Special Leave Petitions In Criminal Law
Special Leave Petition is a unique provision under Article 136 of the Indian Constitution.
It allows the Supreme Court of India to grant special permission to appeal against any judgment or order from any court or tribunal in the country.
It is a discretionary power of the Supreme Court, which it can exercise to hear appeals even if no other appeal is allowed under the law.
The scope includes civil and criminal cases.
Role of SLP in Criminal Law
In criminal law, SLP serves as a last resort for an aggrieved party to challenge lower court decisions (High Court or sometimes even Sessions Court).
SLPs are not an automatic right but are granted when substantial questions of law or gross miscarriage of justice arise.
The Supreme Court examines whether the case involves:
A violation of fundamental rights.
A substantial legal question.
An issue of gross miscarriage of justice.
Error apparent on the face of the record.
Important Points About SLPs in Criminal Cases
Delay in filing an SLP can be condoned by the Supreme Court in deserving cases.
SLP can be entertained against judgments of both trial courts and High Courts.
SLPs may be dismissed summarily if no substantial question of law arises.
Key Case Laws on Special Leave Petitions in Criminal Law
1. R. S. Nayak v. A. R. Antulay, AIR 1990 SC 114
Facts: The petitioner challenged the delay in filing an appeal.
Issue: Whether the Supreme Court should condone delay in filing appeals and SLPs.
Judgment: The Court held that the delay can be condoned in exceptional cases if there is a sufficient cause, but such discretion should be exercised sparingly.
Significance: Established guidelines for condoning delay in SLPs, emphasizing the need for sufficient cause.
2. State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604
Facts: The case dealt with misuse of power in initiating criminal proceedings.
Issue: Scope of Supreme Court's interference via SLP in quashing FIRs and criminal proceedings.
Judgment: The Supreme Court held that it has the power under Article 136 to quash FIRs if they are found to be frivolous or mala fide.
Significance: Clarified that SLP is a powerful remedy to prevent abuse of criminal law by quashing baseless proceedings.
3. Dalpat Kumar v. Prahlad Singh, AIR 1993 SC 276
Facts: The petitioner was convicted based on circumstantial evidence.
Issue: Whether SLP should be entertained for re-appreciation of evidence.
Judgment: The Court said that it will generally not interfere with findings of fact in criminal cases through SLP unless there is a gross miscarriage of justice.
Significance: The Supreme Court will not interfere with factual findings through SLP unless there is a clear error or miscarriage.
4. Union of India v. Ibrahim Uddin, AIR 1980 SC 1562
Facts: The petitioner challenged the order of acquittal.
Issue: Whether SLP can be filed against acquittal orders.
Judgment: The Supreme Court held that SLPs can be entertained against acquittal orders if the prosecution has substantial questions of law to raise.
Significance: Opened the door for appeal against acquittals through SLP in exceptional cases.
5. K. R. Verma v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 1472
Facts: The petitioner filed SLP against conviction and sentence.
Issue: Extent of interference by Supreme Court in criminal appeals via SLP.
Judgment: The Court reiterated that the Supreme Court will interfere only if there is an apparent error of law or gross miscarriage of justice.
Significance: Emphasized the limited and discretionary nature of SLP in criminal cases.
6. J.K. Industries Ltd. v. Chief Inspector of Boilers, AIR 1980 SC 207
Facts: The petitioner challenged criminal proceedings.
Issue: Whether the Supreme Court can grant special leave to appeal against interim or interlocutory orders in criminal cases.
Judgment: The Court held that SLP can be granted even against interlocutory orders if necessary to prevent injustice.
Significance: Expanded the scope of SLP to include interlocutory orders in criminal cases.
Summary of the Role of SLP in Criminal Law
| Aspect | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Nature of SLP | Discretionary special permission to appeal in Supreme Court |
| When granted? | Substantial questions of law, violation of fundamental rights, miscarriage of justice |
| Against what? | Orders/judgments of all courts including acquittals and interlocutory orders |
| Interference | Limited to errors of law and gross miscarriages; not routine re-appreciation of evidence |
| Delay in filing | Can be condoned on sufficient cause |
| Power in quashing FIRs | Yes, to prevent abuse of criminal law |
RELATED Blog
0 comments