Apex Court Cancels ₹1 Lakh Fine on Lawyer Mehmood Pracha from Allahabad High Court; Removes Negative Comments About Him.

The Supreme Court has overturned the Allahabad High Court’s decision to impose a Rs. 1 lakh fine on Advocate Mehmood Pracha related to a petition about videography in elections. The Court also removed personal comments made about Pracha in the High Court’s ruling. Justices Surya Kant and Manmohan issued this order after the Election Commission of India (ECI) stated that the cost and negative remarks were issues between the Court and the petitioner. The Bench remarked that due to the ECI’s reasonable position, they partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the Rs. 1 lakh cost and expunging the negative remarks against Pracha.

However, the Court advised Pracha to only approach appropriate forums in the future. During the hearing, Advocate-on-Record R. H. A. Sikander represented Pracha. Notably, on October 25, the Court had issued a ‘limited notice’ regarding the SLP that challenged the Allahabad High Court’s fine on Pracha for supposedly wasting the Court’s time. The High Court had criticized Pracha for not removing his lawyer’s robe while appearing personally. The Bench indicated it would review whether the High Court’s critical comments about Pracha’s behavior should be removed and if the fine should be canceled. Justice Kant acknowledged the importance of Pracha’s concerns about the security and reliability of video recordings in the election process, stating, “Your issue was very pertinent.”

In the Special Leave Petition (SLP), Pracha mentioned, “The Hon’ble High Court noted that since the Petitioner had previously approached the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi regarding Writ Petitions related to the 2024 Lok Sabha Elections in the 7-Rampur Lok Sabha Constituency, the Petitioner cannot now seek relief from the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad. The Hon’ble High Court also commented on the Petitioner, a practicing Advocate, who appeared before it via video conferencing in his robes, without considering the apology and explanation given by the Petitioner during the hearing, stating he was supposed to appear in another matter as an Advocate.”

“The Hon’ble High Court did not recognize that the reason for invoking its writ jurisdiction in the Writ Petition was entirely within its own territorial limits. Even though the Petitioner had approached the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi before, that court had issued orders regarding the issue of forum non conveniens in Writ Petitions related to elections outside its jurisdiction,” the SLP stated. On September 10, the Allahabad High Court imposed a fine of Rs. 1 lakh, criticizing Pracha’s actions. Pracha had initially filed similar petitions in the Delhi High Court, which had ruled in his favor. However, he later turned to the Allahabad High Court on the same matter concerning electoral transparency in the 7-Rampur Lok Sabha Constituency for the 2024 elections. The High Court expressed confusion over Pracha’s choice to change courts after previously approaching the Delhi High Court.

The High Court’s Division Bench criticized Pracha for his behavior in court, pointing out that he participated in a video conference while wearing his advocate’s coat and band without any prior notice. The Court stated, “Such conduct is not suitable for a senior lawyer who should know the basic etiquette for addressing the Bench in person,” and instructed Pracha to maintain proper courtroom decorum in the future. The Bench added, “The Court’s valuable time has been wasted because the petitioner insisted on having this matter heard here, ignoring that he has already filed two similar writ petitions in the Delhi High Court on the same issue.”

Along with imposing a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh to be paid to the Uttar Pradesh State Legal Services Authority, the high court ordered the Registrar General to collect the amount if it remains unpaid within 30 days. “Given that this writ petition was improperly filed and wasted the Court’s valuable time, along with the unsuitable approach taken by the petitioner appearing in person, this writ petition is dismissed with a cost of Rs. 1,00,000/-. This amount must be paid to the Uttar Pradesh State Legal Services Authority within 30 days from today. If the cost is not paid, the Registrar General is instructed to take necessary legal action for recovery,” the High Court stated.

Cause Title: Mehmood Pracha v. Election Commission of India [SLP(C) No. 24577/2024 Diary No. 46383/2024]