Introduction

Article 137 of the Indian Constitution empowers the Supreme Court of India to review its own judgments or orders. This provision plays a crucial role in ensuring that justice is served and errors, if any, are rectified. In this article, we will delve into the details of Article 137 and explore the significance of the review process.

Article 137: A Closer Look

Article 137 states that the Supreme Court has the power to review any judgment or order pronounced by it. The review can be sought on the grounds of any error apparent on the face of the record. It is important to note that this provision does not confer an automatic right to review, but rather grants the court the discretion to review its own decisions.

The review petition must be filed within thirty days from the date of the judgment or order that is sought to be reviewed. However, the court may entertain a review petition even after the expiry of the thirty-day period if it is satisfied that there are sufficient reasons for the delay.

It is also worth mentioning that the review process is distinct from an appeal. While an appeal is a challenge to the decision of a lower court, a review petition is an examination of the Supreme Court's own judgment. The review process allows the court to correct any errors that may have crept in and ensures that justice is upheld.

Grounds for Review

Article 137 empowers the Supreme Court to review its judgments or orders on the grounds of an error apparent on the face of the record. This means that the error should be evident from the record itself, without the need for any further evidence or argument.

The term "error apparent on the face of the record" has been interpreted by the court over the years. It includes errors of law, errors of fact, or even errors of mixed law and fact. However, it is important to note that a mere disagreement with the judgment or order is not a ground for review. The error must be of such a nature that it has resulted in a miscarriage of justice or a violation of fundamental rights.

The Supreme Court has held that it will not review its own judgment merely because another view is possible or because the petitioner seeks a re-hearing of the case. The court exercises its review jurisdiction sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances where it is satisfied that a grave error has been committed.

Procedure for Review

A review petition is filed in the Supreme Court, and it must contain the grounds on which the review is sought. The petition is then circulated to the judges who heard the original matter, and they have the option to decide the matter on the basis of written submissions or by conducting an oral hearing.

During the review process, the court has the power to stay the operation of its own judgment or order. This means that the effect of the original judgment may be put on hold until the review petition is decided. However, the court exercises this power cautiously and only in exceptional cases where there are strong grounds for staying the operation of the judgment.

After considering the review petition, the court may either dismiss it or allow it. If the court allows the review petition, it may either modify the original judgment or order, or it may set it aside altogether. The court may also refer the matter to a larger bench if it deems it necessary.

Significance of Article 137

Article 137 plays a vital role in upholding the principles of justice and fairness. It allows the Supreme Court to correct any errors that may have occurred and ensures that justice is not compromised. The review process serves as a safeguard against miscarriage of justice and provides an opportunity for parties to seek redressal if they believe that an error has been made.

By allowing the court to review its own judgments, Article 137 also enhances the credibility and authority of the Supreme Court. It demonstrates that the court is willing to rectify its mistakes and ensures that its decisions are based on sound legal principles.

Furthermore, the review process under Article 137 promotes the rule of law and protects the fundamental rights of individuals. It provides a mechanism for individuals to challenge decisions that may have violated their rights and seek appropriate remedies.

Conclusion

Article 137 of the Indian Constitution grants the Supreme Court the power to review its own judgments or orders. This provision ensures that justice is upheld and errors, if any, are rectified. The review process plays a crucial role in maintaining the credibility of the court and upholding the principles of justice and fairness. By allowing parties to seek redressal and protecting fundamental rights, Article 137 serves as a vital tool in the Indian legal system.