INTRODUCTION
The word “Review” in legal jargon indicates a judicial re-examination of any case. This review has to have an error on the apparent face of it to review its judgment in the case. The quashing of any judgment is used very sparingly and is exercised in extreme conditions. In exercising such power, the court should not confer with any arbitrary jurisdiction as per the whims and caprice. As per the observation of Justice C K Thakker and D K Jain, as soon as the judgment is given by the court, it is termed as functus offcio, which means that court ceases its control over the case that is no power to review, alter or interfere with it.
Supreme Court can review its judgment and its powers are enshrined under Article 137 of the Constitution of India, 1950. Earlier, The Courts may not alter or review their own judgments or final judgments after they have been signed, except in order to correct clerical or arithmetic errors, the Supreme Court stated that it had set aside the order of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh to quash the criminal proceedings in the Dowry case.
SUPREME COURT
Article 137 allows the Supreme Court to review its own judgment, subject to the rules of any statute of the Parliament. This power shall be exercised in compliance with the rules laid down by the court pursuant to Article 145. The review shall be conducted by the Supreme Court on the following grounds:
- Introduction of new matters of importance related to evidence;
- mistake or error on the face of the record; and
- If the case consists of any sufficient reason.
In the case, M.S Ahlavat v. State of Haryana, it was delineated that the review is different than the appeal; appeal can be done in any court whereas the privilege to review is exclusively given to Supreme Court. Review is only done when the court thinks that there is gross injustice being done to the party after the judgment is passed. This injustice should be apparent and should not be contradictory to the opinions. The Supreme Court being the apex court shall take into account that there is no miscarriage while delivering the judgment as it is bound by the law and to the people. However, the party cannot ask the court to review the judgment merely for the purpose of rehearsal and a fresh decision of the case as given in the case M/S. Northern Indian Caterers (India) Ltd. v. Lt. Governor of Delhi.
The court shall review its decision if the attention of the court has not been drawn to any relevant legislative provisions. Provision at the first hearing, or where obvious error has been made and it is appropriate to do so. Pass an order for full and effective justice to be done. The proceeding of the review cannot be compared with the initial hearing of the case and the finality of the judgment handed down by the court. It shall not be accepted except where there has been a conspicuous mistake or a patent error or similar serious error in the past due to judicial fallibility. Even if the court dismisses the review petition, it can opt for “Curative Petition” if there is any injustice being done to the party.
CIVIL CASES –
In the civil cases, Order XL of the Supreme Court Rules, 1966 provides that the Supreme Court will be governed by the Order 47, rule 1 of CPC. A review can be asked for if there is an apparent error on the face of it. It is for the limited purpose and cannot be disguised as an appeal. For example, the Supreme Court acknowledged the review petition in Hindustan Sugar Mills v. State of Rajasthan, as it was shown that the assumption on which it had made certain observations in the previous decision was unfounded.
CRIMINAL CASES –
In the criminal cases, under Order XL, Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1966, review of the judgment can be asked by the party. In criminal cases, it becomes all the more important to give emphasis to apparent error as an accused is convicted of punishment or death sentence. It is the question of human lives so SC has to be more careful while going through the case. The Supreme Court in G.L. Gupta v. D. D. H. Mehta reviewed its judgment in a criminal appeal concerning a breach of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947, in which it was brought to its notice that Section 23-C(2) of the Act had not been placed before the Court, and revised the prison sentence to a fine.
CONCLUSION
It is known that Justice cannot be seen but is felt in the hearts of the people which does right by the country. It is bound by Judiciary to make some or the other mistake while passing the judgment as Judiciary is not robots or mechanism systems. So when the justice of the party is at stake, the judiciary is given the power to review it under extreme and apparent situations. Therefore, the Constitution gives SC special power to review in the rarest of the rare cases given under Article 137. When the party is not satisfied by any lower court’s decision, then they can appeal for the same in the higher court but in the situation where SC is concerned, it can be said that Review is the option and will only be considered by the court in the apparent erroneous cases. So therefore, in the cases of gross injustice to the party, the party has the option to refer the provision in the Constitution of India to refer it.
This article is authored by Jaishri Sharma, 2nd BA.LLB (Hons.) student at Institute of law, Nirma University, Ahmedabad.
Also Read – Why Indian Courts have Lots of Pending Cases?
