A tribute to Advocate Jiwat Ram Priani

I am not oblivious to the atypicality of occupying this public space for writing an obituary for my mentor. But what else can be a more befitting space for Shri Jiwat Ram Priani, Advocate other than this reservoir of judicial pronouncements, so that he peacefully sleeps forever in his most cherished world?

Although I could not retain even a tenth of the wisdom, legal knowledge and acumen Sir bestowed upon me, I owe my professional existence to Sir – Mr. Priani for court order sheets, Priani sahab for his colleagues at Bar, Bauji for juniors (elder to me) from his chamber, and Sir for me.

Educationally being a native of the world of biological sciences, without even a distant relative or friend from the world of law, having accidentally joined the law course at the Campus Law Centre, Delhi University, I was in a quandary as to how to shape my career. Those days, there was no concept of law internship; the expression “intern” was completely alien to the world of advocacy. While being in the second year of LL.B, propelled by the anxiety to begin my professional journey, I came to know of a small-time free legal aid office in the Lajpat Nagar area, where Sir, a trial court stalwart, used to visit once a week for pro bono consultations and drafting. I was quite uncertain as to whether I - just a student with no godfather in the law field - would be permitted by that stalwart to sit and learn in that office once a week. But Sir was very warm and welcoming. From then began my professional yatra, holding Sir’s finger as a second year law student in 1987.

Gradually, I started visiting the Patiala House Court chambers of Sir after my classes. When it came to teaching me (yes, virtually “teaching” me), Sir treated me the way a creator would chisel his creation. And when it came to treating me in front of others, he would treat me as a co-professional at an equal footing. Such was his magnanimous conduct towards not just me, but every fellow advocate. Many a time, we saw some stranger entering our chamber and asking who Mr. Priani was. And just noticing his uniform, Sir would stand and introduce himself. Thereafter, he would give the best of consultation to that advocate, without reservation, and of course, without any fee, because the person was an advocate. Sir used to always say with full faith that by spreading and sharing, knowledge increases.

Sir strongly believed in a zero-adjournment-requests culture, which he inculcated in all his pupils. He used to remind us to stay sensitive to the plight of the litigant whose case had come up after 5-6 months. Once, during abstinence from work by lawyers in the Patiala House Court, feeling the pain of his clients, he offered me to address final arguments in a criminal case before a magisterial court, as that time I was just a student of final year LL.B. I grabbed the offer with great enthusiasm. Sir made me prepare the arguments and then grilled me as the court would. Then, he cautioned that I should be truthful to the court that I was only a student, not an advocate. He firmly believed in always staying truthful to the court and used to say that we should first fairly cite the legal precedents which are against our case, and thereafter address the distinguishing aspects, so that the judge is never misled.

So, after full preparation, I appeared before the court of Mrs R Kiran Nath, then metropolitan magistrate in Patiala House Court, and sought permission to address arguments after disclosing my status as only a student. Mrs Nath was quite generous and said she recognised me as a junior of Sir. She heard me at length and finally acquitted the clients. I felt so proud that I had got the clients acquitted, not realising that the acquittal was not because of my arguments, but because of splendid cross-examination of witnesses by Sir. That boost was a significant contributor to my professional confidence.

Within a few days of my enrolment as an advocate, Sir fell ill and had to be hospitalised for about two weeks. That time, I was the only junior in his chamber. Sir told me to ensure that no adjournment is sought on the ground of his hospitalisation, though going by his image, no judge would have ever denied us adjournment. Sir would meet me every evening in his hospital room for ascertaining what happened in the matters listed that day. He would issue instructions on what had to be done for the next day's matters. A true karmayogi, Sir was.

Sir would always caution us to be careful about the reputation of our chamber and never indulge in any activity which would bring a bad name to our chamber. Strict adherence to wearing uniform was his command to us. He would tell us that an advocate must always respect their uniform, and while in uniform, should not indulge in the slightest of misconduct, as it could malign the advocacy profession in public. Sir would strongly deprecate any boastful conduct of advocates even outside courts. “Once we take off our black coat, we are ordinary citizens of this country,” is what he would keep reminding us.

Clad in the uniform, he would always carry with him to court the files of the concerned case along with a handbook of Criminal Procedure Code + Indian Penal Code + Evidence Act. We could never imagine saying before the court that we have forgotten to bring the file or that the file was being brought by the clerk. He was of the belief that since the court might ask any legal question, one must have the bare necessary enactments with them to respond forthwith. 

One would never find Sir sitting idle in the chamber or courtroom. He would advise us to never sit idle. If there is no work while in chamber, keep reading Criminal Procedure Code or Evidence Act or any other law journal, he would tell us. And if sitting in a courtroom awaiting your matter, keep going through the file repeatedly or take notes of the arguments and legal precedents being cited in the case being heard. Sitting idle rusts your cognitive faculties, he strongly believed.

Sir did lot of pro bono work even during the time this expression was not commonly known and used. It was genuine pro bono work, for which even the court fees and typing charges would be spent out of his pocket. He did not discriminate between paying and non-paying clients when it came to quality of performance. Sir would always tell us to return the brief if we were not satisfied about the professional remuneration, but never to compromise on our work input on the matter.

No work was inferior for Sir. One would often find him writing in his hand not just applications and petitions/pleadings, but also clerical forms like bail bond, talbana (PF form), certified copy forms etc. if he had no other work. I would always ask him to dictate to me and I would write at length before sending it to the freelance typists. Even after I started my independent practice and till I left advocacy to join the bench, whenever I would pay him a courtesy visit and find him writing some pleadings, I would request him to let me write under his dictation, which he generously would accede to. That’s the reason why many of my contemporaries would find similarity of expressions between his and mine in the pleadings of my cases.

Sir gave me the fullest opportunity a junior could get to deal with the briefs and face the battlefront. Files of the next-to-next day's matter would be given to me for preparing cross-examination questions. He would carry the files of the next day's matter home. Then, a day before the date was fixed, he would go through the cross-examination questions prepared by me and reject or allow the questions. However busy he was, Sir would spend time on my questions – however silly those would be. And rejection of questions also would be not arbitrary; he would discuss the question concerned, asking me what if the witness answered in the manner against your case? or why do you need to ask this question? and would you not be helping the prosecution to prove something which they otherwise failed to prove? Cross examination is not what to ask, but what not to ask: that was his mantra for us.

Even after I started my independent practice, I was always recognised as Sir’s junior. So I was trusted that I would never mislead the court. Many of the trial judges of that time who rose to the High Court Bench - including Justice Mohd Shamim - used to think I am Sir’s son and would mark my presence in the order sheet as Girish Priani. On being reminded, Shamim sahab would say, “arrey, chela bhi to beta hi hota hain,” (a follower is like a son). Sir gave me indeed much more than he gave his own sons.

Such was the aura of that great man, who gave so many so much professionally. Now, they say Sir is no more. I disagree. What is no more is we, who were in him; he who was in us, remains. And will always remain.

Justice Girish Kathpalia serves as a judge of the Delhi High Court.