Nishchya, B.A. LL.B., KLE Society’s Law College & LL.M., Gujarat National Law University
ABSTRACT
The Indian judiciary is famous for its innovations and interpretations; one such invention is the Curative Petition which was conceived in Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra. In this case, the court came up with a new judicial interpretation by providing a different interpretation of Articles 137 and 142 of the Indian Constitution. The doctrine evolved following the “Ex Debito Justiciae” principle, which aims to protect a person from miscarriage of justice. However, on the other hand, there is another principle i.e., “Interest Reipublicae Ut Sit Finis Litium,” which focuses on achieving finality of the decision to iron out the difference between the parties in lis. Therefore, I, through this paper, intend to open the pandora’s box by tracing the evolution and contemporary significance of curative petition by way of case laws, various constitutional doctrines, and the efficiency of this judicial innovation. I also intend to bring out the various difference between a curative petition and a second review petition, and finally suggest measures to resolve this legal conundrum.
