In Conversation With Senior Advocate Sanjoy Ghose

Kaustubh Mehta Sep 10, 2022

Mr. Ghose, what inspired you to pursue a career as a litigator? Please throw some light on your formative years as a practicing advocate?

Frankly, being a first generation lawyer and not having access to the real world of law, it was a "filmy" idea of law that motivated me to try my hand at a career in law, and a litigator at that. I assumed that as I was good in public speaking and was well abreast of current affairs, I too could be another Perry Mason! How wrong I was. In real life litigation is nothing like what may be portrayed in films and television. It is not glamorous and for a new entrant it is very difficult to establish a practice and gain recognition without a "god father". My natural impulse after 5 years of law was to weigh in in favour of stability and so I took the highest paying corporate law job that was on offer at our campus recruitment in 1996. Within months I realised that I was not meant for a desk job and that my true calling was litigation. In 1997 I joined that Bar finally and have never regretted litigation for a moment even when I got to hear about the fancy starting salaries of the big firm types. I had joined Ms Indira Jaising, senior advocate, as her junior and then in 2001 I finally branched out.

Litigation remains the most enviable avenue for a law graduate, but it is considered replete with trials and tribulations. What is your advice for young lawyers who want to make their mark in litigation?

There is no way of sugar coating this pill. Litigation is not for the weak hearted. The pay is dismal. Setting up an Independent practice is daunting. Especially for young lawyers who may come from not well to do families, sustaining oneself in a big city on woefully insignificant stipends/salaries is one big challenge.

However, once you get established in a litigation practice there is nothing as satisfying professionally as being a litigator. Not only the monetary returns, even in terms of personal satisfaction of having made a difference in people's lives is something only litigation offers. My advice to young litigators would be to hang in there. Please understand that this profession has a long gestation and there is space under the sun for all. So please do not be in any hurry to go independent. I also find many youngsters change their seniors very frequently. One needs at least a year in a court to be able to truly imbibe effective practical training. I have encountered many young lawyers who would tell me "Sir I want High Court experience. I have been with a senior lawyer in the Trial Court for 6 months I have learnt all that there is to do." In 6 months months no lawyer, however smart she may be, can learn all about a court in a matter of six months.

How was your experience as a lawyer representing the Delhi Government? What has changed after being designated as a Senior Advocate?

Representing any government is the same. Governments made change but the bureaucrats remain the same and lethargy and avoidance of risk is the hallmark of the bureaucracy. The first thing one realises when one becomes a "sarkari" lawyer is the bulk. The volumes just multiply and getting timely instructions from departments is an uphill task. While I was only an Additional Standing Counsel, I got to represent the government in several important and sensitive matters such as the fixing of the minimum wages, delhi v/s centre, the delhi riots case, the PIL on Odd- Even, on Dengue, on purchase of low floor buses, regularisation of Kashmiri Pandit school teachers, etc.

After designation as a Senior, and that too in the middle of the pandemic, the bulk decreased while the earnings increased. However, the most liberating aspect has been that now I am free from the headache of client management as a senior is not permitted to interact directly with clients.

Which is the most memorable case in which you were engaged?

Well there are many. Let me cite two which relate to legendary women activists. I had represented Satyarani Chadha, the founder of Shakti Shalini, in the High Court in respect of the bride burning case of her daughter Kanchan. It was Satyaji's struggle for justice that had led to the reform of dowry laws in India. Sadly her own daugher's case was lingering. Finally the High Court affirmed the conviction of her son-in-law.

However the fellow absconded. Also by the time Satya got her phyrric victory, dementia had got the better of her and she could not even comprehend what had transpired in court. The other is the sad case of Professor Latika Sarkar, the legendary legal school who was the force being the Towards Equality Report that led to major law reform to ensure the empowerment of women. Sadly, in her old age, an acquaintence had taken over her house and forced her to gift it away to his wife. Lotika ji was rescused by Usha Ramanathan and we managed to get the court to set aside the gift deed.

How do you see the future of the legal profession in India? Is it going to be prosperous for the young generation?

I have great hope for future bar. The young lawyers are the Gen- NCLAT, they are driven, they are confident and they do not hesitate to voice their opinions. We need a merit based fearless judiciary. As the Bar is the Mother of the Bench, for this we need a meritocratic and fearless bar. This I feel is finally possible with the young lawyers. Also with time, oppressive practices such as low stipends and control of oligarchs over the Bar are bound to wane. This augurs well for the future.

Also, I am delighted to see the increase in the number of women lawyers. I feel that once gender disparity is addressed in the Bar as well as the Bench, we will witness a greater democratisation of the Bar. With increasing use of technology in the world of law, the entire nature of lawyering is set to change and the youth undoubtedly hold the advantage when it comes to optimising technology. So I feel the future is bright, however I am always told that I am too much of an optimist.

How would you assess the tenure of the former Chief Justice of India NV Ramana? How do you see the change in judicial leadership with CJI Lalit at the helm?

Justice Ramana took office at a time when the credibility of the institution he helmed at touched its lowest nadir. Anything he would do to set the house in order would only be an improvement. The expectations were high. To be fair, Ramana did make the right kind of noises. He expedited the appointments but addressing the collegium logjam under Bobde. While Kureshi was thrown under the bus of pragmatism, he did manage to end the stalemate. However by the end of his tenure it was apparent to all that the lofty words he spoke of at seminars and talks were not matched in action.

Important cases such as 370, CAA, demonetisation and electoral bonds remained in cold storage. Also the government was given an easy escape route in matters like the Pegasus scandal. Ramana will therefore be remembered for the opportunity that he frittered away. In contrast, Justice Lalit, who has only a few months in office, has shown the power of "one". The magic that even one person can achieve if he or she is determined to make a difference. Not only are matters which remained for years in cold storage being listed for hearing, prisoners of conscience such as Teesta Setalvad and Siddique Kappan have managed to secure their freedom. He has truly restored the Supreme in the Court and more power to him.

Which is one book that changed your life, and you would like to recommend to our readers?

That is a really tough one. I am a bibliophile and to pin it down to just one book is raw cruelty. If I have to list a few, I would definitely list Maus, Art Speigelman's searing graphic novel on the jewish holocaust as one which got me interested in two genres in one stroke-graphic novels and the holocaust. Partha Chatterjee's masterly work "The Princely Imposter" on the iconic Bhawal Sanyasi Case is also a must read!