A Curative Petition is a legal remedy in the Indian judicial system that allows a petitioner to seek a
reconsideration of a final judgment or order of the Supreme Court of India, even after the dismissal
of a review petition. It is considered the last judicial resort available to a person seeking justice from
the apex court.
Legal Basis
The concept of curative petition is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, but was evolved by
the Supreme Court in the landmark case of:
Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra & Anr (2002) 4 SCC 388
In this case, the Supreme Court held that to prevent miscarriage of justice, the court can reconsider
its judgments in rare and exceptional cases, even after the review petition is dismissed.
Grounds for Filing a Curative Petition
A curative petition can be entertained only if the following grounds are satisfied:
1. Violation of principles of natural justice, such as not being heard before a judgment was
passed.
2. Bias or apprehension of bias in the judgment or by one of the judges.
3. Patent error or manifest injustice in the judgment.
4. The points raised in the curative petition were already raised in the review petition and were
dismissed.
Procedure for Filing
Filed under Article 137 of the Constitution (power to review) and under the inherent powers
of the Supreme Court.
Must be certified by a senior advocate, stating that it meets the criteria laid down in Rupa
Ashok Hurra.
Heard by the same bench of judges (or at least the senior-most judges) who delivered the
original judgment.
Generally, the hearing is done in chambers, and no oral arguments are allowed unless the
Court permits.Important Notes
It is an extraordinary remedy, not a matter of right.
The Supreme Court rarely admits curative petitions.
If admitted, the curative petition can lead to a re-hearing of the case and even alteration or
reversal of the judgment.
Curative Petition in India
Introduction
A curative petition is a rare and exceptional remedy developed by the Supreme Court of India to
prevent a gross miscarriage of justice after the dismissal of a review petition. It is rooted in the
Court’s inherent powers under Article 137 of the Constitution of India.
Legal Evolution and Basis
The doctrine of curative petition was established in the landmark case:
Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra & Anr., (2002) 4 SCC 388
Held: The Supreme Court can reconsider its final judgments in exercise of its inherent powers to
prevent abuse of process and to cure gross miscarriage of justice.
This judgment laid down the procedural and substantive conditions under which a curative petition
may be entertained.
Conditions for Filing a Curative Petition
According to the Supreme Court in Rupa Ashok Hurra, the following criteria must be fulfilled:
1. Violation of principles of natural justice (e.g., not being heard, ex parte orders).
2. Bias or apprehension of bias by a judge who participated in the decision.
3. Issues raised were also raised in the review petition but not adequately addressed.
4. A senior advocate certifies that the petition meets the prescribed requirements.
5. The petitioner must clearly state that the grounds were taken in the review petition.
Procedure
Filed under Article 137, read with Order XLVIII of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013.
Petition is generally considered by the same bench or senior-most judges.
Heard in-chambers unless the Court directs an open-court hearing.
Usually no oral arguments are allowed.
It is not a constitutional or statutory right, but a judicially evolved doctrine.
Important Case Laws
1. Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra, (2002) 4 SCC 388
– Foundational case; introduced curative petitions.
2. Yakub Abdul Razak Memon v. State of Maharashtra, (2015) 9 SCC 552
– Reiterated that curative petitions must not be used to endlessly prolong litigation.
3. Mohd. Arif @ Ashfaq v. Registrar, Supreme Court of India, (2014) 9 SCC 737
– Emphasized minimum judicial scrutiny even in death penalty cases during review and
curative stages.
4. Kamlesh Verma v. Mayawati, (2013) 8 SCC 320
– Held that curative petition is not a second review, and should only be allowed in cases of
glaring injustice.
Conclusion
The curative petition is an extraordinary judicial innovation aimed at preserving the integrity of
justice delivery. However, it is not a substitute for a regular appeal or review. Its use is strictly limited
to cases where the Court’s decision has led to manifest injustice or abuse of process.
