Source: Supreme Court

Why in News?

Justices Dipankar Datta and Prashant Kumar Mishra have issued a new practice direction regarding Special Leave Petitions (SLPs), effective from 20^th August 2024. This direction requires that any SLP seeking exemption from filing a certified copy of an impugned order must include a receipt from the High Court confirming the request for the certified copy, state that the application for the copy is still valid and provide an undertaking to submit the certified copy promptly. This aims to streamline the process and ensure timely submission of necessary documents.

• The Supreme Court held this in the case of Harsh Bhuwalka & Ors v. Sanjay Kumar Bajoria.

What was the Background of Harsh Bhuwalka & Ors v. Sanjay Kumar Bajoria Case?

• The case involves a Supreme Court order issued on 5^th August 2024 regarding the filing of SLPs.
• The order arose from a case where petitioners made a false statement to the Supreme Court about applying for a certified copy of an impugned High Court order.
• The petitioners claimed that they had applied for the certified copy but had not received it from the High Court.
• The petitioners had never applied for the certified copy before filing their SLP.
• The petitioners only applied for the certified copy after filing the SLP and after the Supreme Court requested proof of their application.
• This case highlighted a broader issue of litigants frequently filing SLPs without proper certified copies of impugned judgments/orders.
• Many litigants were submitting applications for exemption from filing certified copies, often with false or misleading statements.
• The Supreme Court noted that its lenient approach to such exemptions had led to a belief among litigants that they could make false statements without consequences.
• This situation prompted the Supreme Court to issue new practice directions regarding the filing of SLPs and applications for exemption from submitting certified copies.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• The Court observed with dismay that the provisions of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, requiring Special Leave Petitions to be accompanied by certified copies of impugned judgments and orders, were being observed more in breach than in compliance.
• The Court noted that its hitherto lenient approach towards applications for exemption from filing certified copies had engendered a sense among litigants that they could make false statements with impunity, necessitating the inculcation of greater discipline in the filing process.
• The circumstances prompted the Supreme Court to issue new practice directions governing the filing of SLPs and applications for exemption from submitting certified copies, with a view to ensuring substantial compliance with the extant rules.
• The Court expressed concern that litigants, perceiving the Court's leniency, often failed to apply for and obtain certified copies, instead annexing downloaded copies of impugned judgments and orders to their Special Leave Petitions.
• The Court remarked that the prevalent practice of accepting exemption applications without proper verification had led to a situation where litigants were rarely required to furnish undertakings for subsequent filing of certified copies upon receipt from the High Court.
• The Court concluded that the persistence of such a situation was untenable, and that substantial compliance with the rules was imperative so long as they remained in force.
• The Court observed that despite existing rules requiring certified copies with SLPs, these rules were often not followed or enforced.

What is a Special Leave Petition?

About:

• A Special Leave Petition is a discretionary appeal mechanism to the Supreme Court of India.
• It is provided for under Article 136 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (COI).
• SLPs can be filed against any judgment, decree, or order of any court or tribunal in India, except those relating to Armed Forces.
• It allows the Supreme Court to hear appeals against decisions where no direct right of appeal exists.
• The power to grant special leave is entirely at the discretion of the Supreme Court.
• SLPs can be filed in both civil and criminal matters.
• They are typically filed when there's a substantial question of law or a perceived miscarriage of justice.
• The Supreme Court can refuse to grant leave without providing reasons.
• If leave is granted, the petition is converted into an appeal.
• SLPs serve as a final recourse for seeking justice after exhausting other legal remedies.
• In the case of any SLP, the Supreme Court has first to decide in its discretion whether it should grant or deny the requested Special Leave.
• The Supreme Court had also argued that the remedy under Article 136 (Special Leave Petition) is a constitutional right. Thus, the bar can be overcome through the possible routes under Articles 32, 131, and 136 of the Constitution.
  • Article 32 provides for constitutional remedies to get the rights protected through writs namely Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Certiorari and Quo warranto.
  • Article 131 (Original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court) is about Centre-State or inter-State disputes in general.

