This Article is written by Sanjana Kesarwani of Pt. Som Chandra Dwivedi Vidhi Mahavidyalaya pursuing BA LLB , 5th year during her internship at Ledroit India.
Keywords:
Special leave petition (for brevity SLP), ARTICLE 136, Supreme court,court, question of law.
LIST OF TOPICS COVERED:
- Introduction
- Nature and scope of article 136
- When can an SLP be filed?
- Who can file an SLP?
- Limitation period for filing SLP
- Procedure for filing SLP
- Essential of SLP
- Types of outcomes in SLP
- Important case laws on SLP
- Limitation,defects and condonation
- Grant of special leave – judicial approach
- Dismissal and its effect
- Review and Curative Petitions Post-SLP
- Recent Judicial Trends
- Practical Challenges in Filing SLP
- Reforms and Suggestion
- Conclusion.
1. Introduction
The Supreme Court of India, established under Part V, Chapter IV of the Constitution, stands at the apex of the Indian judicial system. It performs multiple constitutional functions, including acting as a guardian of the Constitution, an interpreter of law, and the final court of appeal. Article 136 of the Constitution is unique and powerful because it grants the Supreme Court discretionary authority to permit appeals against any judgment, decree, or order of any court or tribunal in India, except those constituted under armed forces laws. This provision allows the Court to intervene even where no statutory appeal is available, making the Special Leave Petition (SLP) an extraordinary remedy.
Article 136 states:
“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.”[1]
The SLP mechanism is not a regular appellate remedy; rather, it serves as a residual or exceptional jurisdiction, designed to ensure that justice prevails even in cases where procedural or substantive error has led to grave injustice. The power vested in the Supreme Court under Article 136 is described as extraordinary, plenary, and discretionary. It provides flexibility for judicial intervention but also necessitates self-imposed limitations to prevent abuse.
2. Nature and Scope of Article 136
2.1 Extraordinary and Discretionary Power
Article 136 does not confer a right to appeal. Instead, it provides a right to request the Supreme Court’s permission (leave) to file an appeal. In Pritam Singh v. State (1950), the Supreme Court held that Article 136 is not intended to be invoked as a matter of course; it applies only in exceptional cases involving substantial questions of law or gross miscarriage of justice.[2]
2.2 No Automatic Admission
The Supreme Court may:
- Dismiss the petition in (at the threshold) Grant leave and convert the SLP into a statutory appeal
- Grant interim relief (such as a stay of the impugned order)
2.3 Not a Substitute for Statutory Appeals
In Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala (2000), the Court clarified that SLP cannot be used to bypass regular appellate mechanisms.[3]
Historical Development of Article 136 Jurisdiction
The concept of extraordinary appellate jurisdiction traces its lineage to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council during British India. Before Independence, appeals could be made to the Privy Council under Section 109 and 110 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, and the Federal Court could certify cases involving substantial questions of law.
When the Constitution of India was framed, the framers sought to replace the colonial appellate system with an indigenous mechanism that retained flexibility to correct judicial errors. Thus, Article 136 was introduced as a residual appellate power, ensuring that even if no statutory appeal was available, justice would not be denied. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, during the Constituent Assembly Debates, emphasised that Article 136 would serve as a “special reserve power” for the Supreme Court to intervene in exceptional cases.
3. When Can an SLP Be Filed?
SLP can be filed against judgments/orders from:
| Court/Tribunal | When Allowed? |
| High Courts (Civil or Criminal Jurisdiction) | Yes |
| Tribunals (e.g., CAT, NCLT, NCLAT, SAT) | Yes |
| Armed Forces Tribunals | No — explicitly excluded under Article 136(2) |
Additionally, SLP may lie against:
a.Final judgments
b. Interim orders (in rare situations involving miscarriage of justice)
c. Orders refusing permission to appeal before the High Court (Certificate of fitness)
4. Who Can File an SLP?
Any aggrieved party may file an SLP. The term “person” is broadly interpreted and can include:
a.Individuals
b Companies
c.Legal representatives
d.Associations
In A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak (1988)[4], the Supreme Court held that Article 136 power transcends all statutory restrictions, allowing even third parties to approach the Court if they are affected.The Supreme Court affirmed that Article 136 transcends procedural limitations and is available to “any person who has suffered injustice at the hands of a court or tribunal.”
