Introduction
Filing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court of India requires more than reproducing the pleadings, grounds and arguments advanced before the High Court. It involves an independent assessment of maintainability, the discretionary jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution, the nature of the alleged legal error and compliance with the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, as amended.
An Advocate-on-Record (AOR) has distinct professional and procedural responsibilities. Although a matter may originate before a High Court, tribunal or subordinate court and may be referred by counsel conducting those proceedings, the petition presented before the Supreme Court must independently satisfy the applicable constitutional and procedural requirements.
This guide examines the principal stages involved in preparing, filing and prosecuting civil and criminal Special Leave Petitions, with particular reference to Advocates-on-Record and referring counsel.
1. Examining Maintainability Before Drafting
The first question is whether Article 136 provides an appropriate basis for approaching the Supreme Court.
Article 136 empowers the Supreme Court, in its discretion, to grant special leave to appeal against qualifying judgments, decrees, determinations, sentences or orders of courts and tribunals within the territory of India, subject to the exception in Article 136(2) concerning courts or tribunals constituted under laws relating to the Armed Forces.
The jurisdiction is extraordinary and discretionary. It does not confer an unrestricted right to a further appeal.
Before preparing an SLP, counsel should examine:
- The jurisdiction exercised by the court or tribunal below.
- The nature and effect of the impugned judgment or order.
- Whether the order is final, interim or interlocutory.
- Whether a statutory or constitutional appellate remedy exists.
- The legal error, jurisdictional infirmity or miscarriage of justice alleged.
- Whether the case warrants the exercise of discretionary jurisdiction.
In Pritam Singh v. State, AIR 1950 SC 169, the Supreme Court explained the exceptional nature of the jurisdiction under Article 136.
An SLP should therefore identify why Supreme Court intervention is justified rather than merely repeat disagreement with the findings of the court below.
2. Distinguishing Civil and Criminal Special Leave Petitions
The Supreme Court Rules, 2013 provide separate procedural frameworks for civil and criminal Special Leave Petitions.
Order XXI governs Special Leave Petitions in civil proceedings, while Order XXII governs Special Leave Petitions in criminal proceedings.
This distinction affects procedural requirements, limitation, prescribed forms and accompanying documents.
The petition must accurately identify the jurisdiction invoked and the proceedings from which the impugned decision arises.
Counsel should examine the substance of the proceedings and the applicable Rules rather than rely exclusively upon the case description adopted by the court below.
3. Limitation: An Essential Preliminary Examination
Limitation must be calculated before substantive drafting begins.
Under Order XXI Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules, the general period for lodging a civil SLP is 90 days from the judgment or order sought to be appealed against.
Where the High Court refuses a qualifying certificate of fitness to appeal, the Rules prescribe a distinct 60-day period, subject to the requirements of the relevant provision.
Order XXII Rule 1 provides the limitation framework for criminal SLPs. Generally, the period is 90 days in cases not involving a death sentence. Certain cases involving a sentence of death or qualifying refusals of leave or certificates are governed by a 60-day period.
Applicable provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963, including Sections 4, 5, 12 and 14, must be considered where relevant.
Counsel should verify the date of the impugned decision, the circumstances concerning certified copies, legally permissible exclusions and the effect of any related proceedings.
Limitation in statutory appeals and other categories of Supreme Court proceedings may be governed by different provisions.
A general assumption that all Supreme Court proceedings carry a uniform 90-day limitation period is legally unsafe.
4. Condonation of Delay
Where a petition is presented beyond the prescribed limitation period, an application for condonation of delay ordinarily becomes necessary.
The application should explain the material circumstances resulting in delay and establish sufficient cause in accordance with the applicable law.
The explanation should be specific, supported by the available record and consistent with the relevant dates.
Condonation is discretionary and cannot be presumed.
The Supreme Court discussed important principles governing condonation of delay in Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag v. Mst. Katiji, (1987) 2 SCC 107, and Esha Bhattacharjee v. Managing Committee of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy, (2013) 12 SCC 649.
The application must be prepared having regard to the nature of the proceedings and the judicial principles governing the particular circumstances.
