Any judgment, decree, decision, sentence, or order of any court or tribunal operating within Indian territory may be appealed against with special leave from the Supreme Court. It is not restricted to any specific court or subject matter. In cases involving issues of fact, the Supreme Court at its discretion may take up law, or both.
The intention behind Article 136 of the Constitution
Providing Justice: Article 136 makes sure that a lower court's technicalities or restrictions do not prevent justice from being served. The Supreme Court can review and correct any mistakes or unfairness that may have been present in the rulings, decrees, sentences, orders, or judgments of the lower courts.
Errors in the Law: The Supreme Court is empowered by Article 136 to deal with legal matters and rectify legal errors. It gives the Court the authority to interpret and make sense of statutes, constitutional provisions, and legal doctrines, thereby guaranteeing uniformity and consistency in the application of the law across the nation.
Protecting Fundamental Rights: One of the most important functions of Article 136's discretionary power is to protect the fundamental rights that the Constitution guarantees. When these rights are being violated or are about to be violated, the Supreme Court has the authority to step in, protect the rights in question, and defend the values of justice, equality, and liberty.
Ensuring Judicial Review: By giving the Supreme Court the power to examine the rulings of subordinate courts and tribunals, Article 136 enhances the concept of judicial review. With the use of this authority, the Court can verify that the rule of law is maintained by assessing the validity, constitutionality, and accuracy of rulings and orders.
Resolving Conflicting Decisions: Under Article 136, the Supreme Court has the authority to settle disputes or contradictions between rulings made by various national courts and tribunals. This encourages consistency, predictability, and legal certainty in the legal system.
Establishing Precedents: The Supreme Court may set precedents and legal guidelines that direct cases in the future by using its discretionary authority under Article 136. These precedents help lower courts make decisions and maintain uniformity in the legal system by influencing and shaping how laws are interpreted and applied.
Process
A party must submit a petition to the Supreme Court to request special permission to appeal under Article 136. In addition to providing supporting documentation, such as copies of the orders or judgments being contested, the petition should specify the reasons for the request for leave. To file the petition, the petitioner may be required by the court to deposit a fee.
Exclusivity
Certain matters are excluded from the scope of special leave to appeal under Article 136(2). It declares that rulings, decisions, sentences, and orders made by any court or tribunal established under laws about the Armed Forces are exempt from Article 136.
Notable cases under Article 136
(2002) Rupa Ashok Hurra vs. Ashok Hurra: The Supreme Court stressed in this case that an SLP should not be viewed as an appeal in the conventional sense. It was decided that the Court should only use Article 136 jurisdiction in extraordinary circumstances involving a significant legal issue or blatant injustice.
In the 2004 case Ramrao & Ors. vs. All India Institute of Medical Sciences: The topic of reservation in admissions to educational institutions was raised. The Supreme Court emphasized the significance of preserving merit-based selection procedures while examining the legality of the reservation policy and granting special leave to appeal.
State of Punjab v. Devans Modern Breweries Ltd. (2004): In this case, the Supreme Court examined the validity of the sales tax imposed on bottled beer and granted special leave to appeal. The Court's ruling affected how applicable laws were interpreted as well as taxation policies.
In the 2014 case of the State of Karnataka v. Selvi J. Jayalalitha, a well-known political figure was accused of corruption. The Supreme Court examined the ruling of the lower court and granted special permission to appeal. There were substantial legal and political repercussions from the case.
In the 2014 case of Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh, the Supreme Court considered how to interpret Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure concerning the filing of First Information Reports (FIRs) and granted special leave to appeal. The Court made it clear what is required in some criminal cases to file a First Information Report (FIR).
Lead India Law provides various legal services, including free legal advice and internet information. You can talk to a lawyer and ask legal questions about the law here.In India, free legal advice online can be obtained at Lead India. Along with receiving free legal advice online, one can also ask questions to the experts online free through Lead India.
Comments