SURENDRA KOLI versus THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

Citation: [2025] 12 S.C.R. 152 · Decided: 11-11-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 12 S.C.R. 152 : 2025 INSC 1308
Surendra Koli 
v. 
The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
(Curative Petition (Crl.) No. 60 of 2025)
In
(R.P. (Crl.) No. 395 of 2014)
In
(Crl. A. No. 2227 of 2010)
11 November 2025
[Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai, CJI, Surya Kant and  
Vikram Nath,* JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Whether the present case meets the exacting threshold for the 
exercise of the curative jurisdiction of this Court and; whether 
two sets of outcomes of this Court can stand together when they 
rest on an identical evidentiary foundation; whether in the facts 
and circumstances of the case, the curative petition ought to be 
allowed and the petitioner be acquitted of the charges u/ss.302, 
364, 376 and 201, IPC.
Headnotes†
Curative Petition – Nithari Case – Two sets of outcomes resting 
on an identical evidentiary foundation – Impermissibility – 
Exercise of curative jurisdiction – In Criminal Appeal No. 2227 
of 2010 decided on 15.02.2011, Supreme Court affirmed the 
petitioner’s conviction and sentence of death in the Rimpa 
Haldar case on the strength of a s.164, CrPC confession 
and supposed discoveries u/s.27, Evidence Act – Review 
petition against this order was dismissed – However, in twelve 
companion prosecutions founded on the same confession 
and recoveries, the High Court acquitted the petitioner on 
16.10.2023, and vide order dtd. 30.07.2025, Supreme Court 
dismissed the State appeals and affirmed those acquittals 
rejecting the very same confession and the very same class 
of s.27 material as legally unreliable – Present petition filed 
* Author
[2025] 12 S.C.R. 
153
Surendra Koli v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
by the petitioner on the ground that irreconcilable outcomes 
have arisen on an identical evidentiary framework and that a 
manifest miscarriage of justice remains despite the dismissal 
of review:
Held: The present case meets the exacting threshold for the exercise 
of the curative jurisdiction – Petitioner has established a fundamental 
defect that impeaches the integrity of the adjudicatory process and 
that relief is warranted ex debito justitiae within the parameters 
of Rupa Ashok Hurra case – The confession that anchored the 
conviction is legally tainted on grounds already accepted by this 
Court in the companion matters – The supposed discoveries do not 
satisfy the statutory preconditions for admissibility – The forensic 
and investigative record does not supply the missing links  – 
Once those keystones are removed, the circumstantial chain no 
longer holds – Art.21 of the Constitution insists on a fair, just and 
reasonable procedure – That insistence is at its acutest where capital 
punishment is imposed – Although the petitioner’s death sentence 
in this case was commuted to imprisonment for life on 28.01.2015 
by the High Court in writ proceedings challenging the rejection of 
his mercy petition, the conviction continues to carry the gravest 
consequences – To allow a conviction to stand on evidentiary basis 
that this Court has since rejected as involuntary or inadmissible 
in the very same fact-matrix offends Art.21 – It also violates 
Art.14 since like cases must be treated alike – Arbitrary disparity 
in outcomes on an identical record is inimical to equality before 
the law – Curative petition allowed – Judgment dtd. 15.02.2011 in 
Criminal Appeal No. 2227 of 2010 and the order in Review Petition 
are recalled and set aside – Petitioner acquitted – Constitution of 
India – Arts.21, 14. [Paras 9, 15, 16, 19-22]
Curative Petition – Curative jurisdiction – Threshold for 
exercise of, stated. [Paras 2-4]
Case Law Cited
Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra [2002] 2 SCR 1006 : (2002) 4 
SCC 388 – followed.
List of Acts
Penal Code, 1860; Constitution of India; Evidence Act, 1872; Code 
of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Supreme Court Rules, 2013.
154
[2025] 12 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
List of Keywords
Curative petition; Curative jurisdiction; Threshold for invoking 
curative jurisdiction; Threshold for exercise of curative jurisdiction; 
Manifest miscarriage of justice; Grave miscarriage of justice; 
Exacting threshold; Nithari Case; Two sets of outcomes; Identical 
Evidentiary foundation; ex debito justitiae; Rupa Ashok Hurra case; 
Like cases must be treated alike.
Case Arising From
INHERENT JURISDICTION: Curative Petition (Crl.) No. 60 of 2025
In
R.P. (Crl.) No. 395 of 2014
In
Crl. A. No. 2227 of 2010
From the Judgment and Order dated 28.10.2014 of the Supreme 
Court at Delhi in
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.