Appellate intervention under Article 136 of the Constitution of India

is properly triggered where lower courts fail to exercise jurisdiction in a manner that rectifies a manifest procedural miscarriage of justice. Although the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 136 is exercised sparingly, the Supreme Court does not hesitate to intervene where both the trial court and the High Court exhibit an unduly pedantic approach by declining to restore a criminal complaint dismissed solely on the ground of default. When it becomes apparent that the complainant is pursuing the litigation diligently and seeks only a fair trial on merits, the refusal of the High Court to exercise its revisional or inherent powers produces gross injustice, compelling the apex court to set aside the concurrent erroneous orders and restore the original complaint case for adjudication in accordance with law. (Yatendra Singh Vs State of U.P. & Another | 2026 INSC 109)