Supreme Court Sets Aside Allahabad HC's Imposition Of Rs.1 Lakh Cost On Advocate Mehmood Pracha, Expunges Adverse Remarks Made Against Him

The Supreme Court today set aside Allahabad High Court's imposition of Rs.1 lakh cost on Advocate Mehmood Pracha over a petition filed by him concerning videography during the electoral process. Personal remarks made against the counsel in the impugned High Court order were also expunged.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Manmohan passed the order, upon Election Commission of India taking a stand that the aspects for which notice was issued (ie imposition of cost and adverse remarks) were between the Court and Pracha.

The order was dictated thus:

"In view of the fair stand taken by the Election Commission of India, we allow this appeal in part to the extent that the cost of Rs.1 lakh imposed on the appellant in para 14 of the impugned judgment is set aside. Similarly, the adverse observations made personally against the appellant are expunged."

Insofar as a jurisdictional issue arose before the Delhi High Court (which Pracha approached prior to Allahabad High Court), the order added, "It goes without saying that the appellant shall carefully choose the forum and approach only such forum which has the jurisdictional competence to decide the controversy".

Advocate-on-Record RHA Sikander appeared and argued for Pracha.

Briefly stated, Pracha had filed a writ petition concerning the authentication, integrity, security, and verifiability of videography in the electoral process. The High Court observed that he had previously filed two petitions on identical subject matter (elections of 7-Rampur Loksabha Constituency in U.P. for the year 2024) before the Delhi High Court, wherein orders were passed to his satisfaction. Despite this, he moved the Allahabad High Court, seeking similar reliefs.

Regarding his conduct of arguing the matter in person while wearing his coat and band, the Court remarked that it was 'taken aback' when it was informed that Pracha was appearing in person.

Apparently, the High Court was informed that Pracha was appearing in person after the order proposing to impose cost was dictated. Noting that he had not removed his band before arguing, the Court emphasized that Pracha's behavior was unbecoming of a senior member of the Bar, who should be aware of the basic etiquette required when addressing the bench in person.

“This behaviour is not expected of a Senior member of the Bar who is expected to be aware of the basic etiquette to be followed while addressing the Bench in person. Mr. Pracha is directed to be cautious in the future and ensure that he maintains the decorum and dignity of the Court. Another aspect to be noted is that the petitioner had filed this writ petition through an Advocate (Mr. Omar Zamin). Having done so he could not have appeared in person without removing his Advocate or having taken leave of the Court,” the Court remarked.

Being of the view that the writ petition was wrongly filed and had resulted in loss of the Court's time, coupled with the 'inappropriate methodology' adopted by him while appearing in person, the High Court dismissed Pracha's writ petition with a cost of Rs. 1 lakh to be paid to the UP State Legal Services Authority.

Case Title: MEHMOOD PRACHA v. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA, SLP(C) No. 24577/2024 

Click Here To Read/Download Order