Article 137 of the Indian Constitution bestows upon the Supreme Court of India the significant power to review any judgment pronounced or order made by it. This provision is crucial as it allows the highest court to reconsider its own decisions, ensuring justice and the evolution of jurisprudence.
This power of self-correction is subject to certain conditions, primarily any law made by Parliament and rules framed by the Supreme Court itself under Article 145. It distinguishes the Supreme Court’s role as not merely a final arbiter but also one capable of rectifying potential errors or addressing new grounds.
Original Text
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.
Detailed Explanation
Article 137 grants the Supreme Court a vital power: the ability to review its own judgments and orders. This power is fundamental to the court’s functioning as the ultimate guardian of the Constitution and the law. Unlike an appeal, where a higher court reviews a lower court’s decision, review under Article 137 means the same court re-examines its own prior decision.
The exercise of this power is not absolute but is made subject to two conditions:
- Laws made by Parliament: Parliament can enact laws prescribing the conditions or limitations under which the Supreme Court may exercise its review power. However, Parliament cannot abolish this power itself, as it is constitutionally granted.
- Rules made under Article 145: Article 145 empowers the Supreme Court to make rules for regulating generally the practice and procedure of the Court, including rules as to the proceedings for review of any judgment or order. The Supreme Court has framed Order XLVII of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, which lays down the procedure and grounds for seeking a review.
The primary grounds for seeking a review before the Supreme Court, as per its rules and established practice, are generally limited to:
- Discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due diligence, was not within the knowledge of the applicant or could not be produced by him at the time when the decree was passed or order made.
- Mistake or error apparent on the face of the record.
- Any other sufficient reason (interpreted narrowly, usually ejusdem generis with the preceding grounds, meaning reasons similar in kind to the specified ones).
The power of review is not an avenue for a rehearing of the case or for arguing points that were already considered and rejected. It is intended to correct grave errors or admit significant new evidence to prevent manifest injustice. This power underscores the principle that even the highest court can err and must have a mechanism for self-correction, contributing to the finality and infallibility of the judicial process in a dynamic legal landscape.
Detailed Notes
- Article 137 grants the Supreme Court of India the power to review its own judgments and orders.
- This power is not an appeal but a review of a decision by the same court.
- The power is subject to laws made by Parliament.
- The power is also subject to rules made by the Supreme Court itself under Article 145.
- The Supreme Court has framed rules (Order XLVII of SC Rules, 2013) governing review proceedings.
- Common grounds for review include:
- Discovery of new and important evidence.
- Mistake or error apparent on the face of the record.
- Any other sufficient reason (interpreted narrowly).
- The power is aimed at correcting grave errors or admitting crucial new evidence.
- It is not meant for rehearing the case or arguing points already considered.
- Review petitions are typically heard by the same judges who delivered the original judgment, if available.
- This power enhances judicial accountability and allows for rectification of errors leading to potential injustice.
- It is a crucial mechanism for the evolution of jurisprudence by allowing the court to revisit and refine its earlier pronouncements in exceptional circumstances.
- The existence of this power contributes to the finality and public acceptance of the Supreme Court’s decisions by providing a limited avenue for reconsideration.
Additional Comments
- The power under Article 137 is distinct from the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. An appeal involves challenging a lower court’s decision before a higher court, whereas review involves the same court reconsidering its own decision.
- The grounds for review are strictly defined and interpreted narrowly by the Court to prevent frivolous petitions and maintain the finality of judgments.
- While review is provided under Article 137, the concept of a ‘Curative Petition’ evolved later through judicial pronouncements (Rupa Ashok Hurra vs. Ashok Hurra, 2002) to cover cases where even a review petition has been dismissed, in very limited circumstances to prevent manifest injustice and abuse of process. This is seen as an exercise of the inherent power of the court, supplementary to Article 137 review.
- The exercise of review power has sometimes led to landmark decisions overturning previous judgments, significantly impacting the legal landscape (e.g., revisiting fundamental rights jurisprudence).
Summary
Article 137 of the Indian Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to review its own judgments and orders. This power is subject to laws made by Parliament and rules framed by the Court under Article 145. The primary purpose is to allow the correction of errors apparent on the face of the record, consider newly discovered evidence, or address other sufficient reasons to prevent manifest injustice. This mechanism is crucial for judicial accountability and the refinement of legal principles, distinct from the Court’s appellate function and limited by specific grounds to ensure the finality of decisions.