Profile
Settings
Refer your friends
Sign out
Our constitution gives an accused person enough chances of getting their verdict reviewed, even after it is announced by the Supreme Court. After a person has been declared guilty of their crimes, they can still file a review petition to the Supreme Court and a mercy petition to the President of India. If that does not work, the law gives them one last option to file a curative petition which is reviewed by a bench of judges. It exists to uphold the two primary principles – avoiding the miscarriage of justice and preventing the abuse of process.
Curative Petition Meaning & Background
The concept of curative petition came into existence in 2002 in the Rupa Ashok Hurra vs. Ashok Hurra and another case. It was a divorce case that reached the Supreme Court to question the legitimacy of a divorce order. Rupa Ashok Hurra withdrew her permission to divorce by mutual consent.
The court said that technical challenges and concerns about reopening cases had to give way to a last-resort venue for correcting flaws in a judgement that could damage the administration of justice. The Latin maxim “actus curiae neminem gravabit” was quoted, meaning that no person shall be prejudiced by the court.
This is guaranteed under Article 137 of the Indian Constitution; as per which, the apex court has the right to review any judgement pronounced or order made by it.
Procedure
It is to be noted that not everyone can simply file for a curative petition just like that. The Supreme Court only agrees to entertain a curative petition in case the aggrieved person can prove that the principles of natural justice were violated or if he can establish that his POV was not taken into consideration before passing the final judgement.
In cases where the judge of the case did not completely disclose the facts that led to the judgement–which leads to suspicion of bias–a curative petition may be entertained by the court.
It can be filed only after the dismissal of the review petition, within 30 days of the passing of the judgement. Such a petition is presented before a bench of three senior-most judges of the court and the judges who passed the order against which the petition is made. They need to give their approval for the matter to be heard, and as much as possible, it is heard by the same set of judges. It is decided by judges in chambers unless a special and valid request for an open-court hearing is stressed upon.
The petition must have the certification of a senior advocate, who can uphold that the petition is made on a valid basis and thus, deserves to be heard in the court.
If the court finds that the petition is made without any merit, then it holds the right to penalise the petitioner.
Curative Petition vs Review Petition
A curative petition is not a matter of right, i.e., not every aggrieved is entitled to it, and it is only entertained where the principles of natural justice were violated. It is a second-time petition–a last resort given to the accused. They should be rare and should be viewed with utter discretion.
A review petition, on the other hand, is filed by the accused to the court when the latter feels that the decision was taken without noting all the facts or under the purview of a bias. It is inherently provided in Article 137 of the constitution of India. A review petition can be filed in the following three circumstances:
Discovery of important evidence that could not be produced in the court earlier
Commitment of an apparent mistake while giving the judgement
Reasons analogous to the aforementioned reasons
The review petition, just like a curative petition, should be made on valid grounds.
Landmark case where Curative Petition was filed
In the 2012 Nirbhaya gang-rape case of Delhi that shook the entire country, the accused men filed a curative petition.
In 2013, a fast-track court was handed over this case to expedite the judgement of this case. The court declared the four men guilty of thirteen offences, including murder, gang rape, and attempted murder of the rape victim’s male friend. The convicts moved to the Supreme Court after this, but there also, they were declared guilty of all crimes.
Then, they filed a review verdict that was dismissed by the court and then went on to file a mercy plea which was rejected by the President of India. Then Pawan Gupta, one of the convicts, filed a curative petition which was rejected by the six-judge bench headed by Justice N.V. Ramana on the grounds of no merit in the plea.
Conclusion
The Curative petition notes are meant to equip you with a detailed understanding of the topic. The curative petition meaning should not be mixed up with that of a review petition. Both of them are similar on many grounds, but a curative petition is filed after the rejection of a review plea to ensure that no injustice is being done by the honourable court due to negligence or otherwise. It is supported by Article 137 of the Indian constitution. The court can reject the petition if it is not being made on valid grounds.
