Bar associations should remain independent, not depend on political parties: BBA President Nitin Thakker

Senior Advocate Nitin Thakker is three-time President of the Bombay Bar Association (BBA)..He has practiced before the Bombay High Court for over five decades. What he is most passionate about is the welfare of the BBA - one of the oldest lawyers' bodies in the country - and the infrastructure of High Court..In this interview with Bar and Bench’s Neha Joshi, Thakker talks about his legal career, his vision for the BBA, politics at the Bar and more..Neha Joshi (NJ): What motivated you to become a member of the Bombay Bar Association?.Nitin Thakker (NT): I thought that I should become a part of the BBA Standing Committee because I have been interested in various social organisations and I have been a trustee of several trusts. I have attended each and every meeting of the Standing Committee. I would take the job very seriously. If you are volunteering to do something, you have to give your 110%. You should not just become a member.During the time when I was only on the Standing Committee, there were no elections like the present ones. We did not have so many people contesting. Most of the time, it was difficult to get 23 people. At the last moment, we would ask people to file nominations. This was in late 80s or 90s, when Rafique Dada was the President..NJ: What changes have you seen within BBA over the years?.NT: Between 2002 and 2008, the BBA only held farewell and annual dinners; there was no other activity. Till 2014, we were a dormant association. There were resolutions passed and meetings were held if any issue came up about against corrupt judges or lawyers demands, etc. But from 2014, we started educational lectures. In that sense, we are growing..NJ: Can you tell us about the amendment to women’s reservation in the BBA Standing Committee?.NT: When I became President, I realised that there were only one or two female members on the Committee. Dr Birendra Saraf (now Advocate General of Maharashtra) and I discussed about what to do so that more women can participate. Saraf suggested some amendments and the became the Advocate General and resigned from his position in the BBA. I formed a sub-committee and gave them guidelines about what we want in terms of the amendment. Everybody was busy, it took some time. We provided reservation of five seats only. We wanted to pass the amendment before the (February 2024) election.But let me clarify, this is not a reservation. It is an assurance that at least there will be five women on the Standing Committee. Today, we have six female members.If you make a reservation, there is a quota, so the women will get elected in only those seats. We wanted to give equal opportunity to the female lawyers. What the amendment provides is that after votes are counted, five women lawyers who have the highest number of votes are added on the Committee. Then the remaining fifteen slots are filled as per number of votes. Using this, we had not just five women, but another lady lawyer who was voted into the Committee.This has become revolutionary. It is the first association in the country to do this. In Delhi, I was told that SCBA is using Bombay as an example. But they are calling it a reservation. I told them this is not reservation but an assurance.There was also a suggestion to nominate women lawyers to the Committee. But that would not have been right, because some woman lawyer may ask why is she not nominated. I think in future, this number will increase on its own. In the last four elections, the statistics of women lawyers in the Committee was 3, 0, 2 and 1. Now we have 6. My earnest desire was to have more female participation. Without this amendment, I don’t think it would have happened. Some female lawyers raised apprehension that since they do not regularly appear in court, people may not vote for them. But now atleast 5 women will be in the Committee. And these are active members! For the first time, we found so many female lawyers contesting elections because of this assurance..NJ: What do you think of CJI DY Chandrachud’s comment that bar associations are “old boys' clubs”?.NT: I do not think the women in our Committee would say that elections were not conducive for them. They got votes from not just female lawyers, but male lawyers also. I think Bombay is progressive. I don’t know if the CJI knows about BBA. Maybe he was generally speaking about other bars. In Bar Council of India or State Bar Councils, you hardly find any female lawyers. There we are told that lawyers from rural and semi-urban areas throw parties etc. Bar council elections really are not conducive for women. But our (BBA) atmosphere is very conducive. We respect female lawyers. You see several women lawyers appearing in court. They are hard-working lawyers and people who work hard are appreciated, irrespective of gender..NJ: Why do you think there are so few female senior lawyers at the Bombay High Court?.NT: It should happen. I think in the present list (of senior advocates) I am expecting quite a few female designates..NJ: Do you have to handle members who had political affiliations?.NT: Luckily in our association, we are totally apolitical. Why do you need political parties? We are really independent; we want to remain independent. I make it a point that we do not want to take their support, we do not want to exist because of them. Today it is ‘x’ party, tomorrow it is ‘y’ party. However, during Emergency, BBA protested, filed cases..NJ: Do you think lawyers in general should be apolitical?.NT: I would not speak about others. Everyone is entitled to political views and to practice the profession. As far as the BBA is concerned, mainstream politics has no place..NJ: What is your vision for the BBA?.NT: After the podcast series (featuring interviews of eminent persons from BBA), members are becoming more aware. Everybody wants to contribute. So now there are several sub-committees – subject wise. Our WhatsApp group is also active.We hope that