New Delhi: A Delhi court has imposed a total fine of ₹6 lakh on advocate Mahmood Pracha for filing a petition seeking to nullify the Supreme Court’s 2019 Ayodhya Ram Janmabhoomi–Babri Masjid verdict. The court termed the plea frivolous, misleading, and a clear abuse of judicial procedure.
District Judge Dharmendra Rana of the Patiala House Court upheld the lower court’s earlier decision that had already fined Pracha ₹1 lakh and went on to impose an additional penalty of ₹5 lakh. The court strongly criticized the lawyer for attempting to misuse judicial mechanisms to question a settled constitutional matter.
Pracha’s petition relied on a speech allegedly delivered by former Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, claiming that the ex-CJI admitted the Ayodhya judgment was a “solution offered by Lord Shri Ram Lalla Virajman.” On this basis, he argued that the verdict lacked judicial impartiality.
However, Judge Rana dismissed the argument, clarifying that Justice Chandrachud’s comments were spiritual in nature, not indicative of bias or divine influence. “The petitioner failed to distinguish between a juristic personality and divinity,” the judge remarked, observing that the statement was merely an expression of faith and not a confession of prejudice.
The court further invoked the Judges Protection Act, 1985, which prohibits civil proceedings against judges for actions taken in the course of their duties. Calling the petition an attempt to mock the law, the judge said, “Certain individuals misuse legal provisions to malign the judiciary. The situation becomes grave when the protector turns predator.”
Ultimately, the court dismissed Pracha’s appeal, reaffirmed the lower court’s decision, and imposed a cumulative fine of ₹6 lakh, emphasizing that such deterrents are essential to safeguard the integrity of the judicial system.
