Harshit Sharma And 2 Others Vs State of U.P. And 2 Others (Allahabad High Court)
Use of Honorific “Hon’ble” Restricted to Sovereign Constitutional Functionaries: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Protocol and Constitutional Position
In a significant observation touching upon constitutional protocol and the dignity attached to sovereign offices, the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, while hearing Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 4982 of 2026, clarified that the honorific “Hon’ble” is reserved for constitutional functionaries performing sovereign functions of the State and not for civil servants, irrespective of how high a post they may hold.
The Bench comprising Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Tarun Saxena was dealing with an issue arising from a complaint and FIR where the name of former Union Minister and sitting Member of Parliament Mr. Anurag Thakur was allegedly mentioned without the appropriate honorific. The Court took note of the affidavit filed by the Additional Chief Secretary (Home), Government of Uttar Pradesh, and observed that the informant had stated he was unaware of the protocol relating to the use of honorifics for Members of Parliament or former Union Ministers.
The Court categorically observed:
“The honorific ‘Hon’ble’ is to be appended to the names of constitutional functionaries who exercise sovereign functions of any of the three organs of the Government.”
At the same time, the Court drew a clear distinction between constitutional authorities and civil servants by further observing:
“‘Hon’ble’ is an honorific which no functionary, howsoever high, who is a civil servant and not the holder of a sovereign constitutional office, is entitled to use.”
Meaning and Scope of “Sovereign Functions”