5. Examining the Record Received from Referring Counsel
An essential responsibility in preparing an SLP is examining the record transmitted by the advocate who conducted proceedings before the High Court or other forum.
The Advocate-on-Record should obtain and scrutinise the impugned judgment, relevant pleadings, material interim and final orders, necessary documentary evidence and other records relied upon in the proceedings below.
Particular attention should be given to omissions, inconsistent statements, questions concerning the authenticity of documents and the procedural history of the dispute.
Counsel should identify whether the proposed grounds were raised before the court below and whether the petition proposes to rely upon material not forming part of the earlier record.
Additional facts or documents should not be introduced contrary to the applicable procedural requirements.
The SLP should accurately represent the existing record and must not conceal material circumstances relevant to the adjudication.
6. Preparing the Synopsis and List of Dates
A well-structured synopsis enables the Court to understand the central legal grievance without first examining the entire paper book.
The synopsis should identify the nature of the proceedings, the operative findings challenged, the substantial legal error alleged and the basis upon which intervention under Article 136 is sought.
A useful approach is to begin with the central legal controversy, explain the essential background and conclude by identifying why the matter warrants consideration by the Supreme Court.
The list of dates should present the relevant factual and procedural events in chronological order.
Every material date should be checked against the record.
The chronology should remain accurate and concise. Arguments or descriptions unsupported by documents should not be introduced as established facts.
The objective is clear legal presentation, not unnecessary repetition.
7. Formulating Questions of Law and Grounds
Questions of law should arise from identifiable findings, omissions or legal issues in the impugned decision.
Broad or abstract formulations unconnected with the actual dispute may not assist the Court in exercising jurisdiction under Article 136.
The grounds should explain the precise nature of the alleged error and its legal consequence.
Depending upon the case, the grounds may concern statutory interpretation, constitutional questions, jurisdictional errors, violation of natural justice, material procedural irregularities or findings alleged to be legally unsustainable.
Not every disagreement with the appreciation of evidence constitutes a substantial question of law.
The questions of law, grounds and prayers should be internally consistent and supported by the record.
8. Preparing the Petition and Supporting Documents
Orders XXI and XXII of the Supreme Court Rules prescribe the procedural framework for civil and criminal SLPs respectively.
The Supreme Court’s official Forms page provides Form 28 for civil SLPs, together with relevant filing checklists and related procedural materials.
Depending upon the nature of proceedings, the filing papers may include:
- The petition in the applicable prescribed form.
- Synopsis and list of dates.
- Impugned judgment or order.
- Relevant pleadings and supporting record.
- Required certified copies or appropriate exemption applications.
- Affidavit and vakalatnama, where applicable.
- Annexures and accompanying documents.
- Applications for condonation of delay, interim relief or other necessary directions.
- Applicable declarations, court-fee particulars and additional procedural documents.
The precise requirements depend upon the Rules, category of proceedings, current Registry instructions and applicable practice directions.
Counsel should verify pagination, indexing, annexure references, document legibility and consistency between the petition and supporting papers.
The use of an old specimen or previously accepted filing format does not establish compliance with every current requirement.
9. Disclosure of Previous and Connected Proceedings
Accurate disclosure of earlier and connected proceedings is fundamental to Supreme Court practice.
The petition must make the declarations and disclosures required under the applicable Rules and prescribed forms.
Counsel should ascertain whether the impugned judgment has been challenged by another party and whether previous petitions, appeals, review proceedings or connected matters exist.
Material orders and procedural developments relevant to maintainability or relief should be disclosed accurately.
An omission or misleading disclosure may have consequences beyond an ordinary Registry objection.
The Advocate-on-Record should independently review significant procedural statements before filing.
10. Applications for Interim Relief
The filing of an SLP does not automatically stay the operation or execution of the judgment or order under challenge.
Where interim protection is necessary, counsel should consider the appropriate form of relief and prepare a properly supported application.
Depending upon the proceedings, the relief may concern stay of operation or execution, protection against coercive action, maintenance of status quo or another appropriate direction.
The application should explain the material circumstances supporting interim relief, the consequences of refusal and the relevant legal considerations.
The prayer should be precise, legally permissible and consistent with the principal challenge.
