In a significant legal development, the Supreme Court of India has acquitted Surendra Koli in one of the multiple cases connected to the notorious Nithari killings. This landmark decision, delivered in November 2025, overturned the court's own 2011 ruling through the extraordinary legal mechanism of a curative petition.
The Curative Petition: An Extraordinary Legal Remedy
The Indian judicial system provides several layers of appeal in criminal cases. After trial court decisions, parties can approach appellate courts including high courts and the Supreme Court. When appeals fail, the next option is a review petition that requests reconsideration based on specific grounds such as new evidence or record errors.
A curative petition represents the final extraordinary legal remedy available when natural justice principles are violated. This mechanism cannot function as a second review and becomes accessible only after exhausting all other legal options, including review petitions. The legal foundation for curative petitions was established in the landmark 2002 case of Rupa Ashok Hurra versus Ashok Hurra.
The Supreme Court invoked its inherent powers under Articles 142 and 137 of the Indian Constitution to create this remedy. Article 142 empowers the court to ensure complete justice, while Article 137 addresses the court's review powers and their limitations. However, the court emphasized that curative petitions should only be entertained when very strong reasons exist, making this an exceptional legal recourse.
The Nithari Case: A Timeline of Legal Proceedings
The horrific Nithari killings came to light between 2005 and 2006 when numerous women and children were reported missing from Nithari village in Noida's Sector 31. The investigation revealed skeletal remains in a drain and on open land behind a house owned by Moninder Singh Pandher.
The recent curative petition concerned one of the initial cases involving the murder of a minor girl who disappeared in 2005. In 2009, a trial court convicted both Koli and Pandher for rape and murder, sentencing them to death. While Pandher was eventually acquitted, Koli's death sentence was upheld by the Allahabad High Court and Supreme Court in 2011.
Following the dismissal of his review petition and the rejection of mercy petitions by both the Uttar Pradesh Governor and the President of India, Koli filed a curative petition. In 2015, the Allahabad High Court maintained his conviction but commuted the sentence to life imprisonment, citing excessive delays in processing his mercy petitions.
Between 2010 and 2021, lower courts convicted Koli in twelve additional Nithari cases. However, in a significant turn of events, the Allahabad High Court acquitted him in all twelve cases in 2023. The Supreme Court subsequently dismissed the state's appeals against these acquittals in July 2025.
Legal Reasoning Behind the Acquittal
The acquittals in twelve Nithari cases rested on the rejection of crucial evidence that had originally formed the basis of Koli's conviction. The evidence included his 2007 confession before a magistrate and recoveries made in 2006.
The Allahabad High Court determined that Koli's confession could not be considered voluntary or reliable because he had remained in continuous police custody for sixty days without access to legal representation. The confession itself contained references to tutoring and torture, further undermining its credibility.
A three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai, Justice Surya Kant, and Justice Vikram Nath described this as an exceptional case. The bench emphasized that Koli's conviction in this specific case, based on identical evidence that led to acquittals in twelve other cases, created an legally unsustainable situation.
The court stated that intervention in such circumstances constituted a constitutional duty. The bench declared, We, therefore, entertain this petition to preserve the purity of this Court's process and to vindicate the rule of law. The court described its curative jurisdiction as narrow but essential to correct grave defects and prevent manifest injustice.
Historical Precedents of Curative Petitions
Indian judicial history contains several notable instances where curative petitions played crucial roles:
Devinder Pal Singh Bhullar (2014): The Supreme Court commuted the death sentence of the 1993 Delhi bomb blast convict to life imprisonment, citing eight-year delays in mercy petition disposal and mental health concerns.
National Commission for Women (2013): The court allowed a curative petition in a domestic dispute case, reversing its earlier position that certain actions didn't constitute cruelty.
Yakub Memon (2015): The court dismissed a curative petition filed on behalf of the 1993 Bombay serial blasts convict, who was executed on July 30, 2015.
Bhopal Gas Tragedy (2023): The court rejected the Union government's curative petition seeking additional compensation funds from Union Carbide Corporation's successor firms.
The Supreme Court's decision in Koli's case underscores the evolving nature of curative jurisdiction in India's legal landscape, demonstrating how this extraordinary remedy can correct fundamental injustices while maintaining the integrity of the judicial process.
