Bar Council of India Notice

Disclaimer & Confirmation

As per the rules of the Bar Council of India, an advocate is not permitted to solicit work or advertise. By clicking “I Agree” below, you acknowledge and confirm that:

you are seeking information about Advocate Manish Jha of your own accord and for your own information and use; there has been no advertisement, personal communication, solicitation, invitation or inducement of any kind whatsoever from Advocate Manish Jha or the chamber to solicit any work through this website; the information made available here is provided only on your specific request; and no information on this website is to be construed as legal advice, nor does its use create any advocate-client relationship.

⚖  E-397, 4th Floor, Tagore Garden Extension, New Delhi – 110027 Mon–Sat  ·  +91 98738 50301  ·  legal@advocatemanishjha.com
Advocate Manish Jha Criminal · Civil · Family Law — New Delhi ☎  Consult the Chamber
Home › Supreme Court — Curative Jurisdiction
Procedure Explainer · Article 137 & 142

After Finality: The Curative Petition as the Supreme Court's Last Door

When an SLP has failed and review has been dismissed, one extraordinary remedy remains. Born in Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra, the curative petition reopens a final judgment only for violations of natural justice or undisclosed judicial bias — and is meant to succeed rarely.

Every litigation has a floor beneath which there is nothing further. In the Supreme Court of India, that floor is the curative petition: a judicially created remedy that permits the Court, in the rarest cases, to reconsider its own final judgment even after the dismissal of a review. The jurisdiction was recognised in Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra (Supreme Court, 10 April 2002), and everything about it — the grounds, the certification, the in-chambers procedure, the costs sanction for abuse — is designed to keep the door narrow. Clients contemplating this step need a candid account of what it can and cannot do.

Where the remedy comes from

The Constitution provides for review under Article 137, and the doctrine of finality would ordinarily end matters there. In Rupa Ashok Hurra, a Constitution Bench confronted the question whether an aggrieved person could seek relief against a final judgment of the Supreme Court even after dismissal of review. Its answer located a limited corrective power in the Court\'s inherent jurisdiction and Article 142: where a judgment was rendered in violation of natural justice, or where the process was tainted in a way that shakes public confidence in the administration of justice — as with undisclosed judicial connection to the cause — the Court may cure its own order ex debito justitiae, as a matter of the debt justice owes. The concurring opinion captured the test: intervention is warranted where the order contravenes natural justice, is without jurisdiction, or involves "even a likelihood of public confidence being shaken", and the remedy must remain "a rarity rather than regular".

The filtered path of a curative petition

Exhaustion. Judgment in the SLP or appeal, followed by a review petition under Article 137 — dismissed. The curative grounds must have been raised in the review.
Certification. A Senior Advocate certifies that the petition meets the Rupa Ashok Hurra requirements — a professional filter that makes counsel answerable for frivolous invocations.
Circulation. The petition circulates to the three senior-most judges and the available judges who delivered the impugned judgment; a majority decision is needed for listing.
Hearing. If listed, ordinarily before the same combination, and as far as possible decided in chambers; exemplary costs may follow a petition found to be without merit.

What it is not

The curative petition is not a third bite at the merits. Grounds that argue the Court misread evidence, overlooked precedent or reached a wrong conclusion belong — if anywhere — in review, and their repetition in curative form invites summary dismissal with costs. The jurisdiction polices process, not outcome: the affected person who was never heard, the judgment shaped by an undisclosed conflict, the order passed without jurisdiction. Keeping that distinction in front of the client is the most important part of advising at this stage, because by definition the client has already lost twice and hope distorts assessment.

Counsel\'s checklist

Identify a ground within the framework precisely: who was denied a hearing and how, or what connection a judge failed to disclose. If the honest answer is "none", the advice should be that the road has ended.

Verify that the ground was taken in the review petition, and obtain the required Senior Advocate certification on the specific requirements, not as a formality.

Manage expectations on timelines and outcomes in writing — including the risk of exemplary costs — so that the decision to file is the client\'s, made with full knowledge of the odds.

This article is for general information only and is not legal advice or a solicitation.

Frequently Asked Questions

On what grounds can a curative petition be entertained?

The Rupa Ashok Hurra framework confines the remedy to violations of the principles of natural justice — typically that the petitioner was not a party or was not heard though affected — and to cases where a judge who participated failed to disclose a connection with the subject matter or parties, giving rise to an apprehension of bias, or where the order was passed without jurisdiction. It is an ex debito justitiae remedy against manifest injustice, not a further appeal on merits.

What are the procedural requirements?

The petitioner must ordinarily have sought review, and the curative petition must state that the grounds were taken in the dismissed review. It must be certified by a Senior Advocate with reference to the requirements laid down by the Court, and is circulated to the three senior-most judges and, where available, the judges who passed the judgment complained of. Only if a majority finds the matter deserves hearing is it listed — normally before the same combination, and usually decided in chambers.

What are the realistic prospects of success?

Deliberately low. The Court has repeatedly described the remedy as a rarity, and has cautioned that petitions without merit may attract exemplary costs. Curative petitions have succeeded in a handful of instances in over two decades. Counsel's duty is to test the case honestly against the narrow grounds before advising the filing.

Is there any remedy after a curative petition fails?

No further judicial remedy exists within the Indian court system; the judgment attains absolute finality. Depending on the subject matter, non-judicial avenues — such as a mercy petition in capital matters — may remain, but the curative petition is the end of the litigation road.

Note: This article is general information about the law and is not legal advice. It does not create an advocate-client relationship. The position stated is as at 21 September 2026 and may have changed since. Readers should verify any provision or decision referred to against the official text and seek advice on their own circumstances.