[Inside Legal Minds] Be respectful, have compassion for clients and other side: Senior Advocate Pinky Anand

The best lawyers have the ability to turn a case in their clients' favour with their impressive arguing skills and attention to detail. Their courtcraft demands the attention of judges they are arguing before and inspires the next generation of lawyers.

But how do they do it? What happens behind the scenes? What are their mantras for success?

In this series, Bar & Bench's Aamir Khan delves deeper into these aspects. Inside Legal Minds captures the inner workings of these lawyers through visual storytelling, from the point of preparing a brief to arguing it in court.

For this photo essay, we followed Senior Advocate Pinky Anand, who has served as Additional Solicitor General (ASG) of India and practices before the Supreme Court of India, various High Courts and other fora.

Anand’s office is in South Delhi's upmarket Neeti Bagh, a neighbourhood that is home to many accomplished professionals, including legal practitioners.  

Posters of Hindi film cult classics adorn the walls of the staircase leading to her office floor, where we wait for the senior lawyer on a pleasant February evening.

At around 5:30 PM, Anand arrives for the evening’s conferences after a busy day in court.  

At the beginning of the first conference, Anand’s colleague Saudamini helps her log in to attend a virtual meeting with the briefing lawyers.

Anand asks Asees, one of her juniors who will be participating in the conference, for the case file. People appear on screen and the meeting starts. The senior lawyer is representing the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI).

She begins, referring to the written synopsis. The counsel appearing online takes her though the relevant dates of the case. 

Anand listens to the counsel carefully, referring to the documents on her iPad, although she makes notes on a piece of paper.

At one point during the meeting, she asks the counsel onscreen, 

“How are we drawing CPC into it?”

The counsel says it is the “principle of execution” and underlines the role of the recovery officer by referring to Section 47 of the CPC, which deals with “questions to be determined by the Court executing decree”. 

The briefing counsel refers to judgments in three cases — Dushyant Dalal, JK Synthetics and SEBI v. Classic Credit. 

Classic Credit is a case where Anand represented SEBI as ASG. It led to addition of Section 24(A), dealing with composition of certain offences, to the SEBI Act in 2017.

“It was so many years ago. I remember it was court number 3. Justice (Arun) Mishra sat in court number 3 at that time,” she recalls. 

The conference lasts for about 30 minutes.

Anand asks Saudamini to participate in the second conference. She discusses some points that are to be deliberated upon during the conference. She takes a pause before the conference and says,

“I started using liquid text fairly diligently...I love technology, by the way. It’s  not like I started using it now. It’s been a long time. I enjoy learning. If I can't face it, I can't get hold of something.”

On the switch to virtual hearings and use of electronic devices, she says,

“You have start learning and get familiarised. You have to be accepting. There is no other way. What I still use is written notes. Sometimes it is your convenience that matters.”

The next conference begins at around 6:30 PM. Three lawyers enter her room.

Anand is behind a bulky wooden desk, placed on a multicolour carpet of floral patterns, facing the door. 

Over a dozen frames — 21 to be precise — marking Anand’s achievements and recognitions across the globe hang on the three interior walls.

A large national flag is placed in the right corner of the room.  

She is representing the Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) in the next matter. She notes down the relevant dates on her iPad. Provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 are relevant for the matter at hand.     

Anand asks the representatives of SAIL to explain how the law has been interpreted thus far. She then turns to the briefing lawyer who has come along with the team. He takes her through the legal developments. The basic allegation in the case pertains to illegal mining in the case beyond the lease period.

The discussion veers into the concept of “stacking” and the counsel seeks Anand’s expertise to obtain a direction for stacking.

“What’s the purpose of stacking?” she asks.

“For ascertaining the actual quantity,” says the representative. 

Anand wonders if there are any rules demonstrating the procedure. She recalls a provision being referred to during the last conference. 

Anand takes down the points she will be building her case on. The argument primarily will be on the “right to sell” the relevant material. She flags the provisions of the law that she would require during the argument stage. 

The senior lawyer seeks the copy of a letter, which is a crucial document in the case. The briefing counsel says it is not on record, but that he would provide a copy. She asks for a copy to be sent on WhatsApp. 

During the end, Anand wants Saudamini to have a list of judgments that have to be relied upon in the case.

The conference ends after about 50 minutes of discussions.

“Let us look at the arguments,” says Anand before the next conference begins. The briefing lawyer has been associated with Anand’s chambers previously. The conference begins at around 7:30 PM. 

The matter pertains to religious practices and entry of devotees into a temple. The lawyers explains the facts, including a Government Order (GO) which “has to be quashed”. 

Anand explains the law surrounding religious places. She says,

“I remember telling you. Even during university times, police couldn’t enter the premises without permission. And it was an accepted policy for most places. I just want to see if religion is covered.”

She argues that it is one thing to say enforce the GO, and another tell the police to enter the premises and execute it.

“What is meaning of sending police in the temple? What is happening is not a crime,” Anand says. 

