A praecipe is essentially a concise written request made to the Court/Registry asking that a particular procedural step be taken.There is an important distinction: “praecipe” is not one single type of application. At Bombay High Court, it is used in several procedural contexts, and the requirements depend on what you are trying to achieve.

Application = substantive judicial request, generally requiring the Court to adjudicate something.

Praecipe = short procedural request/communication seeking a particular direction or administrative/procedural action.

But this is only a working distinction not every praecipe is merely administrative. Some praecipes have specific legal consequences under the High Court Rules.

For example, the Bombay High Court Original Side Rules expressly contemplate praecipes in the Admiralty jurisdiction for entering certain caveats. Under Rules 1072–1074, a praecipe can be used to request entry of a caveat against arrest of a ship, release of an arrested ship, or payment out of sale proceeds.

“Praecipe = a procedural mechanism whose exact function depends on the relevant rule/practice.”

The most common Bombay HC use: PRAECIPE FOR CIRCULATION

This is probably what you are referring to when you see lawyers at Bombay High Court talking about “giving a praecipe”.

A lawyer may have a matter which is not presently on the day's board, but circumstances require that it be placed before the appropriate Bench.

The advocate submits a praecipe for circulation, requesting that the matter be circulated before the Bench.

The Court's current website actually maintains a dedicated “Circulation List”, showing entries such as:

case number,advocate,date of circulation,remarks such as Fresh,For Direction,For Restoration,High on Board,To be listed,at 3.00 pm etc.

What does “circulation” mean?

Very simply:

Praecipe → Registry/appropriate channel → Bench considers request → circulation/listing date may be granted → matter appears for that purpose.

It means you're asking for the matter to be placed before the Court so that the Court can consider the request.

Bombay HC actually publishes praecipe results

This is one of the most useful things to understand at the Bombay High Court.

The official website publishes “Praecipe Details” and “Circulation Dates Granted for Praecipe Received.”

So a praecipe can essentially be the mechanism by which a procedural issue gets brought into the Court's circulation/listing workflow.

There isn't one universal Bombay HC praecipe format:

There are different categories.

For example:

Praecipe for circulation

The format/practice may depend on the Bench and whether the matter is:Appellate Side (AS) or Original Side (OS)

you must check the current Bench-specific directions before filing/sending a praecipe.

What information can a circulation praecipe contain?

That particular Bombay HC direction prescribed the following information:

1 Date of filing of matter

2 Date of impugned order, if any

3 Subject matter in brief

4 Acts relevant to deciding the issues

5 What is the urgency

6 Relief sought on production of praecipe

7 Status of matter

8 Next scheduled listing / next due date

The requested relief could include things such as:

directions,date,speaking to the minutes,extension of time,etc.

Can you attach documents to a praecipe?

Again, it depends on the applicable practice/direction.

That is a very good example of why you shouldn't assume: “I'll just attach the impugned order and affidavit.” For a particular Bench, that could be rejected if the applicable direction prohibits attachments.

Another completely different use: caveat praecipe

This is particularly interesting because here the praecipe isn't simply asking for circulation.

In August 2025, the Bombay High Court issued a notice concerning a forwarding praecipe for lodging/e-filing a caveat under Rule 401 of the High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980.

The Court prescribed a specific format addressed to:

The Prothonotary and Senior Master, High Court, Original Side, Bombay.

The forwarding praecipe identifies the:jurisdiction,caveat number,testamentary petition,deceased,petitioner,caveator/caveatrix,and requests that the accompanying caveat and affidavit be taken on file.

And when a corrected caveat is re-filed, the Court's notice says it should be accompanied by a compliance praecipe and supporting material where the party claims timely filing.

So here you can see another important category:“Compliance praecipe”

It essentially tells the Registry: “Here is the corrected filing; here is how I have complied with the objection/requirement; please take it on record.”

Praecipe can actually be expressly required by a Rule

This is important for understanding the legal status of a praecipe.

Look at Chapter LX of the Bombay High Court Original Side Rules, dealing with Admiralty jurisdiction.

Rule 1072 says that a person wishing to prevent arrest of a ship has to file a praecipe in the Registry, signed by the person or advocate, requesting entry of a caveat against arrest and undertaking to enter appearance and provide security/pay the specified amount.

Similarly:

Rule 1073 :Praecipe for caveat against release of an arrested ship.

Rule 1074:Praecipe for caveat against payment out of sale proceeds of a ship.

Therefore, in these circumstances, the praecipe isn't just an informal letter to the Registry.

The Rule itself makes the praecipe part of the prescribed procedure.

Praecipe vs Interim Application:

Suppose a pending writ petition is listed after two months, but something urgent happens.

You might have:Writ Petition → Interim Application. if you need substantive judicial relief.

But depending on the circumstances, you may also have: Writ Petition → Praecipe for Circulation

to get the matter before the Court for an appropriate procedural/judicial direction.

The praecipe does not magically replace the application that the law requires.

For example, if substantive relief requires an affidavit/application under the applicable rules, a praecipe isn't necessarily a shortcut around that requirement.

Praecipe vs Mentioning

This distinction is very important at Bombay HC.

They're not automatically the same thing.

Mentioning :An advocate orally requests the Court to take up a matter or give some direction, subject to the Court's practice/directions.

Praecipe:A written request is submitted through the prescribed mechanism.

Whether mentioning is permissible depends on the relevant Bench/practice.

What does the Registry do with a praecipe?

A useful practical understanding is:

1.Advocate prepares praecipe

2.Praecipe is lodged/submitted through prescribed channel

3.Registry/appropriate officer processes it

Depending on nature: objections may arise,it may be placed for circulation, it may be sent before the appropriate Bench,a date may be granted,directions may be issued,or it may not be accepted/entertained.

Result gets reflected in the Court's system/listing/circulation information where applicable.

The official Bombay HC website's circulation pages demonstrate that this is a structured process rather than merely an informal communication.

What should a good praecipe contain?

For a normal circulation-type praecipe, as a practical drafting principle, I would structure it like this:

1.Heading :-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

2.Then appropriate jurisdiction:

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

or

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

2.Case title

[Petitioner/Applicant]

Versus

[Respondent]

Case number

3.Body

Keep it short and factual:

1. What is the matter?

2. What happened?

3. What is the urgency?

4. What is the present status?

5. What exactly do you want the Court to do?

Prayer/request

Something like: “In the circumstances, the Applicant/Advocate respectfully requests that the above matter be circulated before the appropriate Bench for …”

The exact language should be adapted to the purpose and applicable practice.

The biggest drafting principle: DON'T ARGUE THE WHOLE CASE

A praecipe is generally not supposed to become a mini-written submission.

Material fact → urgency → present position → precise procedural request.

The Court/Registry should be able to understand in seconds:“Why is this being brought to me today, and what exactly does the advocate want?”

One important terminology point :

You'll see the Court's website sometimes spell it “Praciepe” in headings.

That's essentially a website/typing variation.

The standard legal spelling is:PRAECIPE

Pronounced roughly:PREE-suh-pee / PREE-suh-pee

It comes from Latin praecipere, meaning essentially “to direct/command.”

Useful links : https://bombayhighcourt.gov.in/bhc/PracticeNotes