A five-judge Bench of the Supreme Court will hear curative petitions of two of the four death-row convicts in the Nirbhaya case.

A Bench of Justices N.V. Ramana, Arun Mishra, R.F. Nariman, R. Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan will hear the curative petitions filed by Vinay Sharma (26) and Mukesh Kumar (32) on January 14.

Mukesh Kumar and Vinay Sharma had filed curative petitions in the court on January 9.

Two other death-row convicts, Akshay Kumar Singh (31) and Pawan Gupta (25), against whom death warrants have been issued by a Delhi court, have not filed curative petitions.

What is a curative petition?

A curative petition is the last and final legal remedy available to a person as promised by the Constitution of India.

The concept originated from the case of Rupa Ashok Hurra vs Ashok Hurra and Another where the question arose before the court that “whether an aggrieved person is entitled to any relief against the final judgment / order of the Supreme Court, after the dismissal of a review petition”.

The SC noted that in order to prevent abuse of its process and to cure gross miscarriage of justice, it may reconsider its judgments in exercise of its inherent powers. For this purpose, the court devised curative petition.

The concept of the curative petition is supported by Article 137 of the Constitution. The Article says: Review of judgments or orders by the Supreme Court subject to the provisions of any law made by Parliament or any rules made under Article 145, the Supreme Court shall have power to review any judgment pronounced or order made by it.

Curative petitions are not heard in open court unless the judges decide that there is some merit in the case and therefore should be heard in open court.

Grounds for filing a curative petition

The petitioner will have to prove that there was a genuine infringement of principles of natural justice and that there had been a bias of the judge and judgment that affected him.

The petition shall state expressly that the grounds mentioned under the review petition were dismissed by circulation.

It must have a certification of a senior advocate for fulfilling the above requirements.

The petition is to be sent to the three senior-most judges and judges of the Bench who passed the judgment, if available.

If the majority of the judges on the above Bench agree that the matter needs a hearing, then it would be sent to the same Bench.

The court could impose “exemplary costs” to the petitioner if his plea lacks merit.

Last resort for convicts in Nirbhaya case

A 23-year-old paramedic student, referred to as Nirbhaya, was gang-raped and brutally assaulted on the intervening night of December 16-17, 2012, in a moving bus in South Delhi by six people before being thrown out on the road. She died on December 29.

A Delhi court had issued death warrants against the four convicts and said they would be hanged on January 22 at 7 am in Tihar jail.

The Supreme Court had in 2017 upheld the capital punishment awarded to them by the Delhi High Court and a trial court.

One of the six accused in the case, Ram Singh, allegedly committed suicide in Tihar Jail.

A juvenile, who was among the accused, was convicted by a Juvenile Justice Board and was released from a reformation home after serving a three-year term.

On July 9, 2018, the apex court had dismissed the review pleas filed by three of the convicts in the case, saying no grounds had been made out by them for review of the 2017 verdict.

Manorama Yearbook app is now available on Google Play Store and iOS App Store