|
Curative Petition
The Curative Petition is the last chance available for the protection from the compensation of injustice in the court after the review petition is dismissed or has been exhausted. It is a concept that evolved by the Supreme Court of India in the matter of ''Rupa Ashok Hurra vs. Ashok Hurra and Anr.'' (2002) in which the question was whether an aggrieved person is entitled to any relief against the final judgement or order of the Supreme Court after the dismissal of a review petition. The Supreme Court held that to prevent abuse of its process and to cure gross miscarriage of justice, it may reconsider its judgements in exercise of its inherent powers. For that purpose, the court has devised what has been termed as a curative petition in which the petitioner is required to aver specifically that the grounds mentioned therein had been taken in the review petition filed earlier and that it was dismissed by circulation, which must be certified by a senior advocate. The curative petiti ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Supreme Court Of India
The Supreme Court of India ( IAST: ) is the supreme judicial authority of India and is the highest court of the Republic of India under the constitution. It is the most senior constitutional court, has the final decision in all legal matters except for personal laws and interstate river disputes, and also has the power of judicial review. The Chief Justice of India is the Head and Chief Judge of the Supreme Court, which consists of a maximum of 34 judges, and has extensive powers in the form of original, appellate and advisory jurisdictions. New judges here are uniquely nominated by existing judges and other branches of government have neglible say as the court follows collegium system for appointments. As the apex and most powerful constitutional court in India, it takes up appeals primarily against verdicts of the High Courts of various states of the Union and other courts and tribunals. It is required to safeguard the fundamental rights of citizens and settles dispute ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Review Petition
In India, a binding decision of the Supreme Court/ High Court can be reviewed in Review Petition. The parties aggrieved on any order of the Supreme Court on any apparent error can file a review petition. Taking into consideration the principle of stare decisis, courts generally do not unsettle a decision, without a strong case. This provision regarding review is an exception to the legal principle of stare decisis. Article 137 of the Constitution provides that subject to provisions of any law and rule made under Article 145 the Supreme Court of India has the power to review any judgement pronounced (or order made) by it. Under Supreme Court Rules, 1966 such a petition needs to be filed within 30 days from the date of judgement or order. It is also recommended that the petition should be circulated without oral arguments to the same bench of judges that delivered the judgement (or order) sought to be reviewed. It is not necessary for the court to accept every review petition. C ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Miscarriage Of Justice
A miscarriage of justice occurs when a grossly unfair outcome occurs in a criminal procedure, criminal or civil procedure, civil proceeding, such as the conviction and punishment of a person for a crime they actual innocence, did not commit. Miscarriages are also known as wrongful convictions. Innocent people have sometimes ended up in prison for years before their conviction has eventually been overturned. They may be exonerated if new evidence comes to light or it is determined that the police or prosecutor committed some kind of misconduct at the original trial. In some jurisdictions this leads to the payment of compensation. Academic studies have found that the main factors contributing to miscarriages of justice are: eyewitness identification, eyewitness misidentification; faulty forensic analysis; false confessions by vulnerable suspects; perjury and lies stated by witnesses; police misconduct, misconduct by police, prosecutorial misconduct, prosecutors or judicial miscondu ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Senior Advocate
The title of Senior Counsel or State Counsel (post-nominal letters: SC) is given to a senior lawyer in some countries that were formerly part of the British Empire. "Senior Counsel" is used in current or former Commonwealth countries or jurisdictions that have chosen to change the title "King's Counsel" to a name without monarchical connotations, usually related to the British monarch that is no longer head of state, such that reference to the King is no longer appropriate. Examples of jurisdictions which have made the change because of the latter reason include Mauritius, Zambia, India, Hong Kong, Ireland, South Africa, Kenya, Malawi, Singapore, Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago. Jurisdictions which have retained the monarch as head of state, but have nonetheless opted for the new title include some states and territories of Australia, as well as Belize. Just as a junior counsel is " called to the uterBar", a Senior Counsel is, in some jurisdictions, said to be "called to the Inner ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Principles Of Natural Justice
In English law, natural justice is technical terminology for the rule against bias (''nemo iudex in causa sua'') and the right to a fair hearing (''audi alteram partem''). While the term ''natural justice'' is often retained as a general concept, it has largely been replaced and extended by the general "duty to act fairly". The basis for the rule against bias is the need to maintain public confidence in the legal system. Bias can take the form of actual bias, imputed bias, or apparent bias. Actual bias is very difficult to prove in practice whereas imputed bias, once shown, will result in a decision being void without the need for any investigation into the likelihood or suspicion of bias. Cases from different jurisdictions currently apply two tests for apparent bias: the "reasonable suspicion of bias" test and the "real likelihood of bias" test. One view that has been taken is that the differences between these two tests are largely semantic and that they operate similarly. ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Review Petition
In India, a binding decision of the Supreme Court/ High Court can be reviewed in Review Petition. The parties aggrieved on any order of the Supreme Court on any apparent error can file a review petition. Taking into consideration the principle of stare decisis, courts generally do not unsettle a decision, without a strong case. This provision regarding review is an exception to the legal principle of stare decisis. Article 137 of the Constitution provides that subject to provisions of any law and rule made under Article 145 the Supreme Court of India has the power to review any judgement pronounced (or order made) by it. Under Supreme Court Rules, 1966 such a petition needs to be filed within 30 days from the date of judgement or order. It is also recommended that the petition should be circulated without oral arguments to the same bench of judges that delivered the judgement (or order) sought to be reviewed. It is not necessary for the court to accept every review petition. C ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
