Punjab & Haryana HC Advises Judicial Officers Not To Use Abbreviations In Official Correspondence [Read Order]
‘The aforesaid abbreviation 'VOD' is not in legal parlance but perhaps purports to mean "Vide Order Dated".’
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the District Judge of Gurugram to advise all the judicial officers not to use abbreviations in official correspondence.
Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill noticed the use of abbreviation VOD in a report he received from the Judicial Magistrate while considering a criminal petition in a cheque bounce case.
It reads: “It is respectfully submitted that VOD 19.09.2018, in CRM-M-22396-2018 (O&M) titled as Dayanand Singhal Versus Sandeep Sharma, The Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court has pleased to direct the trial Court to decide the application pending in the Court wherein applicant has sought to take cognizance regarding dishonour of cheque. “
The judge then observed in the order: “The aforesaid abbreviation 'VOD' is not in legal parlance but perhaps purports to mean "Vide Order Dated". The learned District & Sessions Judge, Gurugram is directed to advise all the Judicial Officers not to use such like abbreviations in official correspondence.”
Though not very common, it turns out that some other courts also use this abbreviation. Here are some examples:
- Delhi District Court: Defendant No.1 proceeded against ex-parte VOD 21.3.2016.
- Karnataka HC (in cause title): R-4 & R-5 SERVICE HELD SUFFICIENT VOD. 21.03.2012 (It seems to be very common usage in Karnataka HC judgments)
- Rajasthan HC: clarification issued by the State Government as aforesaid vod5.11
- Jharkhand HC: Expunged (V.O.D. 31.01.03)