How to File a Review Petition in the Supreme Court of India: Grounds, Procedure, and Timeline

A review petition is a legal remedy available under Article 137 of the Constitution and Order XLVII of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, allowing a party to seek reconsideration of a judgment or order passed by the Supreme Court. This guide explains the grounds on which a review petition can be filed, the procedure to follow, the applicable time limit, and how the Court decides such petitions.

Legal Basis for Review Petitions

Article 137 of the Constitution grants the Supreme Court the power to review any judgment or order made by it, subject to the provisions of any law made by Parliament or any rules made under Article 145. The specific procedure is governed by Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013. This power is inherent to the Court's role as the final appellate authority and ensures that errors, if any, can be corrected without requiring the intervention of any other body.

Grounds for Filing a Review Petition

The Supreme Court has laid down three recognized grounds for seeking a review. First, the discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due diligence, was not within the knowledge of the petitioner or could not be produced at the time when the order was made. Second, a mistake or error apparent on the face of the record. Third, any other sufficient reason analogous to the first two grounds. It is important to note that a review petition is not an appeal in disguise, and the Court will not reconsider the merits of the case merely because a party disagrees with the original decision.

Time Limit for Filing

A review petition must be filed within 30 days from the date of the judgment or order sought to be reviewed. The limitation period is strictly enforced, though the Court may condone the delay if the petitioner demonstrates strong and sufficient reasons justifying the late filing. Applications for condonation of delay must be supported by an affidavit explaining the circumstances.

Procedure for Filing

The review petition must be filed through an Advocate-on-Record (AOR) registered with the Supreme Court. The AOR must certify that the petition is the first application for review and is based on grounds admissible under Order XLVII. The petition must clearly state the grounds for review, the specific error or new evidence relied upon, and the relief sought. A certified copy of the impugned judgment must be annexed. The petition is placed before the same bench that delivered the original judgment.

How the Court Decides Review Petitions

In most cases, review petitions are decided by circulation, meaning the judges consider the petition in their chambers without oral arguments. The Court reads the petition and the connected papers and passes an order either dismissing the review or, if it finds merit, directing the matter to be listed for oral hearing. The threshold for success in a review petition is high, as the Court is generally reluctant to reopen matters already decided. Only if the petitioner demonstrates a clear and obvious error that goes to the root of the decision will the Court entertain the review.

What Happens After a Review Petition Is Dismissed

If the review petition is dismissed, the petitioner's last resort is a curative petition, which is an extraordinary remedy developed by the Supreme Court in Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra (2002). A curative petition can be filed only on very limited grounds, including a violation of principles of natural justice or a demonstrated bias. It must be certified by a Senior Advocate and is considered by the three senior-most judges of the Court. This process is outlined in the Supreme Court's own guidelines.

Key Takeaways

A review petition is a narrow remedy designed to correct manifest errors, not to reargue the case. Petitioners must act within 30 days, engage an Advocate-on-Record, and frame their grounds precisely within the three recognized categories. The vast majority of review petitions are dismissed, but the remedy remains an essential safeguard against judicial error in the highest court of the land.