Examining Judicial Review and Curative Jurisprudence: A Critical Analysis

Examining Judicial Review and Curative Jurisprudence: A Critical Analysis

Mathews J Nedumpara
98205 35428

a)Review petitions (civil) dismissed- 19710
Allowed- 92

b) Review Petitions (Crl)
Dismissed- 6087
Allowed- 48

c) Curative petitions (civil)
Dismissed- 2155
Allowed- 0

d) Curative petitions (Crl)
Dismissed- 620
Allowed- 3

So far as curative petitions go, I am not concerned.

The curative jurisprudence itself is against the constitution, a judicial legislation, which no court has the power to do. I consider this mechanism to be in ignorance of the elementary jurisprudence. The court failed to comprehend the distinction between res judicata and stare decisis and mistook one for the other, which would be evident anyone who reads Hurra v. Hurra, by which judgment this mechanism of reopening a case even after review has been dismissed came to be invented.

SHARE THIS :

Disclaimer:


The Bar Council of India does not permit advertisement or solicitation by advocates in any form or manner. By accessing this website you acknowledge and confirm that you are seeking information relating to our firm of your own accord and that there has been no form of solicitation or advertisement by us. The contents of this website is intended purely for educational and informational purposes and should not be construed as soliciting, advertisement or as legal advice.


The contents of this website are the intellectual property of Nedumpara & Nedumpara. No material on this site may be copied, reproduced, republished, uploaded, posted, transmitted or distributed in any way without the prior written permission of Nedumpara & Nedumpara.