Senior Advocate, Constitutional law expert and former Attorney General (AG) KK Venugopal launched his memoir An Accidental Lawyer: My Adventures in Law and Life on Tuesday.

The book, authored by Venugopal and co-authored by advocate Suhasini Sen, traces his journey in the legal profession, reflecting on his decades-long career before the Supreme Court and his tenure as Attorney General for India.

The launch event and discussion, which was held at The Oberoi in New Delhi, was privy to an unusually diverse panel which included activist and former parliamentarian Subhashini Ali, Karanjawala & Co managing partner Raian Karanjawala and senior journalist N Ram.

Ali, in particular, was critical of Venugopal and the book, something which the former AG was informed in advance.

Ali revealed that she was surprised to receive the invitation to the event.

“It was a very unexpected honour for me to be invited as a participant for this evening of celebration of KK Venugopal's memoir. I had really no idea why I was invited. But the organisers told me that he was insistent,” she said

She added that she had warned the organisers in advance that her remarks might be critical.

“I said to the organisers, he and you may not like what I am going to say.”

According to Ali, the organisers conveyed Venugopal’s response.

“They said he was very insistent he didn’t want any sycophants on the stage."

Ali said she appreciated that Venugopal had not treated the Babri Masjid episode casually in his memoir and that the chapter title — “The demolition of the Babri Masjid, reaping the whirlwind” — reflected seriousness about the event. However, she said she was not entirely convinced by one part of his framing.

“He says that Hindus believed that the site was the birthplace of Lord Ram and that a Ram temple had stood there earlier. To my mind this is a sweeping statement which is not entirely based on fact, though that is not the main point I want to make,” Ali stated.

Ali then recalled Venugopal’s role as counsel during the dispute, when he appeared for then Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Kalyan Singh and conveyed the State government’s assurance to the Supreme Court that the mosque would not be harmed.

“It was his onerous responsibility to convey to the Supreme Court the Chief Minister’s assurance that no harm would come to the mosque.”

She also recalled Venugopal’s reaction after the mosque was demolished.

“He stood before the Chief Justice of India and said, ‘I hang my head in shame.’”

Ali said Venugopal subsequently stopped appearing for Kalyan Singh, who was later punished for contempt.

However, she found it difficult to reconcile that reaction with his later role defending other leaders associated with the Ram Janmabhoomi movement.

“He went on to defend LK Advani and his colleagues very vigorously before the Supreme Court. To me this is inexplicable but that’s the way it was,” Ali said.

Ali said the Ayodhya judgment ultimately appeared to contradict the position Venugopal had taken in court decades earlier.

“The Ayodhya judgment itself actually went against what KK Venugopal had said before the Chief Justice of India in 1992.”

Turning to the memoir itself, Ali said the narrative appeared to fall silent on later developments.

“After this, things become very inexplicable to me in the book. There is a silence that is incomprehensible.”

She pointed out that the final chapter of the book deals with Venugopal’s tenure as Attorney General.

“He writes that the Attorney General does not act for the government of the day alone but for the country that is the people of India and that the Constitution must be put foremost.”

Ali said the years during which Venugopal served as Attorney General coincided with developments that, in her view, raised serious constitutional concerns.

“Majoritarianism was strengthened by the day and was hurtling towards an unimaginably dark future,” she said.

She highlighted issues such as lynching of minorities, the farmers’ protests, the abrogation of Article 370, the conversion of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories and the demolition of houses of accused persons in several States.

She concluded by saying that the memoir does not engage with these developments even though it was written after Venugopal demitted office as AG.

“He was silent then and he is silent now after demitting office during the writing of the book,” Ali lamented.

Karanjawala, meanwhile, reflected on Venugopal’s character and the values he brought to the profession, describing him as a lawyer guided by honour and a strong moral compass.

“Whenever confronted with a particular situation, he simply stepped forward, did the right thing and moved on. There was no sermonising and no sanctimoniousness.”

Karanjawala said this instinct often extended to supporting younger members of the Bar who found themselves in difficulty.

He also shared a lighter anecdote illustrating Venugopal’s adventurous side when a bottle of snake liquor was produced at a gathering.

“A person brought out a bottle of snake liquor and asked who would try it. Inside there was a dead snake.. KK Venugopal looked at it and said, ‘I don’t mind trying it."

Journalist N Ram said the memoir should not be read merely as a catalogue of legal cases but as a personal reflection on Venugopal’s life.

“In a sense it is an attempt to find himself — what kind of person he is — and not just a lawyer.”

Ram added that Venugopal could easily have written a far longer legal chronicle but instead chose to focus on selected episodes from his life and career.

The discussion also featured a brief and humorous exchange between Subhashini Ali and Venugopal, offering a glimpse into their long-standing acquaintance.

Ali began recounting how Venugopal had once helped her in a legal matter involving a trade union dispute. She said she had approached him for assistance and accompanied him to the Supreme Court, where she witnessed first-hand the authority he commanded in the courtroom.

As she began narrating the incident, Venugopal interjected from the audience.

“Should I tell them?” he asked, drawing laughter from those present.

Ali continued with the story, explaining that when Venugopal examined the case papers he discovered that she had earlier been held guilty of perjury in related proceedings.

According to her, Venugopal insisted that the issue had to be addressed before the case could be pursued further.

The exchange lightened the mood of what was otherwise a pointed discussion on constitutional politics.

Watch video of the event