Delhi High Court · 2026-03-19
SHRI JOHN DAVID KUSMODE vs UNION OF INDIA, UNDER SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE, DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS, NOTARY CELL & ORS.
- Citation / case number
- W.P.(C)-3541/2026 2026:DHC:2498
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Petitioner
- SHRI JOHN DAVID KUSMODE
- Respondent
- UNION OF INDIA, UNDER SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE, DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS, NOTARY CELL & ORS.
Judgment text excerpt
$~110 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3541/2026 Date of decision: 19.03.2026 IN THE MATTER OF: SHRI JOHN DAVID KUSMODE .....Petitioner (Through: Mr. Robin Ratnakar David and Ms.Neiting Khongsai, Advocates.) versus UNION OF INDIA, UNDER SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE, DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS, NOTARY CELL & ORS. .....Respondents (Through: Mr Jagdish Chandra (CGSC), Ms Aishwarya Sinha (GP), Ms Maanya Saxena, Advocates.) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV JUDGEMENT PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. (ORAL) 1. The instant petition is for the following reliefs:- “a) Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, setting aside the Inquiry Report dated 11.06.2025 and Order dated 22.12.2025 passed by the Respondents cancelling the Petitioner’s Certificate of Practice as Notary Public and directing removal of his name from the Register of Notaries; b) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondents: i. to forthwith restore the name of the Petitioner in the Register of Notaries maintained under the Notaries Act, 1952; and Signature Not Verified Signature Not Verified Signed By:NEHA CHOPRA Signed Signing Date:24.03.2026 By:PURUSHAINDRA 18:35:11 KUMAR KAURAV ii. to reinstate and revalidate the Petitioner’s Certificate of Practice as Notary Public (Regn. No. 4501) and permit the Petitioner to continue to practise as Notary Public; c) Pass such other and further writs, orders or directions as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.” 2. The facts of the case would indicate that the Petitioner is a 72-year- old advocate and Notary Public who has been practicing at the District Court