Special Leave Petition (Article 136)

A special leave petition is a request asking the Supreme Court to use its discretionary power under Article 136 of the Constitution to permit an appeal against a judgment, order, or sentence that would not otherwise reach the Court through the ordinary appellate provisions. It functions as a residual, catch-all route of appeal, standing apart from the specific appellate jurisdiction given by Articles 132 to 134A.

What Article 136 Says

Article 136(1) provides that, notwithstanding anything in the chapter dealing with the Union Judiciary, the Supreme Court may, in its discretion, grant special leave to appeal from any judgment, decree, determination, sentence, or order in any cause or matter passed or made by any court or tribunal in the territory of India. Clause (2) carves out one clear exception: this power does not apply to any judgment, determination, sentence, or order passed by a court or tribunal constituted under any law relating to the Armed Forces.

The opening words "notwithstanding anything in this Chapter" are deliberate. They signal that Article 136 is not confined by the conditions attached to Articles 132, 133, or 134 — it exists precisely to cover situations that fall outside those specific provisions, wherever the interests of justice require the Supreme Court's intervention.

A Residuary and Discretionary Power

Even after Articles 132 to 134 define the Supreme Court's regular appellate jurisdiction, cases can remain where justice demands the Court's interference — not only with High Court decisions outside the scope of those articles, but with orders of any other court or tribunal in India. Article 136 fills that gap. Its scope is described as the widest possible: it lets the Supreme Court grant leave to appeal from any court or tribunal (except a military tribunal), whether the order under challenge is final or merely interlocutory.

Crucially, this power is discretionary and cannot be claimed as a matter of right. The discretion vested in the Supreme Court is unfettered by any statutory restriction and cannot be curtailed by ordinary legislation — only a constitutional amendment to Article 136 itself could narrow it. At the same time, the Supreme Court has repeatedly cautioned that this wide power should be exercised with circumspection, rather than the Court permanently limiting its own reach.

When the Supreme Court Exercises This Power

Courts have laid down that Article 136 is not meant to convert the Supreme Court into a regular court of appeal reviewing every disputed finding of fact. A few principles emerge from how the Court has approached special leave petitions:

• An appeal by special leave is not an appeal as of right; the mere possibility of a different view on the evidence is not, by itself, a ground for the Supreme Court to interfere with findings of the courts below.
• The Court will reappreciate evidence mainly to check for illegality, material irregularity, or a miscarriage of justice — not simply to substitute its own view of the facts.
• In civil cases, special leave will ordinarily not be granted unless a substantial question of law or a matter of general public importance is involved.
• In criminal cases, the Supreme Court has held it will interfere under Article 136 only where exceptional and special circumstances exist, substantial and grave injustice has occurred, and the case shows features of sufficient gravity to justify reviewing the decision.
• The Supreme Court has exercised this power to ensure there is no miscarriage of justice — for instance, quashing an acquittal by a High Court where the finding was found to be misconceived and perverse.

Special Leave and the Anti-Defection Law

Article 136's reach was itself protected in a significant constitutional episode. Paragraph 7 of the Tenth Schedule, inserted by the 52nd Amendment Act, 1985, sought to bar courts from exercising jurisdiction over questions of a legislator's disqualification — which would have shut out the Supreme Court's power under Article 136 (and the High Courts' power under Article 226) in such matters. The Supreme Court declared this paragraph unconstitutional for want of the ratification by state legislatures required under the proviso to Article 368(2), while leaving the rest of the Tenth Schedule intact. This confirmed that a law cannot exclude the Supreme Court's Article 136 jurisdiction without following the special constitutional amendment procedure.

How Article 136 Compares to the US Supreme Court's Power

A useful way to grasp the breadth of Article 136 is to compare it with the position in the United States:

UPSC Relevance

Prelims

• Article 136 gives the Supreme Court discretionary power to grant special leave to appeal from any court or tribunal in India, except military tribunals.
• This power cannot be curtailed by ordinary legislation — only by amending Article 136 itself.

Mains

• Discuss why Article 136 is described as a residuary power and examine the judicial principles that guide its exercise.
• Evaluate the significance of Article 136 in ensuring access to the Supreme Court beyond the specific appellate routes provided by Articles 132–134A.

FAQ

Q1. Can the Supreme Court grant special leave to appeal from any tribunal in India? Yes, from any court or tribunal in the territory of India, except a tribunal constituted under a law relating to the Armed Forces.

Q2. Is special leave to appeal available as a matter of right? No. Article 136 vests this power entirely in the Supreme Court's discretion; it is not a right that a litigant can automatically claim.

Q3. Can Parliament restrict the Supreme Court's power under Article 136 by ordinary law? No. The power is unfettered by any statutory restriction and can be curtailed only by amending Article 136 itself.

Q4. Does the Supreme Court reappreciate all evidence when hearing a special leave petition? Generally no. It reappreciates evidence mainly to check for illegality, material irregularity, or miscarriage of justice, not merely because a different view of the facts is possible.

Q5. When will the Supreme Court interfere in a criminal case under Article 136? Only where exceptional and special circumstances exist, and substantial and grave injustice would otherwise result.

Quick Revision

• Article 136 — Supreme Court's discretionary power to grant special leave to appeal from any court or tribunal (except military tribunals).
• Not an appeal as of right; wholly discretionary.
• Cannot be curtailed by ordinary legislation, only by constitutional amendment.
• Civil cases: needs a substantial question of law or general public importance.
• Criminal cases: needs exceptional circumstances and grave injustice.
• Tenth Schedule paragraph 7, which sought to bar this jurisdiction, was struck down for lacking required ratification.

Sources

• The Constitution of India, Article 136 — https://www.indiacode.nic.in/constitution
• State of Rajasthan v. Islam, AIR 2011 SC 2317 — Supreme Court of India judgment records
• Mathai v. George, (2016) 7 SCC 700 — Supreme Court of India judgment records

Further Reference

For deeper reading on this topic and the wider polity syllabus, these standard works are recommended:

• M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity (McGraw Hill) — the standard UPSC handbook.
• D.D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India (LexisNexis) — authoritative constitutional-law treatment.
• The Constitution of India — Bare Act