Delhi Court Orders Attachment of Movable Assets of Senior Advocate Mehmood Pracha Over Rs 6 Lakh Costs in Ayodhya Judgment Challenge
Background and Context
A Delhi court has directed the attachment of movable property belonging to senior Supreme Court advocate Mehmood Pracha in connection with litigation costs amounting to Rs 6 lakh, arising from a civil suit he had filed challenging the Supreme Court's landmark 2019 Ayodhya judgment. The matter has drawn significant attention from legal circles owing to the nature of the proceedings, the quantum of costs imposed, and the subsequent execution steps authorised by the court.
The genesis of this controversy lies in the unanimous verdict delivered on November 9, 2019, by a five-Judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in M Siddiq (D) Thr Lrs Vs Mahant Suresh Das & Ors, which settled the long-standing Ayodhya dispute. The Bench awarded the disputed 2.77 acres of land for the construction of a Ram temple and further directed that an alternative five-acre plot be allotted to the Sunni Central Waqf Board for the purpose of constructing a mosque.
The Civil Suit Filed by Mehmood Pracha
Following the pronouncement of the Supreme Court's judgment in M Siddiq (D) Thr Lrs Vs Mahant Suresh Das & Ors, Advocate Mehmood Pracha instituted a civil suit before a Delhi court seeking a judicial declaration that the said Supreme Court judgment was null and void, and further praying for fresh adjudication of the underlying dispute.
The suit was contested on multiple grounds, and the Trial Court ultimately dismissed the suit in April 2025, simultaneously imposing litigation costs of Rs 1 lakh upon Pracha.
Note: The institution of a civil suit seeking to declare a Supreme Court judgment null and void is itself a legally contentious step, as civil courts ordinarily do not possess jurisdiction to sit in review or appeal over Supreme Court decisions. This jurisdictional issue formed part of the basis on which the Trial Court dismissed the suit.
Appeal Before the District Court and Enhanced Costs
Aggrieved by the Trial Court's order of dismissal and the imposition of costs, Mehmood Pracha preferred an appeal. However, rather than obtaining relief, the matter took a more adverse turn at the appellate stage.
District Judge Dharmender Rana not only upheld the dismissal of the suit on merits but also went further and imposed an additional Rs 5 lakh in costs over and above the Rs 1 lakh already awarded by the Trial Court. This brought the aggregate costs imposed on Pracha to Rs 6 lakh.
Characterisation of the Litigation by the District Court
The District Court did not limit itself to merely dismissing the appeal. It offered pointed observations regarding the nature of the litigation itself: