Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud on Saturday said that eminent jurist and renowned economist Nani Palkhivala dedicated his life to preserve the rights given in the Constitution and shaped the history of contemporary India through his contribution to law and economics. 

The CJI said that while thinking about what to speak on Palkhivala, he remembered that economics was his passion. In a way, this lecture was a tribute to the brilliant lawyer. If not for Nani, the country would not have had the basic structure doctrine, he added.

Delivering the 18th Nani Palkhivala Memorial Lecture organised by the Bombay Bar Association at the National Centre for the Performing Arts (NCPA) in Mumbai, the CJI said that he was honoured to speak about Palkhivala, who was a man of different facets, an eminent lawyer and a great orator. 

He said Nani delivered his first post-budget speech where the Taj is located now. The locations changed from Cowasji Road to Brabon Stadium. As per the CJI, he used to attend those lectures, which pulled in more crowds than a cricket match.

He said that in 1973, the basic structure doctrine was formally introduced in the landmark verdict delivered by the largest ever Constitution Bench of 13 Judges in the Kesavananda Bharati vs State of Kerala case.

The CJI said that Palkhivala argued for petitioners for 31 days in the case that lasted for 66 days for 5 months. The CJI further said Palkhivala prepared thoroughly. There was a young girl who visited the hearing. She asked one day who was this young man interrogating these well-dressed sitting gentlemen.

However, the hearing did not go as planned. The eminent lawyer was stormed with a barrage of questions from the Bench. At the end of the long rant by the Judge about socialism, Nani said that only an imbecile would jump the Berlin Wall from the west to the east, recalled the CJI. 

The Supreme Court then ruled that while Parliament had the power to change any part of the Constitution, it could not do so by changing the basic structure of the Constitution. It was a slime 7-6 ratio, but still a verdict of 13 Judges, added Justice Chandrachud. 

He said the identity of the Indian Constitution has evolved, but the craftsmanship of a judgement still lay in keeping the soul intact. The rule of law and separation of powers, dignity of the individual, the basic structure has taken different avatars.

CJI Chandrachud said that the basic structure doctrine was taken to Nepal and Pakistan from India.

As per the CJI, Nani was the go-to man of the nation during the times of turbulence. He played a major role in shaping jurisprudence. As a thinker on economics, Nani spoke against the dogmas of the day.

He said Nani was in his own way a true family person. There was mutual admiration, respect and companionship, which helped him pursue his profession with ease.

The CJI said that his parents were very close to Nani and Nargesh. He recalled that when the call came for the Supreme Court, Nani told his father that he should not take the offer, as he (Justice Y.V. Chandrachud) was safer in Mumbai than in Delhi. The CJI said that he was truly ‘awestruck’ by Nani’s wit and charm.

He further talked about how Nani once represented and returned the brief of Indira Gandhi, stating that Palkhivala’s life should be looked at from the standpoint of historical events. 

The ink was barely dry from the British Raj when the country had the licence Raj. Nani was against the policies that denied people their liberties and freedom. In 1958, Nani delivered his first post-budget speech. He performed the role of educating the masses. The government of the day was also trying to bring about social change, added Justice Chandrachud. 

He recounted how Palkhivala had welcomed the liberalisation policy of the government in 1991. During his 1992 post budget speech, Nani said if India wanted to grow and prosper, it had no option but to integrate with the global economy.

This revolution enabled India to harness into a vibrant software industry. Palkhivala was one of the founding members of Tata Consultancy Services, the CJI highlighted in his speech.    

He said the Indian Constitution did not favour liberalism, but knew how to strike the right balance, permitting the state to change policies for growth.

Cultures across the world relied on prophets to tell people whether they were walking on the wrong path. Nani was one such prophet, he added.

He said one thing that disheartened Nani was the delays in Justice. Nani used to say that since the Indians believed in the afterlife, they expected cases to come up in that life.

During the event, CJI Chandrachud launched a book titled, Early writings of Nani Palkhivala, a compilation of the articles written by Palkhivala in local publications during his adolescent days. He also gave the Civil Liberties Award Citation to former Mumbai Police Commissioner Julio Ribeiro on the occasion. 

Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud on Saturday said that Judges were the ‘guardians’ of liberty of citizens living in this country, who did not differentiate between the cases coming before them and heard each argument with equal sincerity.

