Supreme Court Steps In: Curative Petition Sheds Light on Judicial Integrity

The Supreme Court allowed a curative petition by Surendra Koli, highlighting inconsistencies in adjudication from the Nithari killings case. The court emphasized that curative jurisdiction aims to prevent justice miscarriages and maintain judgment integrity. This follows Koli's conviction affirmation in 2011 and his life sentence commutation in 2015.

The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, addressed the integrity of its judicial process, highlighting concerns over decisions made on identical records that speak with 'discordant voices.' This move came as the court entertained a curative petition filed by Surendra Koli, challenging his conviction in the infamous Nithari killings case.

A bench led by Chief Justice B R Gavai noted that Koli's petition presented exceptional circumstances warranting the court's curative jurisdiction. The bench emphasized that despite past final verdicts, inconsistencies and injustice in the adjudication process must be corrected to preserve public confidence and judicial integrity.

The court referred to the authoritative Rupa Ashok Hurra case, underscoring that a curative petition is not a second review but exists solely to remedy gross miscarriages of justice. Koli's curative petition followed his conviction in 2011, a failed review plea in 2014, and a subsequent life sentence commutation by the Allahabad High Court in 2015.

(With inputs from agencies.)