A review petition is a legal request filed for the re-examination of a judgment delivered by the Supreme Court of India. The legal foundation for this process is established under Article 137 of the Indian Constitution.
Review petitions can be filed on various grounds, including:
In the landmark case of Sow Chandra Kante and Anr. Vs. Sheikh Habib, it was clarified that a review petition cannot be utilized to re-argue the same matter.
A curative petition serves as the last constitutional recourse available for addressing grievances within the judicial system. This legal remedy was established by the Supreme Court in the 2002 case of Rupa Ashok Hurra vs. Ashok Hurra and Anr..
Curative petitions are typically filed after a review plea has been dismissed. Their purpose is to rectify a gross miscarriage of justice. A notable case illustrating this is Yakub Abdul Razak Memon vs. State of Maharashtra, where the accused filed a curative petition prior to his execution.
Review petitions are generally filed immediately after the final judgment, whereas curative petitions are submitted only after a review petition has been dismissed.
Both review and curative petitions are usually heard in-chambers by the same bench that delivered the original judgment. However, curative petitions have stricter procedural requirements.
While review petitions can be filed based on an apparent error, curative petitions require proof of a gross miscarriage of justice, which may include instances such as judicial bias.
Understanding the distinctions between review and curative petitions is essential for the legal framework section of the Civil Services Exam. It's important to be aware of landmark cases that have set precedents for these petitions, as they might be featured in examination questions.
Elevate your learning and grasp these legal concepts to enhance your preparation!
Kutos : AI Assistant!
