The grounds on which the consideration of application was pleaded were that the registrar has no power to refuse the lodgement or registration of an application for recall, except for the three grounds stated in the Supreme Court Rules, 2013. Therefore the petitioner pleaded for consideration a review as the application was not heard before the order was passed in the review petition.
Reflecting on such a plea, the court stated that the applicant- petitioner not being heard before the order was passed in a review petition cannot be a ground for filing an ‘application for recall’.
While dismissing the application filed by the NGO Lok Prahari, the court observed – ‘ The relief claimed in the said application, in our opinion, is unstable. There can be no review of an order passed in the review petition. The fact that the applicant-petitioner was not heard before the order was passed in review petition cannot be the basis to file an ‘application for recall’. For, the review petition has been decided on merits by circulation in Chambers as per the practice and rules of this Court.’
The petition filed by the NGO was in relation to the case of Lok Prahari v Election Commission of India in which the bench comprising of the then CJI Dipak Mishra, Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justice A M Khanwilkar had clarified that an appellate court has the power, in an appropriate case, to stay the conviction under section 389 beside suspending the sentence.
The court while addressing the present petition further contended that the review petition was decided on merits by the circulation in the chambers as per the practice and rules of the court.