Special Leave Petition: Meaning, Features, Process and Who can file it ?

/ Indian Constitution (1950), Latest News, Practice Areas, Supreme Court Advocate / By

By: Chetna Singhal

Introduction:

The Indian judicial system, known for its complexity and layered structure, offers various legal remedies to ensure justice is served. Among these remedies, the Special Leave Petition (SLP) stands out as a powerful tool that allows individuals to seek the Supreme Court’s intervention in cases where they believe justice has not been fully delivered. This blog delves into the deeper information on the origin, meaning, use, relevant sections, and landmark judgments related to the SLP in India.

Origin of SLP:

The concept of the Special Leave Petition is embedded in Article 136 of the Indian Constitution. The SLP was drafted with the intention of providing a last-resort legal remedy to the aggrieved individual. It empowers the Supreme Court to grant special leave to appeal against any judgment, decree, determination, sentence, or order passed by any court or tribunal in the country. The framers of the Constitution envisioned this provision as a tool to serve justice, ensuring that the apex court could correct gross injustice or miscarriage of law.

Meaning and Scope of SLP:

An SLP is a discretionary power of the Supreme Court, meaning that it is not a guaranteed right for every litigant. The Court may accept or reject an SLP based on the case’s merits. The fundamental purpose of an SLP is to allow the Supreme Court to intervene in cases where there is a need to amend due to a substantial question of law or a gross injustice. In SLP, the expression “special leave” implies special permission.

According to previous years data, the percentage of Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) admitted by the Supreme Court is between 20-25%. This statistic highlighted the fact that while SLPs consume a significant portion of the Court’s time, their admission threshold remains high, and the rate of reversal in these cases is not particularly high. In her paper, “The Temporal Analysis of the Supreme Court of India’s Workload,” Hemrajani highlights that SLPs on average occupy nearly 63% of the judges’ time. This heavy allocation of judicial resources to SLPs presents a fundamental challenge to the efficient functioning of the Court.

Key Features of SLP:

The legal tool SLP has a few key features, which are mentioned below –

  • Discretionary Power: The Supreme Court can decide whether to grant leave for an appeal.
  • Broad Jurisdiction: SLP can be filed against any order or judgment, whether from a High Court, tribunal, or any other judicial body.
  • No Limitation on Grounds: The grounds for filing an SLP are not strictly defined, allowing a wide range of cases to fall within its spectrum.

Use and Application of SLP:

SLP can be invoked in various legal scenarios, including civil, criminal, and constitutional matters. The most common instances where SLP has been filed includes the following –

  1. Violation of Fundamental Rights: SLP can be filed if a lower court’s decision violates an individual’s fundamental rights.
  2. Substantial Question of Law: If the case involves a significant legal question that requires interpretation by the Supreme Court.
  3. Gross Miscarriage of Justice: Where the judgment of a lower court leads to a severe miscarriage of justice.

In addition to this, a Civil or Criminal Appeal, as the case may be, may also be filed directly in the Supreme Court if it is permissible under any specific provision of the Constitution or of any law.

Process of Filing an SLP:

  • An SLP must be filed within 90 days from the date of the judgment or order of a lower court.
  • The petition must clearly state the grounds on which the special leave to appeal is sought.
  • If the Supreme Court finds merit in the petition, it grants “leave,” converting the SLP into an appeal.
  • It can be filed within 60 days against the order of the High Court refusing to grant the certificate of fitness for appeal to the Supreme Court.

Procedure-

  • A Special Leave Petition (SLP) must include all the facts upon which the Supreme Court is to base its decision, focusing on the specific grounds that justify the filing of an SLP.
  • The petition must be duly signed by an Advocate-on-Record. Additionally, the petitioner is required to include a statement within the SLP declaring that no other petition on the same matter has been filed in any High Court.
  • Once the SLP is filed, the Supreme Court will initially hear the aggrieved party. Depending on the merits of the case, the Court may allow the opposite party to present their case through a counter affidavit.
  • After the hearing, if the Court finds the case worthy of further consideration, it will grant leave for the appeal to proceed; otherwise, the appeal will be rejected.
  • The Supreme Court charges a filing fee of INR 1,500 for a standard Special Leave Petition (SLP). For SLPs involving special cases, the fee increases to INR 5,000. Additionally, the court charges INR 200 for each application filed in connection with the SLP.

When and Who can file an SLP?

SLP can be filed by an aggrieved party against the judgment or order of refusal to grant the certificate. SLP can be filed when a substantial question of law arises or grave injustice has been served.

