Start with the Article 136 route test
The Supreme Court describes Article 136 as a very wide discretionary appellate jurisdiction over courts and tribunals in India. A Special Leave Petition therefore begins with a threshold question: is the proposed challenge one in which the Court should be asked to grant special leave, rather than an ordinary statutory appeal, review, revision or other remedy? Article 136 does not create an automatic right to a further appeal. The petition must explain why the case warrants the Supreme Court's discretionary intervention and must comply with the Supreme Court Rules governing civil or criminal SLPs.
What a Special Leave Petition is
A Special Leave Petition, commonly called an SLP, is the procedural vehicle used to seek leave under Article 136 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court's own jurisdiction page states that the Court may, in its discretion, grant special leave to appeal from a judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order made by a court or tribunal in the territory of India. That makes the remedy broad in source, but discretionary in operation.
The distinction between an SLP and an appeal is important. At the first stage, the Court decides whether leave should be granted. If leave is refused, the matter ends at the special-leave stage. If leave is granted, the Supreme Court Rules provide that the SLP is treated as the petition of appeal and registered accordingly. The appeal stage is therefore legally and procedurally distinct from the initial request for leave.
Civil and criminal SLPs are governed by different Orders
Part II of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 contains separate procedural Orders. Order XXI governs Special Leave Petitions (Civil), while Order XXII governs Special Leave Petitions in Criminal Proceedings. The classification affects limitation, prescribed form, record requirements and some criminal-specific matters.
| Question | SLP (Civil) | SLP (Criminal) |
|---|---|---|
| Primary procedural Order | Order XXI, Supreme Court Rules, 2013 | Order XXII, Supreme Court Rules, 2013 |
| Constitutional source | Article 136 | Article 136 |
| General limitation under the Rules | Normally 90 days from the judgment/order; 60 days where a certificate of fitness was refused | Normally 90 days; 60 days where leave was refused by the High Court; 60 days in a death-sentence case |
| After leave is granted | SLP is treated as the petition of appeal | SLP is treated as the petition of appeal |
Step 1: identify the judgment or order being challenged
The petition should begin with the exact impugned judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order, the court or tribunal that made it, the case number, date and procedural history. An SLP should not be drafted from a broad grievance alone. The challenged decision controls the limitation calculation, the questions raised, the annexures required and the relief requested.
The petitioner should also check whether the impugned decision is final or interlocutory and whether another ordinary remedy remains available. The existence of another route does not mechanically eliminate Article 136 jurisdiction, but it can materially affect whether invoking the Supreme Court at that stage is appropriate.
Step 2: calculate limitation before drafting
Limitation should be treated as an initial filing question, not an afterthought. Under Order XXI Rule 1, a civil SLP is generally to be lodged within 90 days from the judgment or order sought to be appealed from. Where a High Court refused a certificate of fitness, the Rules prescribe 60 days from the refusal order, subject to the specified provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Order XXII sets a similar structure for criminal SLPs: where leave to appeal was refused by the High Court, the period stated in the Rules is 60 days from refusal; in other cases not involving a sentence of death, 90 days from the judgment or order; and in a death-sentence case, 60 days. The Rules expressly refer to relevant provisions of the Limitation Act. The filing date should therefore be calculated from the actual procedural record rather than from a generic online summary.
Practical limitation safeguard
Record the impugned-order date, date of any certificate/leave-refusal order, copy-application and copy-readiness dates where relevant, court holidays and any period sought to be excluded. If the filing is beyond time, a properly supported application for condonation of delay may be required. The Court's rules also provide that delay should not be condoned without notice to the respondent in the circumstances specified for civil SLPs.
Step 3: use the Supreme Court filing structure
For civil SLPs, Order XXI Rule 3 prescribes the petition architecture and Form No. 28. The Rules require, among other things, a list of dates, the certified copy of the judgment or order challenged, the SLP in the prescribed form, relevant statutory or constitutional provisions in an appendix where applicable, annexures, and an affidavit supporting the petition. The Supreme Court's Forms page separately publishes the SLP format.
The Rules also require disclosure of whether an earlier SLP against the same impugned judgment or order was filed and what happened to it. Civil SLPs must additionally state whether a letters patent appeal or writ appeal lies and whether that remedy has been used. These disclosures matter because the petition must accurately present the procedural history.
Step 4: keep the SLP anchored to the record below
Order XXI requires the petition to be confined to the pleadings before the court or tribunal whose order is challenged, with documents from that record annexed to the extent necessary to answer the questions of law or support the grounds. The Supreme Court has repeatedly stressed the importance of accurate disclosure and verification when parties approach it under Article 136.
This creates a useful drafting discipline: identify each proposed ground, identify where the underlying fact or submission appears in the record below, and identify the page or document that supports it. An SLP is not ordinarily the place to reconstruct a new factual case that was never presented below.