The briefing counsel is asked to narrow is down to the main points of arguments that are required to be put forth.  

The discussion now moves towards the fundamental rights of devotees. Anand asks the lawyer for a composite note with points made earlier. She illustrates that the composite note would reflect how the GO was passed in the direction which was given ex parte.  

The conference lasts for about 20 minutes.

In the fifteen-minute break before the next conference, Anand and Saudamini discuss the case details. 

“Fresh notes have come,” says Saudamini.

A moment later, Anand rises from her desk.

“I need to go for a one minute walk. I can’t sit for so long,” she says, leaving the room.

Before a team of briefing counsel arrive for the meeting, Anand and Saudamini start preparing. Anand studies the case file, flipping pages to see the latest order.

“It was a crazy day today,” says Anand. Saudamini feels the previous day was “crazier”.

“I am going to make my own notes,” she tells Saudamini.

The briefing team is running late. She takes a moment to share that cases involving criminal law have a human element and that she spent the previous few days traveling to other parts of the country to represent clients in criminal cases.

“It gets exciting,” she says.

Bringing her focus back to the case file, the senior lawyer expresses her disapproval towards the style and size of the text's font. The papers are printed back-to-back, which is another thing she dislikes.

Anand maintains a strong focus on the documents she is reading, taking exception to any interruption that might derail her train of thought.

The next set of briefing lawyers arrive one by one. Anand asks the first one about the other and then demands the list of dates on the developments of the case. 

She emphasises on the relevant clauses and asks for a clarification on the legal point that could go against her client.

“You can’t rely on a document and say one part is good for me and the other is bad for me. Show me something which gives you a better case,” she tells the briefing team.

“If you try and ride on too many high horses, you will fall from one of them,” says Anand, noting the various points of arguments espoused by the briefing counsel.

There is a lot of back and forth on the dates and developments in the case. Anand, who is particular about detailing the chain of events in the case, constantly prods the briefing counsel, who are expected to offer prompt assistance. 

Anand narrows down on four issues that have to be argued in the Supreme Court. 

“List of dates with basic things. You have to pinpoint things,” she tells the lawyers keeping in mind the essence of time in the Supreme Court.

A long day of conferences ends with a banter on her handwriting. When Saudamini tries to poke fun at Anand for her handwriting, Anand says, 

“I have the best handwriting in the world! I am convent educated.”

At around 9:30 PM, Anand calls it a day. She prefers to prepare solo on the morning of her day in court. 

The next day, we observed Anand arguing before the Supreme Court, where she had to argue a few matters. One of the cases pertains to land acquisition in Raipur, Chhattisgarh, for which she prepared in the morning. 

Appearing before Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma for the respondents in a contempt case, Anand exhibits a mild but assertive demeanour. 

She explains to the Bench each date-wise development and draws the judges' attention to the previous order of the Court. 

“Only a paper possession. They’re seeking to get more pounds of flesh,” she argues.

The Supreme Court notes that it is clearly recorded in the order that the possession aspect and allotment have only been done in papers and that it had quashed the acquisition proceedings.

Anand convinces the Court about the compliance of her client, following which the judges discuss between themselves.

In the meantime, Anand informs the Bench that the petitioners have already moved the High Court concerned. Taking the point into consideration, the Court rules in favour of Anand’s client.

It, however, clarifies that if it is found that the respondents were ever in possession, appropriate orders would be passed against them.

For now, it’s a win for Anand and her team.

A Harvard Law School graduate, Anand doesn’t feel that there was only one person or thing that inspired her journey as a legal practitioner.

“Over the years, I’ve come to a conclusion that there are various aspects of life that affect a legal practitioner. Various things affect you and the drive to do something about them, or change them, become your inspiration."

Her curiosity of law began when she found that a few of her friends were pursuing it. Upon closer introspection, she realised that law was a tool to bring a significant change in people’s lives. That was when she decided to do law.

But it wasn’t smooth sailing early on, especially when it came to navigating her way through a male-dominated profession. She says,

“I came into the profession when it was a male bastion and the prejudices had to be actively fought against. Today, there are a lot more women in the profession and its heartening to see them doing so well and forging ahead. The legal landscape has changed over the years, to be more inclusive. It used to be only a handful of women in courts when we started, but today, we see so many.”

Although Anand sees some “brilliant and motivated” individuals joining the profession of late, she doesn't want them to get complacent, as “there cannot be a substitute for hard work”. 

“This profession demands absolute and complete fidelity and priority and anything less cannot be an option,” she says.

On tips for appearing before the Supreme Court, Anand says that lawyers should be “masters of their brief” and be familiar with every letter in it.

"Then pause and find your propositions. Identify the points in the issue and let it then unfold before the court in a cohesive and decisive thought. Support with precedent where available and if there is no precedent, then challenge yourself and develop a new jurisprudence. Be respectful, have compassion for clients, and the other side, and remember that you are an officer of the Court first."