INTRODUCTION:
The Constitution of India under Article 136 vests the Supreme Court of India with a special power to grant special leave to appeal against any judgment or order or decree in any matter or cause passed or made by any Court/tribunal in the territory of India.
This is special power bestowed upon the Supreme Court of India which is the Apex Court of the country to grant leave to appeal against any judgment in case any substantial constitutional question of law is involved or gross injustice has been done.
“Special leave petition” or SLP hold a prime place in the Indian judicial system. It provides the aggrieved party a special permission to be heard in Apex court in appeal against any judgment or order of any Court/tribunal in the territory of India.
MEANING OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION:
Special leave petition (SLP) means that an individual takes special permission to be heard in appeal against any high court/tribunal verdict. Thus it is not an appeal but a petition filed for an appeal. So after an SLP is filed, the Supreme Court may hear the matter and if it deems fit, it may grant the ‘leave’ and convert that petition into an ‘appeal’. SLP shall then become an Appeal and the Court will hear the matter and pass a judgment.
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION CAN BE PRESENTED UNDER FOLLOWING CIRCUMSTANCE:
Special Leave Petition can be filed against any judgment or decree or order of any high court/tribunal in the territory of India, or
Special Leave Petition can be filed in case a high court refuses to grant the certificate of fitness for appeal to Supreme Court of India.
TIME LIMIT TO FILE SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION:
- It can be filed against any judgment of a high court within 90 days from the date of judgment, or
- It can be filed within 60 days against the order of a high court refusing to grant the certificate of fitness for appeal to Supreme Court
WHO CAN FILE SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION?
Any aggrieved party can file an SLP against the judgment or order of refusal of grant of certificate.
Through SLP, an aggrieved party can appeal to the Supreme Court against any judgement passed by any lower court or tribunal. This leave is granted when the case involves a question of law. Mere errors of fact, mis-appreciation of evidence or even findings of fact arrived at wrongly are not grounds of appeal before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is only concerned with question of law i.e. if the law was correctly applied, whether the interpretation of law was in accordance with the settled principles of law etc.
The aggrieved party or the petitioner filing SLP has to give a brief synopsis of the facts and issues presented in the case along with a list of dates specifying the chronology of events pertinent to the judgments. Along with this, the petitioner has to formulate questions of law to appeal against the judgments. These questions should pertain to laws relevant to the general public as well.
Once registered and presented in the Supreme Court, the petitioner will get a hearing before the Court. Subsequently, depending on the merits of the case, the Supreme Court will issue a notice to the opposite parties who will then file a counter affidavit stating their views. It’s at this point that the Supreme Court will decide whether to grant leave to the petitioner or not. If the Court grants leave, the case is then converted into a civil appeal and will be argued afresh in the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court can rescind or revoke the earlier judgment, modify it or allow it. The Court can also send the case back to the relevant lower court for fresh adjudication in light of principles laid down by it or on account of any issues missed out by the lower court.
Article 133–136 of the Constitution of India defines the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Article 133 provides for civil appeals from orders of the High Court,
Article 134 provides for criminal appeals and Article 136 provides for special leave petition. If a case does not fall within Article 133 or Article 134 then under Article 136 the Supreme Court may be moved and a special permission may sought to grant leave to appeal.
CONTENTS OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION:
This petition is required to state all the facts that are necessary to enable the court to determine whether SLP ought to be granted or not. It is required to be signed by Advocate on record. The petition should also contain statement that the petitioner has not filed any other petition in the High Court.
It should be accompanied by a certified copy of judgment appealed against and an affidavit by the petitioner verifying the same and should also be accompanied by all the documents that formed part of pleading in Lower Court.
THE SCOPE OF POWER VESTED WITH THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA UNDER ARTICLE 136:
The constitution of India vest “discretionary power” in the Supreme Court of India. The Supreme Court of India may in its discretion be able to grant special leave to appeal from any judgment or decree or order in any matter or cause made or passed by any Court/tribunal in the territory of India. The Supreme Court of India may also refuse to grant the leave to appeal by exercising its discretion.
