Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Court | Supreme Court of India |
| Case Number | MA-001901 – 2025 |
| Diary Number | 57540/2025 |
| Judge Name | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH |
| Bench |
|
| Type of Law | Civil appellate procedure |
| Questions of Law | Whether the Court may, in exercise of its inherent power, modify its own order to expunge adverse remarks and costs when counsel tenders an unqualified apology. |
| Ratio Decidendi (3–8 sentences) |
The Supreme Court held that once a Bench indicates that no further submissions are necessary, counsel must respect that indication to preserve court decorum. Continued insistence after the Court’s inclination serves no purpose and undermines the dignity of proceedings. An unqualified and bona fide apology by counsel, supported by assurances from senior members of the Bar, may justify the exercise of the Court’s inherent power to modify its own order. In this case, the apology and assurances warranted deletion of adverse observations and the cost imposed. The Court’s discretion to amend its orders in the interest of justice and decorum was reaffirmed. |
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court |
|
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | The State Election Commission’s Special Leave Petition was dismissed with adverse remarks against its counsel and a cost of Rs. 2,00,000/–. The Commission filed this Miscellaneous Application seeking expunction of those remarks and waiver of costs. Counsel tendered an unqualified apology on the record and senior advocates of the Bar assured non‐repetition. The Court allowed the application and modified its earlier order by deleting the adverse observations and the cost. |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The Supreme Court will expunge adverse remarks and costs from its order if counsel tenders an unqualified and bona fide apology on record.
- Counsel must respect a Bench’s indication to refrain from further submissions once the Court has signalled its inclination.
- The Court’s inherent power to modify its own orders in the interest of justice and to maintain courtroom decorum is reaffirmed.
- Assurances from senior members of the Bar supporting the apology can influence the Court’s discretion to amend its prior order.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The applicant’s counsel tendered an unconditional and bona fide apology before the Court.
- A Bench’s indication that no further submissions are required must be respected to preserve the dignity and orderly functioning of proceedings.
- Continued insistence after the Court’s inclination serves no purpose and negatively affects court decorum.
- Leaders of the Bar personally assured the Court that the conduct would not recur.
- In exercise of its inherent power and in view of the apology and assurances, the Court modified its prior order by deleting the adverse observations and cost.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner (State Election Commission):
- Sought expunction of adverse observations against its counsel and waiver of the Rs. 2,00,000/– cost.
- Tendered an unqualified apology and remorse on record.
- Senior Bar leaders assured the Court of non‐repetition of such conduct.
Factual Background
The State Election Commission’s Special Leave Petition against a High Court interlocutory order was dismissed by the Supreme Court on 26.09.2025 with adverse remarks against its counsel and a cost of Rs. 2,00,000/–. The Commission filed this Miscellaneous Application seeking to expunge those remarks and to waive the cost. Counsel apologized unconditionally, and senior advocates of the Bar assured the Court that no similar incident would occur in the future. On 28.10.2025, the Supreme Court modified its earlier order by deleting the adverse observations and the cost.