Nirbhaya Case: Two convicts file curative pleas-The Hindu-10-01-2020
Another death row convict in the Nirbhaya gang rape and murder case, Mukesh Singh has filed the curative petition in the Supreme Court in a last-ditch effort to escape the noose.
Curative Petition is the last judicial resort available for redressal of grievances in court which is normally decided by judges in-chamber. It is only in rare cases that such petitions are given an open-court hearing.
The concept of the curative petition was evolved by the Supreme Court of India in the matter of Rupa Ashok Hurra vs Ashok Hurra and Anr. (2002) where the question was whether an aggrieved person is entitled to any relief against the final judgement/order of the Supreme Court, after the dismissal of a review petition.
The Supreme Court, in the case, held that in order to prevent abuse of its process and to cure gross miscarriage of justice, it may reconsider its judgements in the exercise of its inherent powers.
For this purpose, the Court has devised what has been termed as a “curative” petition.
Certain specific conditions are laid down by the Supreme Court to entertain the curative petitions.
The petitioner will have to establish that there was a genuine violation of principles of natural justice and fear of the bias of the judge and that the judgement adversely affected him.
The petition shall state specifically that the grounds mentioned had been taken in the review petition and that it was dismissed by circulation.
The petition is to be sent to the three senior-most judges and judges of the bench who passed the judgement affecting the petition, if available.
If the majority of the judges on the above bench agree that the matter needs hearing, then it would be sent to the same bench (as far as possible).
The court could impose “exemplary costs” to the petitioner if his plea lacks merit.
Review of judgments or orders by the Supreme Court subject to the provisions of any law made by Parliament or any rules made under Article 145, the Supreme Court shall have power to review any judgment pronounced or order made by it.