Curative Petition

The Curative petition is a legal remedy available to review the final judgement of court after all other remedies have been exhausted. It is filed after the dismissal of review petition. Review petition is the remedy available to seek review of the final judgement of the court. Curative petition originated in the 2002 case of Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra & Anr. The curative petition is heard by a bench comprising the three senior-most judges of the Supreme Court, along with the judges who delivered the original judgment. It is filed in exceptional circumstances when there is clear evidence of violation of Principle of Natural justice and apprehension of judge’s bias during the final judgement. The court can dismiss the petition anytime during the hearing if the petition is without the merits. After 2002, the curative petition have been filed in many cases like Union Carbide case, Nirbhaya Gang Rape case, Rajeev Gandhi murder case etc. Hence, curative petition is an important tool to uphold the principles of justice, and ensure that the law is applied fairly and equitably.

The origin of curative petition can be traced back to the landmark judgment in Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra & Anr. (2002). In this judgement, Supreme Court established the framework of Curative petition as a final legal remedy to entitle the aggrieved to a relief against the court’s final judgement after the dismissal of review petition. The Supreme Court held that in certain exceptional circumstances where a judgment of the court appears to suffer from a gross miscarriage of justice, a curative petition may be filed to address the injustice. Since then, the tool of curative petition has been used various times. The curative petition ensures the Right to justice and fair trial enshrined in the constitution.

Curative petition is the final legal remedy available against the final judgements of the apex court. It is a procedural tool to prevent miscarriage of justice by the Courts. It is available to aggrieved person against the perceived injustices or errors in judgments pronounced by the Supreme Court. It is considered as the last resort for seeking judicial review of a judgement after all other remedies have been exhausted.

Grounds for Filing a Curative Petition: A petition can be filed if the principles of natural justice are violated. This includes if there are allegations of bias against the judges who heard the matter or if there has been an abuse of the process of law. These are very limited grounds and if they are not met then a curative petition is rejected. It is considered that since multiple appeals and even the opportunity of review has been satisfied, the litigant should only approach the court in utmost cases of urgency. That is why the grounds for curative petition are very restricted.

While the Indian Constitution does not specifically mention curative petitions, several constitutional provisions and principles provide the authority to the Supreme Court to allow such petitions.

1. Article 32 (Right to Constitutional Remedies) : It provides the right to the individual to move the Court on infringement of their Fundamental Rights. This provision empowers the Supreme Court to intervene and provide remedies in cases where fundamental rights have been violated.
2. Article 137 (Review power of Supreme Court) : It empowers the apex court to review its own judgements. It provides a basis for the court to allow the tool of curative petitions to the people as a means of correcting the injustice.
3. Article 142 (Power to do Complete Justice): Supreme Court has the power to pass any decree or order in the interest of ensuring that justice is done in the matter.
4. Doctrine of Judicial Review : The Judicial Review is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution. But it is inherent in the constitution to allow the Supreme Court to examine the constitutionality and legality of legislative and executive actions. This doctrine also provides the mechanism to ensure the justice to the citizens. These inherent powers enable the court to adopt procedural mechanisms, such as curative petitions, to address exceptional situations and uphold the rule of law.
5. Principle of Natural Justice : The Indian Constitution enshrines principles of natural justice, including the right to a fair hearing and procedural fairness. These principles guide the Supreme Court in considering curative petitions and ensuring that parties have a reasonable opportunity to be heard and present their case.

1. The curative petition can be accepted if the petitioner establishes that he was not heard by the Court before passing the judgement. It is a violation of the Principles of Natural Justice.
2. The petition can also be accepted if there is apprehension of the judge's bias while passing the judgement. For example, If a judge fails to disclose the facts.
3. The curative petitions can not be admitted in the regular cases. It is a remedy in rare cases according to the Supreme Court.
4. A curative petition needs to be certified by the Senior Advocate on substantial grounds.
5. A curative petition is filed when the review petition has been dismissed by the Court.

• It must be certified by a Senior advocate who is recognised as such by the Bar Council of India or any State.
• The petition is heard by three senior-most judges of the Supreme Court in addition to the judges who passed the original judgement.
• Such a petition is usually decided by the judges in the chamber. However if a request for an open-court hearing is made then it may be allowed.

• The Curative petition can be rejected by the Supreme Court judgement any time during the case if he/she finds that the petition is without any merit.
• In such situation, the court may also impose a penalty on the petitioner.

How is it different from Review petition

1. Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra & Anr. (2002) : The case arose from a matrimonial dispute between Rupa Ashok Hurra and Ashok Hurra. Rupa Hurra filed a review judgement against the initial judgement of Supreme court disposing of certain issues related to the divorce proceedings. After her review judgement got dismissed, she filed a curative petition. In this case the apex court recognized the concept of curative petitions as a procedural safeguard to prevent miscarriage of justice.
2. Union of India v. Union Carbide (2023) : The Government filed a curative petition in this case to increase compensation to victims of the Bhopal Gas tragedy. From Jan. 10-12, 2023, the Supreme Court of India held three days of hearings on the Curative Petition and dismissed it on the final day and noted that the settlement award was much larger than any previous damage award in India.
3. Vodafone Idea and Bharati Airtel v. Department of Telecom: The curative petition filed by telecom companies in 2013 citing that there are arithmetical errors in the calculation of Adjusted Gross Revenue (AGR) done by the Department of Telecommunications. Telecom operators are required to pay licence fee and spectrum charges in the form of ‘revenue share’ to the Government. This revenue share is calculated based on the AGR.
4. Yakub Memon v. State of Maharashtra (2015) : Yakub Memon, one of the accused in the 1993 Bombay bombings case, filed a curative petition seeking a review of the Supreme Court's decision to uphold his death sentence
5. V. Sriharan @ Murugan v. Union of India (2016): In this case, the convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case filed curative petitions challenging the Supreme Court's decision to uphold their death sentences.
6. Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation (2014) : In this case, curative petition was filed against the Supreme Court's decision to uphold the constitutionality of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalized homosexuality.
7. Mohammad Arif alias Ashfaq v. Registrar, Supreme Court of India (2014) : In this case the curative petition was filed after his review petition was dismissed by the court against the death sentence given initially.
8. Nirbhaya case (Delhi Gang Rape case 2012) : In March 2017, the Supreme Court had upheld the death sentences of four convicts in the case. After dismissal of review petition, the curative petitions were filed by the convicts. The curative petitions were rejected by the court in July 2018, affirming its earlier decision.

A curative petition is a vital remedy available against miscarriages of justice. It is based on the principle that ‘while certainty of law is important, it cannot be at the cost of justice’. It provides an opportunity to correct egregious errors, uphold the principles of justice, and ensure that the law is applied fairly and equitably. However, it is essential to note that the threshold for admission of a curative petition is exceptionally high and is used in rare situations. This unique legal remedy allows individuals or entities to seek relief even after exhausting all other avenues of appeal.