About Curative Petition:

• It is the last resort to the highest court that can be petitioned for redressal of grievances in court, and its ruling is final. 
• It is a way to ask the court to review and revise their own decision, and it is filed after a review petition is dismissed or used.
• It is the final and last option for the people to acquire justice, as mentioned and promised by the Constitution of India.
• Objective: It is meant to ensure there is no miscarriage of justice and to prevent abuse of process.
• Evolution:
  • The concept of curative petition originated from the case of Rupa Ashok Hurra Vs. Ashok Hurra and another case (2002) where the following question arose before the court of law: '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 court used the Latin maxim “actus curiae neminem gravabit”, which means that an act of the court shall prejudice no one.
  • The maxim becomes applicable when the court is under an obligation to undo a wrong done to a party by the act of the court itself.
  • This led to the creation of the concept of a curative petition by the Supreme Court to prevent the miscarriage of justice and to prevent the abuse of process.
  • In this case, a five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court unanimously held that in order to rectify gross miscarriage of justice, the court will allow the curative petition filed by the victim.
• Constitutional Backing:
  • The concept evolved in the case of Rupa Ashok Hurra Vs, Ashok Hurra is not newer to the constitution itself.
  • Article 137 of the Indian Constitution broadly supports the idea of a curative petition. 
  • It states that the "Supreme Court has the power to review any judgment pronounced (or order made) by it if the matter concerns the laws and rules made under Article 145.
• Criteria for admission:
  • The court ruled that a curative petition can be entertained if the petitioner establishes there was a violation of the principles of natural justice and that he was not heard by the court before passing an order.
  • It will also be admitted where a judge fails to disclose facts that raise the apprehension of bias.
  • The SC has held that curative petitions must be rare rather than regular and be entertained with circumspection.
  • A curative petition must be accompanied by certification by a senior advocate, pointing out substantial grounds for entertaining it.
• Who hears Curative petitions?
  • A curative petition must first be circulated to a bench of the three senior-most judges and the judges who passed the concerned judgment, if available.
  • Only when a majority of the judges conclude that the matter needs hearing should it be listed, as far as possible, before the same bench.
  • A curative petition is usually decided by judges in chamber, unless a specific request for an open-court hearing is allowed.
  • It shall be open to the Bench at any stage of consideration of the curative petition to ask a senior counsel to assist it as amicus curiae.
  • In the event of the bench holding at any stage that the petition is without any merit and vexatious, it may impose exemplary costs on the petitioner.