  • Under this, once the SLP has been presented to the Supreme Court, the aggrieved party is provided with special permission to be heard in Apex Court in an appeal against the order or judgment of any court or tribunal in the territory of India.
  • The aggrieved party has to provide a brief synopsis of the facts and issues presented in the case, along with a list of dates.
  • The petitioner has to formulate questions of law to appeal against the judgment.
  • Depending upon the merits of the case, the Court will issue a notice to the opposite party, and they will have to file a counter affidavit, leaving the Court to decide whether to grant leave or not. If the Supreme Court grants leave, then the case is converted into a civil appeal and will be argued again in the Supreme Court.

Similar Mechanism present in other countries:

1. United States:

In the United States, the Supreme Court reviews cases primarily through the “Writ of Certiorari.” Parties can petition the Court to hear their case, but unlike the SLP, the US Supreme Court has the discretion to choose which cases to hear, typically focusing on those of national significance or where lower courts have issued conflicting decisions.

2. United Kingdom:

In the United Kingdom, appeals to the Supreme Court require “permission to appeal,” similar to the SLP. However, this authority is frequently granted by a lower court, and only in cases involving a point of law of great public concern. The UK takes a more limited approach, focusing on instances with a broad legal significance.

3. Canada:

Canada’s Supreme Court also has a “Leave to Appeal” mechanism, in which parties must request permission for their case to be considered. The requirements are similar to the SLP, but the emphasis is on ensuring that only cases of national significance or those posing major legal issues reach the highest court. Under the Supreme Court Act in Canada, under Section 40 (1), read with Section 43, lay down the appellate powers of the Canadian apex court, limiting it to matters of public importance, or those deemed necessary in the interest of justice.

4. Australia:

Australia has a procedure quite similar to India’s SLP, known as “Special Leave to Appeal.” The Australian Judiciary Act, 1903, stipulates similar criteria under Section 35A, for grant of leave to appeal to the Australian High Court. It normally examines criteria such as the public importance of the legal problems at hand and whether the case has the potential to resolve conflicting lower-court rulings.

While these systems are similar to the SLP, the main distinction is the level of discretion exercised by each country’s highest courts. In most cases, the emphasis is on addressing matters of substantial public or legal importance, ensuring that the Supreme Court’s time is spent on cases with far-reaching consequences.

Crucial Judgments on SLP:

Several crucial judgments that have shaped the understanding and application of SLP in India:

1. Pritam Singh v. The State (1950):

This case laid down the foundational principles for using SLP, emphasizing that the Supreme Court would interfere only in cases of grave injustice. The Constitutional Bench observed that the Supreme Court is vested with “wide discretionary power” under this article, which is required “to be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases”.

The Court further observed that “this Court” should not grant special leave unless it is shown that “exceptional and special circumstances exist” and that “substantial and grave injustice” has been done.

2. Dhurandhar Prasad Singh v. Jai Prakash University (2001):

In this case, the Supreme Court of India clarified the scope and purpose of the Special Leave Petition (SLP) under Article 136 of the Constitution. The Court emphasized that SLP is not a regular appellate jurisdiction but an extraordinary remedy. The primary intent behind SLP is to allow the Supreme Court to address substantial legal issues that have broader implications for the law or where there has been a grave miscarriage of justice. The judgment reinforced that SLP should be invoked in exceptional cases and not as a matter of routine.

3. A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak (1988):

This case involved the trial of A.R. Antulay, a former Chief Minister of Maharashtra, who challenged transferring his case from a Special Court to the High Court. The Supreme Court allowed the SLP, holding that the High Court’s direction to transfer the case was incorrect. The judgment emphasized the importance of adhering to procedural laws and ensured a fair trial process, highlighting the Court’s role in correcting judicial errors through SLP.

4. Union of India v. P.K. Bose (2017):

In the case of Union of India v. P.K. Bose, the Supreme Court underscored the importance of caution when filing an SLP. The Court stated that SLPs should not be filed frivolously. The judgment stressed that only those petitions that present substantial legal questions or where there is a severe miscarriage of justice should be admitted. The Court warned that frivolous petitions would be dismissed at admission, ensuring that the SLP mechanism remains a tool for addressing severe legal concerns rather than a regular appellate process.

5. Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab (1994):

This case involved the constitutionality of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), which had stringent provisions. The Supreme Court allowed the SLP and upheld the constitutional validity of TADA but imposed strict guidelines to prevent its misuse. The Court’s intervention through SLP was crucial in balancing national security concerns with protecting individual rights.

6. Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of India (1989):

This case arose from the Bhopal gas tragedy, where victims sought enhanced compensation. The Supreme Court allowed the SLP filed by the victims, revisiting the earlier settlement. The Court ensured that the interests of the victims were adequately protected, demonstrating the use of SLP in cases of large-scale public interest and ensuring justice for affected parties.

Limitation of SLP:

In its judgment in Vasanthakumar, the Supreme Court recognized that the frequent and extensive use of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 136 has diluted its role as the nation’s highest constitutional court. This acknowledgment reflects a critical need for reform to ensure that the Court’s discretionary powers are exercised with greater restraint. Concerning the constitutional validity of amending Article 136, it is important to note that this provision has not been classified as part of the basic structure of the Constitution. Consequently, as established in the landmark Kesavananda Bharati case, Parliament possesses the authority to amend Article 136 through the procedure set forth in Article 368. This legal framework provides a clear path for the necessary reforms to better align the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction with its intended constitutional role.

Proposed Reforms:

Several reforms have been proposed by legal experts to address the issues surrounding Special Leave Petitions (SLPs). Mentioned two such reforms –

  • One of the most notable proposals is the creation of a National Court of Appeal that would operate independently of the Supreme Court. This idea was first suggested by Justice Bhagwati in the Bihar Legal Support Authority case and was later brought up again in 2016 in the Vasanthakumar v. Bhatia case, where a plea was made for its establishment.
  • Another widely discussed reform, mentioned in both the 125th and 259th Law Commission Reports, is the idea of restructuring the Supreme Court by setting up four regional benches across the country and maintaining one Constitution Bench in Delhi. The goal of this proposal is to make the Supreme Court more accessible to people from different regions, as a single court in Delhi can be difficult to reach. However, as the Reports acknowledge, implementing this reform would require an amendment to Article 130, which designates Delhi as the seat of the Supreme Court.

Differences between Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) and regular appeal:

Feature Special Leave Petition (SLP) Regular Appeal
Legal Basis Article 136 of the Indian Constitution Based on specific provisions in statutes or procedural laws (e.g., Civil Procedure Code, Criminal Procedure Code)
Scope of Jurisdiction Wide discretionary power; the Supreme Court can hear any matter from any court or tribunal. Limited to specific grounds or types of cases defined by statute.
Discretion Completely discretionary; the Supreme Court may accept or reject an SLP without providing detailed reasons. Generally, an appeal as a matter of right, subject to statutory conditions and grounds.
Purpose To correct grave injustice, address substantial legal questions, or where lower courts have grossly erred. To review and correct errors in fact or law made by lower courts.
Grounds for Filing Can be filed on any grounds; no specific criteria, but usually involves substantial legal issues or gross miscarriage of justice. Typically limited to legal grounds such as errors in the application of law or procedural irregularities.
Judicial Review Extensive review, potentially of any issue presented in the case, but subject to the Court’s discretion. More structured and confined to the grounds specified by law.
Role of the Supreme Court Acts as a guardian of justice and the Constitution, intervening in exceptional cases. Acts as an appellate court, ensuring correct application of law.
Examples Challenging any decision from High Courts, tribunals, or other lower courts. Appeals against a High Court judgment under specific statutes like the Income Tax Act, Rent Control Act, etc.

Conclusion:

The Special Leave Petition serves as a crucial instrument in the Indian legal system, ensuring that the Supreme Court can uphold justice in cases of significant legal and constitutional importance. While it offers a pathway for redress, it is also a discretionary power used judiciously to maintain the sanctity of the legal process. Thus, understanding SLP and its process is essential for anyone navigating the complex landscape of Indian law.

References for more info on SLP:

Century Law Firm

Frequently Asked Questions about Special Leave Petitions (SLPs)

1. What is a Special Leave Petition (SLP)?

A Special Leave Petition (SLP) is a discretionary power of the Supreme Court of India, provided under Article 136 of the Indian Constitution. It allows individuals to seek the Supreme Court’s intervention in cases where they believe justice has not been fully delivered by lower courts or tribunals.

2. Who can file a Special Leave Petition?

Any aggrieved party can file an SLP against the judgment or order of a lower court or tribunal. This includes individuals, organizations, or even the government, provided they can demonstrate that the case involves a substantial question of law or a gross miscarriage of justice.

3. What is the time limit for filing an SLP?

An SLP must typically be filed within 90 days from the date of the judgment or order of the lower court. However, if the SLP is against a High Court’s refusal to grant a certificate of fitness for appeal to the Supreme Court, it must be filed within 60 days of that order.

