curative petition

The Supreme Court created the remedy in Rupa Ashok Hurra, using its inherent power to prevent abuse of its process and to cure gross miscarriage of justice. It lies only after a review petition is dismissed, and on narrow grounds: violation of natural justice, such as a person affected not being heard, or a judge failing to disclose a connection that gives rise to apprehension of bias.

A senior advocate must certify that the grounds are made out. The petition goes first to the three senior-most judges and the judges who decided the case, if available; it is listed for hearing only if a majority think it merits it. Frivolous petitions can attract costs. The procedure is now in the Supreme Court Rules, 2013.

Example

After his review was dismissed, the convict filed a curative petition, arguing that he was never heard on the new evidence relied on against him.

In Indian law

• Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra, 2002 INSC 189
• Order XLVIII, Supreme Court Rules, 2013 (curative petition)

See also

review · special leave petition · natural justice · per incuriam

Read more in the study notes

• Arbitral award and setting aside under section 34 (Alternative Dispute Resolution Systems)
• Articles 32 and 226: constitutional remedies, the writs and PIL (Constitutional Law I)
• Common law and criminal law remedies for environmental harm (Environmental Law)
• Patents: meaning, patentability and non-patentable inventions (Intellectual Property Rights I)
• The nature of the judicial process: Cardozo and the common law model (Judicial and Legislative Process)
• What Are Not Inventions: Section 3, Section 4 and Computer-Related Inventions (Law of Patents in India)