Delivering the memorial lecture on 90th birth anniversary of former Attorney General of India Ashok Desai, organised by the Bombay Bar Association in Mumbai, Justice Chandrachud said that every case that came before either the District Judiciary, a High Court or the Supreme Court, was important for Judges. He added that no case was big or small for the courts across the country.

Stating that the confidence of people, the due process of law and the protection of liberties rested on the shoulders of the Judiciary, the CJI observed that if the courts failed to protect the personal liberty of people and were not able to grant them relief, there was no purpose of their existence.

The CJI exemplified his point with a case that he had heard on Friday in which a person’s sentences for electricity theft in nine separate cases were running consecutively, not concurrently and said that if was an example of breach under Article 136. 

During the hearing of this case before the Apex Court, Justice Chandrachud had observed that the Supreme Court existed to hear the cries of such petitioners, adding that the Judges burnt the midnight oil for such cases.

The top court of the country had allowed the appeal filed by the convict and directed that the sentences should run concurrently.

Speaking about honour killing, the CJI said that hundreds of young people die in India due to honour killings merely because they love someone or marry outside their caste or against their family’s wishes.
Citing an article that reported murder of a 15-year-old girl by her own parents in Uttar Pradesh in 1991,  the CJI said that morality was a fluid concept, which varied from person to person.

He said the villagers accepted the crime. Their actions were acceptable and justified for them because they complied with the code of conduct of that society in which they lived. 

The CJI then observed that the code of conduct of these villagers would not have been put forward by rational people. 
Referring to the ‘negotiation of morality due to power difference,’ the CJI observed that morality was often dictated by dominant groups. He said the members of weaker and marginalised groups were forced to submit to dominant groups for their survival.

The dominant groups overpowered the weaker sections of the society and  decided the code of conduct or morality. The vulnerable groups were placed at the bottom of the social structure and their consent, even if attained, was a myth, he added.

The vulnerable sections of the society were unable to generate a counter culture because of humiliation and separation at the hands of oppressor groups. Even if they developed a counter culture, the same was overpowered by government groups to further alienate them, he added.

Speaking about the Supreme Court order of September 6, 2018, which decriminalised homosexuality in the country by striking off Section 377 of Indian Penal Code, the CJI said that the verdict rectified injustice.

He said Section 377 of IPC was based on morality of a gone era. The Constitutional morality today focused on rights of individuals and protected it from popular morality notions of the society, added Justice Chandrachud.

The CJI further mentioned the September 27, 2018 verdict of the Apex Court, which struck down Section 497 of the IPC, decriminalising adultery.

He said the values of a progressive Constitution served as guiding force for the country, conveying that the personal and professional lives of the citizens were not divorced from the Constitution.

Terming the Constitution as the flag bearer of fundamental rights of citizens, which guided people in their daily lives, the CJI said the Indian Constitution was not designed for people as they were, but how they ought to be.

The appointment of New Advocate General for the State of Maharashtra has been decided. Senior Advocate Dr. Birendra Saraf shall be taking this position.

The resignation of the incumbent Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni has been accepted by the Maharashtra cabinet headed by Chief Minister Eknath Shinde.

In a meeting held on Tuesday,the appointment for Advocate Saraf was announced.

Once Governor Bhagat Singh Koshyari gives his approval, Saraf will be appointed as next Advocate General of Maharashtra.

Advocate Saraf has been practicing for the past 25 years before the Bombay High Court.

Dr Saraf graduated from the  Government Law College, Mumbai where he was a topper in all three years of graduation.

As a junior lawyer, he worked in the chambers of present Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud.

When the current CJI a was elevated as the as Bombay High Court judge in 2000, Saraf joined the chambers of another law luminary former Advocate General Ravi Kadam.

In 2020 Saraf was designated as Senior Advocate

advocate Saraf has served the Bombay Bar Association as Secretary for a period of  six years and is presently the Vice-President.

Advocate Saraf is a known name as in his course of  career, he has appeared in several high-profile and controversial cases.

He is known for successfully arguing for Bollywood actress Kangana Ranaut in her plea challenging the demolition activity by the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) on her property in Bandra in September 2020.

It was due to the efforts by Saraf that the High Court quashed the demolition notice and permitted Ranaut to take steps to make her property habitable.

Another Important case that advocate Saraf has been associated with,is the proceeding pertaining to contentious dispute between Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited and its largest shareholder, Invesco Developing Markets Fund.

More lately he also represented Dhyandev Wankhede, who is the father of IRS officer Sameer Wankhede, who formerly headed the Narcotics Control Bureau during the Aryan Khan drug case.