The conception of the  curative petition was first evolved by the Supreme Court of India in Rupa Ashok Hurra vs. Ashok Hurra, 2002 on the question whether an  displeased person is entitled to any relief against the final judgment of the Supreme Court, indeed after the  dismissal of review petition.

It’s majorly have two objectives, firstly to avoid miscarriage of justice and secondly to save from abuse of process. 

The conception of the  curative petition is supported by Article 137 of the Indian Constitution. It provides that in the matter of laws and rules made under article 145, the Supreme Court has the power to review any judgment pronounced or order made by it. Such a petition needs to be filed within 30 days from the date of judgment or order passed.  A  curative petition may be filed after a review plea is dismissed. 

It can be heard if the  aggrieved party establishes that there was a violation of the principles of natural justice, and that he wasn’t heard by the court before passing an order.  It must be rare rather than regular.  It must be first circulated to a Bench of the three senior-most judges, and the judges who passed the concerned judgment, if available. Only when a  majority of the judges conclude that the matter needs  hail should it be listed before the same Bench. 

The Bench at any stage of consideration of the  petition can ask a  senior advocate to  help it as amicus curiae.

A  petition is  generally decided by judges in the chamber unless a specific request for an open court is allowed.  In the event of the Bench holding at any stage that the  petition is without any merit, it may  put a penalty on the  party filed curative petition.