An aggrieved party from the judgment or decree of high court cannot claim special leave to appeal as a right but it is privilege which the Supreme Court of India is vested with and this leave to appeal can be granted by it only.
An aggrieved party can approach the Apex Court under Article 136 in case any constitutional or legal issue exists and which can be clarified by the Supreme Court of India. This can be heard as civil or criminal appeal as the case may be.
This is “residual power” vested with the Supreme Court of India.
JUDGEMENTS OF VARIOUS COURTS OF INDIA ON SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION:
- Pritam Singh V States, the Supreme Court laid down the broad principles within which it would exercise its jurisdiction in granting special leave under this Article. The Court observed:
“On a careful examination of Article 136 along with the preceding article, it seems clear that the wide discretionary power with which this Court is invested under it is to be exercised sparingly and in exceptional cases only, and as far as possible a more or less uniform standard should be adopted in granting special leave in the wide range of matters which can come up before it under this article. By virtue of this article, we can grant special leave in civil cases, in criminal cases, in income tax cases, in cases which come up before different kinds of tribunals and in a variety of other cases. The only uniform standard which in our opinion can be laid down in the circumstances is that the Court should grant special leave to appeal only in those cases where special circumstances are shown to exist.
- The purpose and scope of Article 136 was discussed by a Bench of five Judges in Bihar Legal Support Society v. Chief Justice of India, where the Court observed:
It may, however, be pointed out that this Court was never intended to be a regular court of appeal against orders made by the High Court or the sessions court or the magistrates. It was created as an Apex Court for the purpose of laying down the law for the entire country and extraordinary jurisdiction for granting special leave was conferred upon it under Article 136 of the Constitution so that it could interfere whenever it found that law was not correctly enunciated by the lower courts or tribunals and it was necessary to pronounce the correct law on the subject. This extraordinary jurisdiction could also be availed by the rt for the purpose of correcting grave miscarriage of justice, but such cases would be exceptional by their very nature. It is not every Case where the Apex Court finds that some injustice has been done that it would grant special leave and interferes. That would be converting the Apex Court into a regular court of appeal and moreover, by so doing Apex Court would soon be reduced to a position where it will find itself unable to remedy any injustice at all on account of the tremendous backlog of cases which is bound to accumulate.”
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITIONS IN CRIMINIAL MATTERS:
- In Ramabhupala Reddy v. State of A.P., the Supreme Court has defined the scope of interference under Article 136 in criminal matters as follows:
Although the powers of this Court under that article are very wide, this Court, following the practice adopted by the Judicial Committee has prescribed limits on its own power and in criminal appeals, except under exceptional circumstances it does not interfere with the findings of fact reached by the High Court unless it is of the opinion that the High Court had disregarded the forms of legal process or had violated the principles of natural justice or otherwise substantial and grave injustice has resulted. This Court does not ordinarily reappraise the evidence if the High Court has approached the case before it in accordance with the guidelines laid down by this Court unless some basic error on the part of the High Court is brought to the notice of this Court. It is best to bear in mind that except in certain special cases, the High Court is the final Court of appeal and this Court is only a Court of special jurisdiction.
CONDITIONS REQUIRED TO BE SATISFIED FOR INVOKING JURISDICTION OF THE COURT UNDER ARTICLE 136:
A reading of Article 136 would indicate that unless the following conditions are satisfied the Court will not interfere under Article 136 of the Constitution:
- The proposed appeal must be from any judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order, that is to say, it must not against a purely executive or administrative order. If the determination or order giving rise to the appeal is a judicial or quasi-judicial determination or order, the first condition is satisfied. It may be in any cause or matter.
- That the said determination or order must have been made or passed by any court or Tribunal in the territory of India.
The Court has further held that unless both the conditions are satisfied, Article 136(1) cannot be invoked.