4. What are the grounds for filing an SLP?

The grounds for filing an SLP are not strictly defined, but generally include:

  • Violation of fundamental rights
  • Substantial question of law that needs interpretation by the Supreme Court
  • Gross miscarriage of justice by lower courts
  • Matters of significant public importance

5. How is an SLP different from a regular appeal?

An SLP differs from a regular appeal in several ways:

  • It’s discretionary – the Supreme Court can choose whether to hear the case
  • It has a broader scope, allowing the Court to review any judgment from any court in India
  • It’s typically used for cases involving substantial legal questions or gross injustice
  • Regular appeals are often limited to specific grounds defined by statutes

6. What is the success rate of SLPs in the Supreme Court?

According to available data, the admission rate of SLPs in the Supreme Court is between 20-25%. This means that only about one in four or five SLPs filed are actually admitted for hearing by the Court.

7. What happens if the Supreme Court grants “leave” in an SLP?

If the Supreme Court grants “leave” in an SLP, it means the petition is converted into an appeal. The case will then be heard in detail by the Court, which will examine the merits of the case and make a final judgment.

8. Can an SLP be filed against an interim order?

Yes, an SLP can be filed against an interim order of a lower court or tribunal. However, the Supreme Court generally discourages SLPs against interim orders unless there is an exceptional circumstance or a question of significant legal importance involved.

9. What are the filing fees for an SLP?

The Supreme Court charges a filing fee of INR 1,500 for a standard Special Leave Petition (SLP). For SLPs involving special cases, the fee increases to INR 5,000. Additionally, the court charges INR 200 for each application filed in connection with the SLP.

10. Can an SLP be filed without a lawyer?

While it is technically possible to file an SLP without a lawyer, it is not advisable. SLPs are complex legal documents that require a deep understanding of law and court procedures. The Supreme Court rules require that the petition be signed by an Advocate-on-Record, making professional legal assistance necessary in practice.

11. What is the difference between an SLP and a writ petition?

While both SLPs and writ petitions are means to approach the Supreme Court, they differ in several ways:

  • SLPs are filed under Article 136, while writ petitions are filed under Article 32 of the Constitution
  • SLPs are against judgments of lower courts, while writ petitions are typically filed for violation of fundamental rights
  • SLPs are discretionary, while the right to file a writ petition for enforcement of fundamental rights is itself a fundamental right

12. Can an SLP be filed against an arbitration award?

Yes, an SLP can be filed against an arbitration award, but only after exhausting the remedies available under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. This typically means first challenging the award in the appropriate High Court under Section 34 of the Act.

13. What is the role of the Advocate-on-Record in filing an SLP?

An Advocate-on-Record (AOR) plays a crucial role in filing an SLP. They are specially qualified lawyers registered with the Supreme Court. Their responsibilities include:

  • Drafting and filing the SLP
  • Ensuring all procedural requirements are met
  • Representing the case before the Supreme Court
  • Acting as a liaison between the client and the Court

14. Can new evidence be presented in an SLP?

Generally, new evidence is not allowed to be presented in an SLP. The Supreme Court’s role in an SLP is to review the legal aspects of the case based on the evidence already on record. However, in exceptional circumstances, if the new evidence is crucial to prevent a miscarriage of justice, the Court may allow it.

15. What happens if an SLP is dismissed?

If an SLP is dismissed, it means the Supreme Court has decided not to interfere with the lower court’s judgment. This decision is final, and the judgment of the lower court stands. However, in rare cases, a review petition can be filed if there is an error apparent on the face of the record.

16. Can an SLP be withdrawn?

Yes, an SLP can be withdrawn with the permission of the Court. The petitioner needs to file an application for withdrawal, stating the reasons. The Court may grant permission to withdraw with or without liberty to file afresh, depending on the circumstances.

17. What is the concept of “leave” in the context of SLP?

“Leave” in the context of an SLP refers to the Supreme Court’s permission to hear the case. When the Court grants “leave,” it means the SLP is converted into an appeal, and the Court will hear the case on its merits. Granting of leave indicates that the Court finds that the case involves a substantial question of law or a matter of public importance.

18. Can an SLP be filed against a judgment of a single judge of a High Court?

Yes, an SLP can be filed against a judgment of a single judge of a High Court. However, it’s generally advisable to first file an appeal before the Division Bench of the same High Court, unless there are exceptional circumstances that justify directly approaching the Supreme Court.

