Constitutional Functionaries Like MPs, Judges, Ministers Entitled To 'Hon'ble' Honorific, Civil Servants Are Not: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court recently observed that constitutional functionaries who exercise sovereign functions must be addressed as 'Hon'ble' in every communication pertaining to them. A bench of Justice JJ Munir and Justice Tarun Saxena clarified that personal disgruntlement or familiarity with a family can't permit the author of any communication to refer to a sovereign functionary without their entitled honorific. The Court, however, further clarified that a civil servant, regardless of rank, is not entitled to use this specific honorific. "The Ministers of the Central and State Governments, the Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts, the Speaker, the Chairman of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, respectively and likewise of the State Legislative Assemblies, the Members of Parliament and the State Legislative Assemblies are entitled to the use of this honorific", the bench observed in its order. It added that there could be other similar functionaries who, according to the protocol, are entitled and whoever is entitled to the use of this honorific must be addressed likewise. The bench clarified this while hearing a criminal writ petition filed by one Harshit Sharma and others. For context, when this case was heard on March 31, the bench took exception to the UP Police having failed to append 'Hon'ble' before the name of a Member of Parliament and Ex-Union Minister, Anurag Thakur, whose name was mentioned in the FIR.The bench had then called for the explanation of the Additional Chief Secretary (Home), Government of UP. On April 30, the bench was apprised via an affidavit that a typed Hindi complaint produced by the first informant, Khajan Singh, had not referred to Mr Anurag Thakur as Hon'ble, and the same was reproduced verbatim in column 12 of the check FIR. The informant claimed he was entirely unaware of the protocol regarding the use of honorifics for Members of Parliament or Former Union Ministers. Taking note of the same, the bench clarified that being an MP, Mr Anurag Thakur was strictly entitled to the honorific. The Court observed that the honorific 'Hon'ble' is to be appended solely to the names of constitutional functionaries who exercise sovereign functions of any of the three organs of the Government. The Court further clarified that the Ministers of the Central and State Governments, the Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts, the Speaker, the Chairman of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, respectively and likewise of the State Legislative Assemblies, the Members of Parliament and the State Legislative Assemblies are entitled to the use of this honorific. Closing this specific part of the dispute, the Court accepted the counter-affidavits filed by the State and the respondent counsel on record. Briefly put, the case before the Court is a quashing plea concerning the offences of criminal intimidation and criminal breach of trust. The former Union Minister's name was mentioned in the FIR, though he has not been named as an accused.Case title - Harshit Sharma And 2 Others vs. State Of U.P. And 2 OthersClick Here To Read/Download Order

Constitutional Functionaries Like MPs, Judges, Ministers Entitled To 'Hon'ble' Honorific, Civil Servants Are Not: Allahabad HC

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sparsh Upadhyay

Constitutional Functionaries Like MPs, Judges, Ministers Entitled To 'Hon'ble' Honorific, Civil Servants Are Not: Allahabad HC

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers