justice and to prevent abuse of process.
- Constitutional Background:
- The concept of the curative petition is supported by Article 137 of the Indian Constitution. It provides that in the matter of laws and rules made under Article 145, the Supreme Court has the power to review any judgement pronounced (or order made) by it. Such a petition needs to be filed within 30 days from the date of judgement or order.
- A curative petition may be filed after a review plea against the final conviction is dismissed.
- It can be entertained if the petitioner establishes that there was a violation of the principles of natural justice, and that he was not heard by the court before passing an order.
- It must be rare rather than regular.
- A curative petition must be first circulated to a Bench of the three senior-most judges, and the judges who passed the concerned judgment, if available. Only when a majority of the judges conclude that the matter needs hearing should it be listed before the same Bench.
- The Bench at any stage of consideration of the curative petition can ask a senior counsel to assist it as amicus curiae (Friend of the court).
- A curative petition is usually decided by judges in the chamber unless a specific request for an open-court hearing is allowed.
- Grounds for Rejection:
- In the event of the Bench holding at any stage that the petition is without any merit, it may impose a penalty on the petitioner.