An assertion of urgency does not dispense with the obligation to establish the grounds for relief.
11. Electronic Filing Before the Supreme Court
Electronic filing forms an important part of contemporary Supreme Court practice.
The Supreme Court’s official e-filing resources identify SC-eFM 2.0 and SC-eFM 3.0. Advocates should follow the portal, instructions and technical requirements currently applicable to their filing.
The official SC-eFM documentation explains the process of entering case information, uploading documents and completing submission.
The published SC-eFM FAQs describe PDF uploads and a stated 50 MB limit for an uploaded petition file. Practitioners should verify any subsequent technical changes before filing.
A draft saved within the portal must be distinguished from a finally submitted filing.
Under the documented process, final submission leads to generation of a diary number and the matter proceeds to Registry scrutiny.
Electronic submission does not eliminate the requirements of the Supreme Court Rules.
The Advocate-on-Record should verify the completeness, arrangement, legibility and accuracy of uploaded documents before final submission.
12. Registry Scrutiny, Defects and Re-filing
The Registry examines presented proceedings for compliance with the applicable Rules and procedural requirements.
Order VIII Rule 6 of the Supreme Court Rules provides a framework concerning scrutiny and rectification of defects. Its operative requirements, including relevant time periods, extensions and consequences of non-compliance, must be examined in the context of the particular filing.
The initial filing of an SLP and subsequent re-filing after removal of defects are distinct procedural stages.
The Registry may raise objections concerning limitation, classification, supporting documents, certified copies, affidavits, prescribed declarations, annexures, pagination or other filing requirements.
The Advocate-on-Record should maintain a clear record of:
- The original filing date.
- Diary number allotted.
- Date and nature of Registry objections.
- Relevant defect-removal deadlines.
- Dates of subsequent re-filing.
- Whether an application concerning delay in re-filing is necessary.
- Final scrutiny and registration status.
Office reports may distinguish delay in initial filing from delay in re-filing.
Those two matters should not be treated as interchangeable.
An effective filing practice includes an internal pre-filing quality check rather than relying exclusively upon Registry scrutiny to identify defects.
13. Responsibilities of the Advocate-on-Record
Order IV of the Supreme Court Rules governs the framework relating to advocates and Advocates-on-Record.
An Advocate-on-Record has a distinct procedural position and responsibility for acting on behalf of a party in accordance with the Rules.
The role extends beyond mechanical filing or permitting the use of an AOR registration number or signature.
The Supreme Court, in a judgment delivered on 20 February 2025 arising from SLP (Criminal) No. 4299 of 2024 and connected proceedings, emphasised the professional obligations of Advocates-on-Record in relation to scrutiny of case papers, accuracy of factual assertions and appropriate verification.
An AOR cannot avoid professional accountability merely by asserting that inaccurate pleadings originated from the litigant or referring counsel.
Professional responsibility therefore requires meaningful examination of the record, independent scrutiny of material factual instructions and appropriate supervision of documents filed in the AOR’s name.
The AOR should also maintain effective communication concerning procedural requirements, Registry objections, interim applications and orders passed by the Court.
14. Coordination Between the AOR and Referring Counsel
The relationship between an Advocate-on-Record and referring counsel is important to effective Supreme Court litigation.
Referring counsel ordinarily possesses familiarity with the factual background, previous proceedings and relevant documents.
The AOR is responsible for exercising the professional judgment and procedural oversight required by the Supreme Court framework.
Effective coordination should include a complete transmission of the record, identification of material orders, verification of limitation, clarification of proposed grounds and examination of the final petition.
Responsibilities concerning drafting, document verification, filing compliance and communication of Court directions should be clearly understood.
Neither the AOR nor referring counsel should proceed on the assumption that the other has independently verified every material fact.
15. Listing and Proceedings at the Special-Leave Stage
Following filing, scrutiny and the applicable listing process, the petition may be placed before the appropriate Bench.
At the special-leave stage, the Supreme Court considers whether leave to appeal should be granted.
The Court may dismiss the petition, issue notice, consider interim relief, grant special leave or pass other appropriate orders.
Issuance of notice does not automatically amount to grant of special leave.
