The Allahabad High Court recently restrained bar associations at Allahabad and Lucknow from collecting ₹500 as a photo identification charge from litigants or advocates [Rajdhani Inter State Transport Co. New Delhi v. State of UP]..Justice Pankaj Bhatia passed the direction after the Court was informed that the Registry accepts only those affidavits which are sworn before the oath commissioner and that a photograph of the litigant is mandatorily required to be taken at the photo centre to ascertain the veracity of the person signing the affidavit.“Through this interim order, the High Court Bar Association and the Oudh Bar Association are directed to ensure that no amounts are charged from the litigants/advocates towards the photo identification at any rate whatsoever,” the Court ordered on May 19..Linking of the affidavits with the amounts collected would amount to contempt of court by the members of the governing bodies of the bar associations, it added.The Court further directed that the persons manning the photo centre, either on behalf of a firm or a company, would also be personally liable if any amounts are being charged for photo identification over and above what have been sanctioned by the Chief Justice under the Allahabad High Court Rules..The issue arose after the petitioner’s counsel sought adjournment on the ground that an affidavit could not be accepted as the deponent could not come to Lucknow for photo identification and swearing of the affidavit.The Court had in April found the collection of money by the bar association for photo identification to be illegal and also opined that non-acceptance of affidavit deposed before the notary was impermissible under the Allahabad High Court Rules. It had then asked counsel representing High Court to assist it on the issue..In the latest order, the Court noted the High Court Registrar General’s submission that there is no proposal to reject the petitions supported by affidavits sworn before the notary. With regard to charging of ₹500 by the bar associations, the Court was informed that two division benches have passed directions against it.However, it was also submitted that the charges for verification of an affidavit before the oath commissioner are ₹125."The High Court either on its administrative side or the Hon’ble Chief Justice in exercise of powers, has never permitted the Bar Associations to charge any amount over and above the amount of Rs.125/-...The photo identification work was assigned and was outsourced to be carried out by the Bar Associations who in turn have handed over the same to a third party and the same is beyond the control of the High Court," the Court was told..The Court observed that since the right to avail judicial remedies is a constitutional right, access to justice has to be smooth and free of unwanted roadblocks, lest it becomes road less travelled.“The procedural requirements to achieve and ensure the access to justice has to be erased so that the constitutional right is not reduced to an empty provision. Procedures prescribed for access cannot be such that defeat the very purpose they seek to achieve. The procedures should be to lubricate the path instead of becoming a resistance. Procedures although essential are like friction which is a ‘necessary evil’ but cannot be excessive lest it brings the entire machinery to a stand still,” it said..Taking into account the High Court Registrar General’s submission, the Court ordered the following on acceptance of petitions by the Registry.“As an interim measure, it is directed that the Registry/Stamp Reporting Section shall accept all the petitions, applications, appeals etc., filed before the High Court, both at Allahabad and Lucknow and duly supported by the affidavits sworn before the Notary Public appointed in the entire country of India as a valid affidavit in support of the petitions, applications, appeals, etc.”.Further, the Court clarified that the list of defects pertaining to the affidavits shall not be raised by the stamp reporting section in respect of petitions which are supported by affidavits sworn before the notary public.“In the absence of any provisions contained in the Allahabad High Court Rules, prima-facie, the list of defects as notified being 272 in number, also do not appear to have any statutory basis,” it said, while calling for measures to address the issue of “huge number of defects” being pointed by the Registry. .It further noted that the practice of litigants traveling from far-off places solely for photo identification was on the face of it retrogressive.“The same has also resulted in the High Court Bar Association as well as Oudh Bar Association charging amounts beyond the sanction of law solely based upon resolutions, and continuation of such practice is neither desirable nor does it goes augur well for the temple of justice which is to function with the active help of Bar Associations in furtherance of the constitutional goal of providing access to justice to all,” it added..The Court directed that the matter be placed before the High Court for modification of the rules, on the lines of steps taken by Kerala High Court for OTP and email verification. .Advocates Tushar Mittal represented the petitioner. He was also amicus curiae in the case.Senior Advocate JN Mathur and Advocate SM Singh also assisted the CourtAdvocate Gaurav Mehrotra represented the High Court.Advocate Manoj Dwivedi represented the Oudh Bar Association..[Read Order]