5. Limitation Period for Filing SLP
The limitation period is governed by:
| Type of Order Challenged | Time Limit to File SLP |
Against High Court judgment by way of appeal | 90 days |
| Against refusal of certificate of fitness | 60 days |
(Refer: Supreme Court Rules, 2013 and Limitation Act, 1963)
A delay condonation application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act may be filed where sufficient cause exists. The Supreme Court strongly discourages delay, especially by government entities (Postmaster General v. Living Media India Ltd., 2012).[5]
6. Procedure for Filing SLP —
Step 1 — Collect Certified Copies of Impugned Orders
A certified copy of the High Court/Tribunal judgment is mandatory. If not available at filing, an affidavit explaining the delay is required.
Step 2 — Prepare the SLP Petition
According to Order XXI of the Supreme Court Rules, the SLP must include:
1.Synopsis and List of Dates:
A well-structured synopsis summarises facts and legal issues, followed by a chronological list of dates for quick reference.
2.Petition mentioning:
- Jurisdictional basis (Article 136)
- Facts of the case
- Grounds for challenge
- Substantial questions of law
3.Annexures (judgments, documents)
Step 3 — Drafting Grounds for Special Leave
Grounds should show miscarriage of justice, violation of natural justice, or substantial legal error. Personal grievances without legal basis are insufficient.
Step 4 — A Signed Affidavit
The petition must be verified by an affidavit signed by the petitioner or authorized representative.
Step 5 — Filing Through Advocate-on-Record (AoR)
Only an Advocate-on-Record can file an SLP (Order IV, Rule 2 of Supreme Court Rules). The petitioner may engage any advocate, but the Vakalatnama must be signed by the AoR.
Step 6 — Payment of Court Fees and Filing
The petition is filed electronically via the Supreme Court e-filing portal.
Step 7 — Scrutiny by the Registry
The Registry examines:
- Formatting
- Limitation
- Annexures
- Vakalatnama defects
Defects may be:
- Curable (minor clerical issues)
- Non-curable (jurisdictional defects)
Step 8 — Listing Before the Court
Once cleared, the matter is listed before the Division Bench.
Step 9 — Notice to Respondent
If the Court finds merit, it issues notice to the opposite party.
Step 10 — Hearing and Grant of Leave
At this stage, the Supreme Court may:
| Outcome | Effect |
| Leave granted | SLP becomes a statutory appeal |
| SLP dismissed | Litigation ends; High Court order stands |
7. Essential Contents of SLP:
- Synopsis:Brief summary of case and legal issues
- List of Dates:Chronological timeline
- Questions of Law:Must demonstrate the issue is substantial and requires Supreme Court intervention
- Grounds:Legal reasons challenging impugned order
- Prayer:Relief sought
- Annexures:Copy of judgment, pleadings, etc.
8. Types of Outcomes After SLP Filing
- Dismissal in — most common.
- Leave granted — petition converted into regular civil/criminal appeal
- Interim relief granted — stay on operation of impugned order.
- Matter remanded — case sent back to high court/tribunal for reconsideration.
9. Important Case Laws on SLP
- Pritam Singh v. State, AIR 1950 SC 169 : SLP to be used sparingly
- Durga Shankar Mehta v. Thakur Raghuraj Singh, AIR 1954 SC 520: Very wide powers of SC
- Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala (2000): SLP not substitute for appeal
- Khoday Distilleries Ltd. v. Sri Mahadeshwara Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Ltd. (2019): Effect of dismissal without reason
10. Limitation, Defects and Condonation
SLPs often get rejected for:
- Delay without satisfactory explanation
- Poor drafting
- Failure to demonstrate legal issues of general importance
The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the SLP jurisdiction exists to correct injustice, not to provide an avenue for routine appeals.
11.Grant of Special Leave — Judicial Approach
The Supreme Court exercises caution while granting leave:
Civil Cases: Leave is granted only when a substantial question of law of general importance arises or the lower court’s findings are perverse.
Criminal Cases: Leave is granted where the judgment leads to gross miscarriage of justice, or where evidence has been ignored or misinterpreted.