Similarly, an interim order does not by itself determine the ultimate merits of the petition.
Counsel appearing at the admission stage should be prepared to identify the central legal error, the material findings challenged and the reasons intervention is warranted.
A focused presentation, supported by accurate references to the impugned judgment and record, generally assists effective consideration of the matter.
16. Consequences of Grant or Refusal of Special Leave
The legal consequences of an order passed at the special-leave stage depend upon its nature.
Before leave is granted, the Court exercises discretionary jurisdiction to determine whether the proposed appeal should be entertained.
Where leave is granted, the matter enters the appellate stage.
In Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala, (2000) 6 SCC 359, the Supreme Court explained the distinction between the special-leave stage and appellate jurisdiction, particularly in relation to the doctrine of merger.
The principles were further considered in Khoday Distilleries Ltd. v. Sri Mahadeshwara Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Ltd., (2019) 4 SCC 376.
A dismissal of an SLP without granting leave does not ordinarily result in merger of the impugned decision into an appellate judgment of the Supreme Court.
The specific consequences must, however, be determined from the terms and nature of the order, including whether the Court has made a reasoned declaration of law.
17. Practical Pre-Filing Checklist
Before final submission of a Special Leave Petition, the Advocate-on-Record and referring counsel should consider the following checklist:
- Confirm the availability and appropriateness of Article 136 jurisdiction.
- Examine whether another statutory or constitutional remedy is applicable.
- Identify the precise judgment or order proposed to be challenged.
- Calculate limitation independently and examine relevant exclusions.
- Verify certified-copy requirements and any necessary exemption application.
- Examine the complete relevant record received from referring counsel.
- Cross-check the synopsis, list of dates, questions of law and grounds.
- Verify material factual statements and annexure references.
- Review prescribed declarations, affidavits, vakalatnama and applications.
- Confirm disclosure of prior and connected proceedings.
- Check current filing checklists, court fees and electronic document requirements.
- Verify final electronic submission and diary number generation.
- Monitor Registry scrutiny and remove notified defects.
- Record re-filing dates and examine the need for any procedural application.
- Track listing, interim applications and subsequent Court directions.
This checklist is an editorial aid and does not replace the prescribed Supreme Court filing checklist or applicable Registry directions.
Conclusion
The preparation and filing of a Special Leave Petition involves constitutional analysis, procedural accuracy, effective legal drafting and professional accountability.
An SLP should not merely reproduce the submissions advanced before the High Court. It should explain why the case justifies the Supreme Court’s discretionary intervention under Article 136.
For Advocates-on-Record and referring counsel, careful record scrutiny, accurate limitation computation, proper disclosure, compliance with filing requirements and effective coordination remain essential.
A disciplined approach at the filing stage assists clearer presentation of the case and reduces avoidable procedural deficiencies.
Principal Legal References
- Constitution of India — Article 136.
- Supreme Court Rules, 2013, as amended — Orders IV, VIII, XXI and XXII.
- Limitation Act, 1963 — Sections 4, 5, 12 and 14, where applicable.
- Pritam Singh v. State, AIR 1950 SC 169.
- Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala, (2000) 6 SCC 359.
- Khoday Distilleries Ltd. v. Sri Mahadeshwara Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Ltd., (2019) 4 SCC 376.
- Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag v. Mst. Katiji, (1987) 2 SCC 107.
- Esha Bhattacharjee v. Managing Committee of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy, (2013) 12 SCC 649.
- Supreme Court judgment dated 20 February 2025 arising from SLP (Criminal) No. 4299 of 2024 and connected proceedings — professional responsibilities of Advocates-on-Record.
Official Supreme Court Resources
Supreme Court Rules and Amendments
Prescribed Forms and Filing Checklists
Electronic Filing
SC-eFM Frequently Asked Questions
Legal Information Notice
This article is intended solely as a general legal and professional information resource. It is not a substitute for examination of the applicable statutes, Supreme Court Rules, amendments, practice directions, Registry instructions and the facts of an individual case.
Procedural and electronic filing requirements may change. Advocates should verify the requirements applicable at the time of filing.
JVR Law Office is an independent professional website and is not affiliated with or endorsed by the Supreme Court of India.