Article 137 of the Indian Constitution grants the Supreme Court the authority to examine any of its rulings or directives.
Aims of the Review
The Court has the right to review its judgments to correct a clear error, not a minor one of minimal importance. By no means is a review an application in disguise. This suggests that the Court is allowed to correct major errors that resulted in an incorrect conviction rather than reconsidering the case from the beginning.
Review petition submission
According to the Civil Procedure Code and the Supreme Court’s regulations, anybody considering a judgement unfair can ask for it to be reconsidered. This suggests that not all parties to a lawsuit must request a review of the ruling.
The deadline for filing a review petition is 30 days after the date of the judgment or decree. If the petitioner can demonstrate compelling grounds for the delays, the court may sometimes excuse the delay in submitting the review petition. Additionally, it is important to understand that a judgement is the ultimate decision in a matter, whereas an order is an intermediate rule subject to the final judgement.
Justifications for Examining the Review Petition
It must be emphasised that the Court does not entertain every review petition offered. If the justifications for the proposal have been proven, it will only exercise its discretion to approve a review petition.
The Supreme Court has outlined three grounds for requesting a review of a judgment it has rendered: A fault or error that is evident from the record; the discovery of fresh information or supporting documentation that, after the practice of reasonable diligence, was not known to the petitioner or could not be provided by him; or any other sufficient rationale that is analogous to the other two justifications.
Legal procedures
Review petitions are often handled without the hearing opinions of defense counsel. The judges watch it “through circulation” in their hearing rooms. However, in exceptional cases, the court will allow an oral argument. In a 2014 decision, the Supreme Court mandated that review applications in all litigation concerning the death penalty be examined in public by a three-member panel of justices. Review petitions are heard by the same panel of judges who delivered the initial sentence or ruling that is being appealed.
Is the option available when Petition Reviewed fails?
In the Roopa Hurra case in the year 2002, the supreme court introduced the idea of a curative petition, which may be considered after a review petition is denied. Whatever the case, the Supreme Court’s ruling cannot lead to any injustice. Similar to the petition discussed above, a curative petition is often not given an oral hearing and is only evaluated on a very small variety of factors.
