They came. They argued. They left. Only to come again. Even as senior Supreme Court lawyer Harish Salve was arguing the SNC Lavalin case for Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan in the Kerala High Court with his vintage aplomb, it was fait accompli. Pinarayi was smiling at the end of round one as his detractors were left cursing their luck.
The hearing of the revision petition, though, is set to continue. Most sensational cases involving the government and prominent politicos in the state were not won or lost in courtrooms. Their fates were sealed in the hands of a legion of top-notch luminaries. History testifies. Harish Salve is no novice himself. He is considered the most expensive lawyer in the country with a super-rich clientele including Bollywood superstar Salman Khan and corporate monoliths Mukesh Ambani and Ratan Tata.
The state has engaged the numero unos of the Indian jurisprudence over the years to carry its burden of proof. Questions over propriety, conflicts of interest and rationale have also been raised by legal experts and Opposition parties alike.
Justice C N Ramachandran Nair, a former judge of the Kerala High Court, tells Express the government is like any other litigant in a court and the choice of the lawyer is that of the litigant.“But the tendency to bring in counsel from outside the state is a poor reflection on the Advocate General and the government pleaders who are mostly very competent people,” he says.
There is a general misunderstanding lawyers with heavy reputations carry much weight on a judge’s decision. Judgments are rendered based on facts, evidence and according to law. There cannot be any change depending on the lawyer arguing the case, the Justice stressed.“
In short, no lawyer can advance the merit of a case based on his reputation. If the case is meritorious, irrespective of the lawyer, the litigant will get favourable orders. If the case is meritless, no lawyer can change the conclusion of the judge,” he says. Everything depends on the comprehension and capacity of the judges, he says. According to Advocate A Jayasankar, the most number of lawyers were paradropped to represent the state government during VS Achuthanandan’s tenure as Chief Minister.”
“What logic is there behind hiring such ‘bigbudget’ lawyers by splurging lakhs of rupees when the Advocate General and other law officers are at the state’s disposal?” he asks.In 2011, the state exchequer had reportedly incurred a liability of around Rs 30 lakh after V S Achuthanandan obtained the aid of SC lawyers in the Edamalayar and Ice cream parlour cases. Senior SC lawyers Shekhar Naphade and Rajinder Sachar appeared for Achuthanandan in a petition seeking CBI probe in the Ice cream parlour case. However, the High Court and the Supreme Court rejected the plea.
Former Director General of Prosecution T Asaf Ali says: “It’s an improper practice by the government to engage private lawyers to plead its cases in constitutional courts, that too in a country where the government is the biggest litigant.
”During the tenure of LDF Governments headed by the late E K Nayanar and V S Achuthanandan, private lawyers were engaged by the state for appearing in several cases at the expense of the taxpayers and the government. The state’s counsel, including the Advocate General, remained mute spectators in the court, he says.