Singh Vs. Baldeva & Ors  INSC 610 (24 April 1996)
G.N. (J) Ray, G.N. (J) Hansaria B.L. (J)
1996 SCALE (4)201
O R D
review petition and other miscellaneous applications in connection with the
review petition have been filed out of time. It has been filed by Satbir Singh,
the maternal grand-father of PW6 Satish, seeking for review of the judgment
passed in Crl. Appeal No.650 of 1995.
view, the review application is not maintainable. In Simranjit Singh Mann vs.
Union of India (1992 (4) SCC 653), this Court has held that a third party has
no locus standi to challenge the conviction and sentence awarded to certain
convicts even on the averments of violation of their fundamental rights.
No.6/95 made in Contempt Petition No. 234/95 (State of Karnataka vs. I.R. Dhananjaya),
it has been held that the review petition filed by the State seeking review of
the conviction and sentence of one of the officers of the State was not
maintainable. The petitioner in this review petition has relied on the decision
of this Court in S.P. Gupta vs. President of India (AIR 1992 SC 149) and has
contended that the third party like him is competent to file the present
petition for review. Such contention, however, cannot be accepted. In S.P.
Gupta's case, the petitioner was espousing the case of independence of
judiciary. The present petitioner is not espousing such a cause, but praying
for review of the judgment passed in an appeal preferred by the convicted
appellants. The same stands entirely on different footing and, in our view, the
petitioner has no locus standi to maintain the instant review petition.
review petition and the miscellaneous applications are therefore dismissed.