In State of Bombay v Rudy Mistry (1960), the Court emphasised that while it can reappreciate evidence, it does so only in cases of manifest illegality or procedural irregularity.[8]
12.. Dismissal and Its Effect
The dismissal of an SLP may occur in two ways:
Dismissal in – without assigning reasons. It does not amount to affirmation of the High Court’s decision (Kunhayammed v State of Kerala, 2000).[9]
Dismissal after detailed hearing – where reasons are recorded; the doctrine of merger applies, and the High Court judgment merges into the Supreme Court’s order.
13.Review and Curative Petitions Post-SLP
If the SLP or appeal is dismissed, the petitioner may file:
Review Petition under Article 137 read with Order XLVII of the Supreme Court Rules.
Curative Petition, as per Rupa Ashok Hurra v Ashok Hurra (2002), in cases of violation of principles of natural justice.[10]
14.Recent Judicial Trends
The Supreme Court has increasingly emphasised the need to regulate SLP admissions due to rising caseloads. Statistics show that more than 60% of cases filed in the Supreme Court are SLPs, though only a small fraction are admitted.
In Mathai @ Joby v George (2010), the Court reiterated that Article 136 should not be converted into a routine appellate mechanism, warning against misuse that undermines judicial efficiency.[11]
Recent judgments encourage High Courts to deliver reasoned orders, thereby reducing unnecessary SLPs. Moreover, the Supreme Court Registry has introduced digital scrutiny and e-filing to streamline the SLP process.
15.Practical Challenges in Filing SLP
- Excessive Filing and Backlog: Thousands of SLPs are filed annually, leading to judicial delay.
- Frivolous Petitions: Many SLPs are filed despite lacking legal merit, burdening the system.
- High Cost: SLP filing involves substantial legal fees and procedural formalities.
- Limited Accessibility: Only Advocates-on-Record can file, creating procedural dependence.
- Evolving Technology: Though e-filing is available, digital literacy gaps persist among litigants.
16. Reforms and Suggestion
- Pre-Screening Mechanism: A dedicated SLP screening committee could filter frivolous petitions.
- Cost Sanctions: Penalising unnecessary SLPs could deter misuse.
- Strengthening High Courts: Ensuring thorough appellate adjudication reduces reliance on Article 136.
- Awareness of Procedural Requirements: Litigants must be educated about SLP’s exceptional nature.
- Encouraging Mediation and ADR: Alternative dispute resolution mechanisms can reduce appellate burdens.
17. Conclusion
Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution is a constitutional safety valve, ensuring justice prevails over technicalities. While the provision grants vast powers to the Supreme Court, the Court exercises this power cautiously and selectively. SLPs are meant for exceptional cases involving significant legal questions, violation of principles of natural justice, arbitrary or perverse findings, or grave miscarriage of justice.
Thus, filing an SLP requires:
- Strong legal grounds
- Proper documentation
- Adherence to procedural rules
- Representation through an Advocate-on-Record
- Misuse of SLP jurisdiction causes delays and burden on the judiciary.
The Supreme Court has consistently emphasized that SLP is not a matter of right but a matter of judicial discretion.
The Special Leave Petition under Article 136 epitomises the Supreme Court’s role as the ultimate protector of justice in India’s constitutional democracy. It serves as an extraordinary remedy ensuring that no miscarriage of justice occurs merely due to procedural rigidity or absence of statutory appeal.
However, the discretionary nature of SLP requires restraint, discipline, and judicious exercise. The Court has rightly observed that “Article 136 is a residual power to be exercised only in the rarest of rare cases.” Its essence lies in balancing judicial accessibility with finality of litigation.
Thus, understanding the procedure, limitations, and ethical purpose of SLP is essential for all litigants and practitioners seeking justice before the Supreme Court. When used wisely, it preserves the sanctity of law and strengthens public faith in the judiciary.
References
- Constitution of India, Article 136.
- Pritam Singh v State AIR 1950 SC 169.
- Kunhayammed v State of Kerala (2000) 6 SCC 359.
- A.R. Antulay v R.S. Nayak (1988) 2 SCC 602.
- Postmaster General v Living Media India Ltd (2012) 3 SCC 563.
- Supreme Court Rules, 2013 (as amended).
- Limitation Act, 1963.
- State of Bombay v Rudy Mistry AIR 1960 SC 391.
- Kunhayammed v State of Kerala (2000) 6 SCC 359
- Rupa Ashok Hurra v Ashok Hurra (2002) 4 SCC 388.
- Mathai @ Joby v George (2010) 4 SCC 358.