Origin of SLP:

• The phrase "special leave to appeal" in Article 136(1) of the Indian Constitution originates from the Government of India Act, 1935.
• The 1935 Act used the term "special leave" in five instances, primarily in Sections 110, 205, 206, and 208.
• Section 110(b)(iii) prohibited legislative bodies from making laws that infringed on His Majesty's prerogative to grant special leave to appeal, except where expressly provided.
• Section 205(2) allowed parties to appeal to the Federal Court on grounds of wrongly decided substantial questions of law, without needing special leave from His Majesty-in-Council.
• The same section prohibited direct appeals to His Majesty-in-Council (Judicial Committee of the Privy Council), with or without special leave.
• Section 206(1)(b) empowered the Federal Legislature to allow appeals to the Federal Court in certain civil cases, subject to the Federal Court granting special leave.
• Section 206(2) allowed for the abolition of direct appeals to His Majesty-in-Council if provisions under 206(1) were enacted.
• Section 208 dealt with appeals to His Majesty-in-Council, allowing appeals without leave in certain original jurisdiction cases, and with leave of the Federal Court or His Majesty-in-Council in other cases.
• The leave granted by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council was called "special leave".
• This historical context from the 1935 Act formed the basis for the concept of special leave in the Indian Constitution.

Filing of an SLP:

• Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) may be filed under Article 136 of the Indian Constitution against any judgment, decree, or order issued by a High Court or tribunal within Indian territory.

Time Period:

• SLPs can be filed within 90 days from the date of a High Court judgment, or within 60 days against a High Court order refusing to grant a certificate of fitness for appeal to the Supreme Court.

Who can make SLP?

• Any aggrieved party may file an SLP against a judgment or order refusing to grant a certificate for appeal to the Supreme Court.
• SLPs can be filed for any civil, criminal, or other matter where a significant legal issue exists or a serious injustice has occurred.
• The petitioner must provide a concise summary of the case facts, issues, and timeline, along with legal arguments challenging the verdict.
• Upon filing, the petitioner will have an opportunity to present their case before the Supreme Court.
• Based on the merits, the Court may issue notice to the opposing party, who must submit a counter-affidavit.
• The Supreme Court will then decide whether to grant leave or not.
• If leave is granted, the case is converted into a civil appeal and will be heard again before the Supreme Court.
• The SLP mechanism provides a special permit for aggrieved parties to appeal against any court or tribunal order within Indian territory to the Supreme Court.

Grounds of SLP:

• Grounds for Filing: While there are no specific grounds mentioned in the Constitution, generally SLPs are filed on grounds such as:
  • Substantial question of law
  • Gross miscarriage of justice
  • Violation of principles of natural justice
  • Violation of fundamental rights

Procedure of SLP:

• A Special Leave Petition (SLP) must contain all relevant facts upon which the Supreme Court is to base its decision, pertaining to the grounds for filing the SLP.
• The petition must be duly signed by an Advocate-on-Record, as per the Supreme Court Rules.
• The petitioner must include a statement within the SLP affirming that no other petition regarding the same matter has been filed in any High Court.
• Upon filing of the petition, the Supreme Court shall grant a hearing to the aggrieved party.
• Based on the merits of the case, the Court may, at its discretion, allow the opposite party to present their case through a counter affidavit.
• After the hearing, the Court shall determine if the case warrants further consideration.
• If the Court deems the case fit for further hearing, it shall grant leave to appeal.
• In the event the Court finds insufficient grounds for further consideration, it shall reject the appeal.
• The decision to grant or reject the SLP rests solely on the discretion of the Supreme Court, based on the facts presented and arguments made during the initial hearing.
• The procedure for SLP filing and consideration is designed to allow the Supreme Court to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution judiciously.

Legal Provision:

• Article 136 of the COI deals with special leave to appeal by the Supreme Court.
• It states that
  • (1) Notwithstanding anything in this Chapter, the Supreme Court may, in its discretion, grant special leave to appeal from any judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order in any cause or matter passed or made by any court or tribunal in the territory of India.
  • (2) Nothing in clause (1) shall apply to any judgment, determination, sentence or order passed or made by any court or tribunal constituted by or under any law relating to the Armed Forces.

Case Laws

• In Laxmi & Co. v. Anand R. Deshpande (1972), the Supreme Court held that when hearing appeals under Article 136 of the Constitution, the Court may consider subsequent developments to expedite proceedings, protect the rights of parties, and advance the interests of justice.
• The Kerala State v. Kunhayammed (2000), ruling established that the Court's discretion to grant Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) does not invoke its appellate jurisdiction if the Court declines to grant leave based on its findings.
• Pritam Singh v. The State (1950) established that the Supreme Court should not interfere with High Court decisions except in exceptional circumstances. Upon admission of an appeal, the appellant may challenge any erroneous legal determinations by the High Court. The Court should apply uniform criteria when granting special leave to appeal.
• N. Suriyakala v. A. Mohandoss & Ors. (2007) affirmed that Article 136 of the Constitution does not establish an ordinary court of appeal. It confers broad discretionary powers on the Supreme Court to intervene for meeting the ends of justice, rather than conferring a right of appeal on litigating parties.