Special Leave Petition Timelines
Special Leave Petition (SLP): Overview
An SLP is a petition filed to the Supreme Court of India under Article 136 of the Constitution, seeking special permission to appeal against a judgment or order from any lower court or tribunal. The Supreme Court has discretionary power to grant or deny leave.
Timelines for Filing SLP
Under Order XLIII Rule 1(b) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, an SLP must be filed within 90 days from the date of the judgment or order against which the petition is filed.
If the petition is filed after this 90-day period, it is considered delayed.
The petitioner can seek condonation of delay by providing sufficient cause/reasons for the delay.
Important Case Laws Explaining SLP Timelines and Delay Condonation
1. Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (1987)
Facts: Delay in filing an SLP was due to the negligence of counsel.
Issue: Whether delay caused by legal advice can be excused.
Holding: The Supreme Court held that negligence or ignorance of counsel is not a sufficient ground for condoning delay.
Significance: This case sets a high threshold for condonation of delay — the petitioner must show genuine and sufficient cause beyond mere lawyer’s negligence.
2. Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980)
Facts: Delay in filing the petition was due to unforeseen circumstances.
Issue: How strictly should the courts interpret the limitation period for filing SLP?
Holding: The Court said that while limitation laws must be followed, substantial justice must prevail over technicalities.
Significance: This judgment balances the strict enforcement of timelines with fairness in deserving cases.
3. Deepak Mahajan v. Rajnish Ahuja (2008)
Facts: Delay was caused due to illness of the petitioner’s advocate.
Issue: Can illness of counsel be considered a sufficient cause for delay?
Holding: The Court ruled that illness of counsel, if properly supported by medical evidence, can be a valid ground for condoning delay.
Significance: This case softens the harsh approach of Katiji in genuine cases involving health issues.
4. Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa (1970)
Facts: Delay due to petitioner’s lack of legal knowledge.
Issue: Whether ignorance of law is a valid reason to condone delay.
Holding: The Court held that ignorance of law is no excuse.
Significance: Reinforces that petitioners must be vigilant and act within prescribed time.
5. Rajender Singh vs. State of Punjab (2005)
Facts: Delay of a few days due to unavoidable circumstances.
Issue: What is the Court’s approach toward condoning short delays?
Holding: The Court held that a few days’ delay, especially when justified by valid reasons, can be condoned in the interest of justice.
Significance: Reiterates the principle that minor delays, if explained satisfactorily, should not be a bar.
6. Union of India v. Hilal Ahmed Mir (2014)
Facts: Delay of 97 days in filing SLP.
Issue: Can delay exceeding prescribed period be condoned?
Holding: The Supreme Court laid down guidelines that each case must be examined on its facts, and delay beyond 90 days can be condoned for sufficient cause.
Significance: Emphasizes the discretionary power of the Court to condone delay on a case-by-case basis.
7. M.K. Kini v. Union of India (1953)
Facts: Delay caused due to misplacement of records.
Issue: Can administrative or clerical errors be a valid ground for condoning delay?
Holding: The Court accepted such errors as sufficient cause if they were beyond the control of the petitioner.
Significance: Adds flexibility in procedural timelines where fault lies outside petitioner’s control.
Summary of Principles from the Above Cases:
| Principle | Case Law |
|---|---|
| Negligence of Counsel not excused | Collector v. Katiji |
| Substantial justice over technicality | Bachan Singh v. Punjab |
| Illness of counsel is valid ground | Deepak Mahajan v. Rajnish Ahuja |
| Ignorance of law not excuse | Hindustan Steel Ltd. |
| Minor delays condoned | Rajender Singh v. Punjab |
| Discretion to condone delay beyond 90 days | Union of India v. Hilal Ahmed Mir |
| Administrative errors condoned | M.K. Kini v. Union of India |
Practical Advice Based on These Cases
Always file SLP within the 90-day timeline to avoid complications.
If delayed, file an application for condonation of delay immediately.
Provide detailed and genuine reasons with supporting evidence for delay.
Avoid relying on lawyer’s negligence or ignorance.
Remember, courts aim to balance strict timelines with the interests of justice.
RELATED Blog
0 comments