19. What is the difference between an SLP and a review petition?

An SLP and a review petition serve different purposes:

  • An SLP is filed to challenge the decision of a lower court in the Supreme Court
  • A review petition is filed in the same court that passed the original judgment, asking it to reconsider its decision
  • SLPs have a broader scope for challenge, while review petitions are limited to errors apparent on the face of the record
  • SLPs are filed under Article 136, while review petitions are filed under Article 137 of the Constitution

20. Can the Supreme Court impose costs while dismissing an SLP?

Yes, the Supreme Court has the power to impose costs while dismissing an SLP. This is often done in cases where the Court finds the petition to be frivolous or filed merely to delay the proceedings. The imposition of costs is at the discretion of the Court and aims to discourage unnecessary litigation.

21. What is the significance of the Pritam Singh v. The State case in relation to SLPs?

The Pritam Singh v. The State case (1950) is significant because it laid down the foundational principles for using SLPs. The Supreme Court emphasized that:

  • The power to grant special leave should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases
  • The Court should not grant special leave unless it is shown that exceptional and special circumstances exist
  • Substantial and grave injustice must have been done for the Court to interfere

This judgment set the tone for how SLPs should be approached and considered by the Court.

22. Can an SLP be filed in matters related to personal laws?

Yes, an SLP can be filed in matters related to personal laws such as marriage, divorce, inheritance, etc. However, as with all SLPs, the Supreme Court will only entertain the petition if it involves a substantial question of law or if there has been a gross miscarriage of justice in the lower courts.

23. What is the role of the Supreme Court’s discretion in SLPs?

The Supreme Court’s discretion plays a crucial role in SLPs:

  • The Court has complete discretion to grant or deny leave to appeal
  • This discretion allows the Court to focus on cases of significant legal importance
  • The Court can refuse to entertain an SLP without giving any reason
  • This discretionary power helps in managing the Court’s caseload and ensuring that only matters of substantial importance are heard

24. How does an SLP differ from a Letter Patent Appeal (LPA)?

An SLP and a Letter Patent Appeal (LPA) differ in several ways:

  • An SLP is filed in the Supreme Court, while an LPA is filed in the High Court
  • An SLP challenges the decision of any court or tribunal in India, while an LPA is specifically against the judgment of a single judge of the High Court
  • SLPs are discretionary and based on Article 136 of the Constitution, while LPAs are statutory appeals based on the Letters Patent of the High Court
  • The grounds for an SLP are broader, while LPAs are typically limited to specific grounds provided in the Letters Patent

25. What reforms have been proposed to address the large number of SLPs filed in the Supreme Court?

Several reforms have been proposed to address the large number of SLPs filed in the Supreme Court:

  • Creation of a National Court of Appeal to handle routine cases, allowing the Supreme Court to focus on constitutional and public importance matters
  • Restructuring the Supreme Court by setting up regional benches to improve accessibility
  • Stricter scrutiny of SLPs at the admission stage to filter out frivolous petitions
  • Imposing higher costs on frivolous SLPs to discourage unnecessary litigation
  • Encouraging alternative dispute resolution mechanisms to reduce the overall caseload on courts

26. Can an SLP be filed against an order of the National Green Tribunal (NGT)?

Yes, an SLP can be filed against an order of the National Green Tribunal (NGT). The NGT Act, 2010, provides for a direct appeal to the Supreme Court against any order or decision of the NGT. This appeal is to be filed within 90 days from the date of communication of the order or decision of the Tribunal.

27. What is the significance of the Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of India case in the context of SLPs?

The Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of India case (1989) is significant in the context of SLPs because:

  • It demonstrated the use of SLP in cases of large-scale public interest
  • The Supreme Court allowed an SLP to revisit an earlier settlement in the Bhopal gas tragedy case
  • It showed how the Court can use its discretionary power under Article 136 to ensure justice in matters of national importance
  • The case highlighted the Court’s role in protecting the interests of victims in mass disaster cases

28. How does the concept of SLP in India compare to similar mechanisms in other countries?

The concept of SLP in India is similar to, but not identical to, mechanisms in other countries:

  • In the United States, the “Writ of Certiorari” serves a similar function, allowing the Supreme Court to choose which cases to hear
  • The United Kingdom has a “permission to appeal” system for its Supreme Court, which is granted by either the lower court or the Supreme Court itself
  • Canada’s “Leave to Appeal” mechanism is similar, requiring parties to request permission for their case to be heard by the Supreme Court
  • Australia has a “Special Leave to Appeal” process, which is quite similar to India’s SLP

The main difference is often in the level of discretion exercised by each country’s highest court and the specific criteria for granting leave.

Also Read:

The Prevention of Corruption Act: India’s Comprehensive Battle Against Corruption
Consumer Protection Act in India: Your Rights, Remedies, and How to File Complaints
Hindu vs Muslim Law: Comprehensive Guide to Marriage, Divorce, Adoption and Succession in India

Popular Posts

Related Posts