Information-gain framework: build a ground-to-record map
| Ground component | Record question | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Impugned finding | Where exactly does the lower court make the finding? | Defines what is actually challenged |
| Legal proposition | Which constitutional, statutory or precedential rule is relied upon? | Shows the legal basis of the challenge |
| Preserved issue | Was the issue pleaded or argued below, and where? | Tests whether the SLP remains within the record |
| Material document | Was the document part of the lower-court record? | Reduces risk of improper new material |
| Relief | What order is the Supreme Court asked to make at the leave stage? | Keeps the prayer aligned with Article 136 procedure |
Step 5: filing through an Advocate-on-Record
The Supreme Court Rules provide that no advocate other than an Advocate-on-Record (AOR) is entitled to file an appearance or act for a party in the Supreme Court, subject to the Rules concerning parties appearing in person and other specific situations. In an ordinary represented SLP, the AOR is therefore central to filing, curing Registry defects, service and subsequent procedural steps.
The Supreme Court currently provides electronic filing systems and publishes court forms, fee tools and a limitation calculator. These operational tools should be checked immediately before filing because Registry processes, portal fields and filing directions can change more quickly than the underlying constitutional rule.
Step 6: Registry scrutiny and curing defects
After presentation, the Registry scrutinizes the filing for compliance with the Rules and practice. The Supreme Court Rules empower the Registry to require amendments and correction of defects. The Rules also contain a specific default mechanism where communicated defects remain uncured for 90 days, after which the matter may be placed before a Judge in Chambers for appropriate orders.
Registry scrutiny is therefore a substantive operational stage. A limitation-compliant initial filing can still encounter defects relating to documents, formatting, court fee, affidavits, translations, indexing, service or procedural disclosure. The safest workflow is to maintain a defect-response checklist and cure each item against the official Registry communication.
Step 7: listing at the special-leave stage
Once the matter is ready for listing, the Supreme Court considers whether special leave should be granted. In civil SLPs, the Rules contemplate that petitions may initially be heard ex parte unless notice is directed, subject to caveat and other provisions. If notice is ordered, service steps must be completed. A respondent who receives notice, or who has lodged a caveat, may oppose the grant of leave and interim relief and may file objections within the time structure stated in the Rules.
The first hearing should therefore not be treated as the final appeal hearing. The immediate questions may include whether notice should issue, whether interim protection is justified, whether delay should be condoned where applicable, and ultimately whether leave should be granted.
Step 8: interim relief must be framed separately and precisely
An SLP does not automatically stay the impugned order. If interim protection is necessary, the petition should identify the specific order sought and the prejudice alleged if protection is refused. Depending on the case, the request may concern stay, status quo, suspension, protection against coercive steps or another appropriate interim direction.
The application should remain tied to the procedural posture. A broad request to suspend everything below may be unnecessary or legally mismatched. The interim prayer should identify the operative part of the challenged order, current enforcement position and the minimum protective direction said to be necessary pending consideration of the SLP.
Step 9: what happens if leave is granted
Grant of special leave changes the procedural character of the matter. Order XXI provides that, after leave is granted and any additional court fee is paid, the SLP is treated as the petition of appeal and is registered and numbered as an appeal. Order XXII similarly provides for criminal SLPs to be treated as appeals once special leave is granted.
This two-stage structure has an important practical consequence: arguments about whether leave should be granted should not be confused with the full merits of the eventual appeal. The petition must make out a sufficient basis for the Court to enter appellate jurisdiction; the appeal then proceeds under the applicable Supreme Court procedure.
SLP compared with appeal, review and revision
| Route | Source | Core procedural question |
|---|---|---|
| Ordinary appeal | Constitution or statute granting an appellate right | Does the law permit an appeal as of right or under specified conditions? |
| Review | Power of the same court under the applicable law/rules | Can the same court reconsider its own decision on the prescribed narrow grounds? |
| Revision | Statutory supervisory provision such as Section 115 CPC or BNSS revision provisions | Does the statute permit revisional supervision over this order? |
| Special Leave Petition | Article 136 of the Constitution | Should the Supreme Court exercise discretionary special-leave jurisdiction? |
These routes should not be selected by label. The decision should begin with the source of jurisdiction, the nature of the impugned decision, the available statutory remedies and the procedural objective.
Supreme Court SLP readiness checklist
| Checkpoint | Question to resolve |
|---|---|
| Article 136 route | Why is special leave the appropriate Supreme Court route for this decision? |
| Impugned decision | Is the exact judgment/order and procedural history identified? |
| Limitation | What is the applicable 90-day or 60-day rule, and how is time computed? |
| Record | Are the proposed grounds anchored to pleadings and documents below? |
| Disclosure | Are earlier SLPs and other appellate remedies fully disclosed as required? |
| AOR/filing | Is the filing prepared through the correct Supreme Court filing channel? |
| Interim relief | What precise interim protection, if any, is required? |
| After leave | Is the team prepared for conversion of the SLP into an appeal if leave is granted? |
Information only
This guide explains the general Special Leave Petition framework and does not determine whether Article 136 should be invoked in a particular matter, whether another remedy should be pursued first, whether limitation has expired, whether delay will be condoned, or whether the Supreme Court will grant leave or interim relief. Those questions depend on the exact judgment, procedural history, applicable statute, record and current Supreme Court Rules and practice. Verify the current official material and obtain case-specific professional advice before acting.
Official sources
Related guides
See Appeal Procedure for ordinary appellate routes, Revision Procedure for statutory revisional jurisdiction, Writ Petition Procedure for High Court constitutional jurisdiction, and the Supreme Court of India hub for court-specific navigation.