all the issues of the Bar members are solved. The biggest issue that we discussed is about condition of toilets, particularly ladies’ toilets. I will write a letter to the Chief Justice and High Court Registrars.BBA is equally concerned about disposal and listing of cases. We have been approaching the CJ for that. We have also been suggesting that judges familiar with the subject should take the matter so that disposal will increase. I am not complaining, but even the Chief Justice is grappling with the issue.Another concern is how to improve the system. One of the lawyers mooted this idea that seniors are willing to give their time to mediate old matters (more than 20 years old) because nothing may have survived in that matter. Why keep it pending? We are working on this scheme. We do not know how many old matters are pending, because with the increase in the city civil court pecuniary jurisdiction, a lot of cases now stand transferred..NJ: Why are fewer private practicing lawyers accepting judgeship?.NT: It is true that so many young lawyers were being approached to become a judge are not willing to accept judgeship. Everyone has their own problems - children, their education, elderly parents, medical expenses of future - variety of reasons to not accept. At the same time, there are people who have accepted. We do not know where everything is just now. It is true that people are not willing to accept, there is already a displeasure about majority not accepting. Earlier, there was a concept that when an invitation comes to accept judgeship, people take it as a duty to accept to give it back to the profession. But now people have reservations. Some say we are not mentally suited for the profession..NJ: Was studying law a conscious choice for you?.NT: My father, GA Thakker, was a lawyer (and later a Bombay High court judge), so there was that environment in the house and I was inclined to take law from the beginning. Maybe during my SSC, I was aiming to do something in Science. But in some preliminary exam, I did not get good marks in Science. I took Commerce stream, and from there to law was a natural progression. My father never told me what to do, he would have encouraged me for Science also, if that was what I wanted..NJ: How were your early years at the Bar?.NT: My father from day one decided that I will not do any work with him. He said that “you must go and learn not with me, but someone else where somebody will teach you properly.” He told me since I had not studied anything, I must join a solicitor’s firm. That time, he introduced me to KJ Merchant, Partner at Kanga & Co. Merchant introduced me to a managing clerk. Now, managing clerks in a solicitor’s firm are an institution by themselves. They were so knowledgeable that they would draft affidavits, plaints, conduct conferences. I know of a managing clerk who even applied that he should be allowed to sign articles and appear for solicitors’ examinations. That managing clerk took out a big bundle of papers in a matter and he asked me to prepare an affidavit of documents. That comes in Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), but I did not know what is an affidavit. I started reading CPC whenever I was not doing any other work.I was with Kanga for 9 months. After that, my father told me to join the chambers of late Senior Advocate Anil Divan. It was fixed in my mind that I would become a counsel. The senior lawyer was very particular and a disciplined person. He taught me that any pleading is a foundation of a litigation, and it has to be properly drafted. One must know under what provision one is seeking relief.Another senior taught me that before you draft a suit, you must know what ultimate relief you are going to ask. So first, dictate your prayers in the suit or the petition so you know what relief you are going to ask for.Anil bhai was here for about 4 years after I joined him. Then he moved to Delhi. He would come to Mumbai during weekends. Anil bhai’s chambers were shared by late Senior Advocate Ashok Desai. If Anil bhai was not there, then you sit with Ashok bhai. So I had the chance of working with him also..NJ: When did you start independent work?.NT: Mulla & Mulla Craigie Blunt & Caroe and Little & Co had a lot of bank work. My office was next to theirs and I stated getting such work. I would draft and argue matters in court. That in a way became my specialisation.There was a technical person who used to do arbitration matters. He was doing arbitration for Railways, and this was pre-1996 amended Act. They had to file suits and awards of governments were challenged. He started giving his work to me. Then I started getting a lot of arbitration matters. That is how I developed my practice in banking and arbitration. Little & Co had company matters.As a junior, we couldn’t say no to any matter. At that time, all matters came to the High Court and when you were seen in court appearing in matters, other solicitors would send work. When you have somebody in the profession, it is good to an extent that you get an introduction, probably a brief or two. But if you are not upto the mark, you are not working hard, you are not showing that you have worked on the matter or your research is poor, then people will not brief you regularly. So merely because somebody is a first-generation lawyer and, therefore, they have to struggle is not right. According to me, everyone has to struggle, which means work hard, sincerely, honestly.In 1985, my father expired. He had chambers in the High Court annexe building along with Nani Palkhivala, Soli Sorabjee and others. After his death, I started occupying his chambers. After a year, the High Court wanted those premises, so I surrendered that chamber and moved back in Anil bhai’s chambers.I got my own chambers on October 12, 2007, and by then I was already a Senior Advocate..NJ: How did you get the senior gown?.NT: I got my senior gown in 1997. I had not applied for long because I was waiting for Senior Advocate Virendra Tulzapurkar to apply. Him and I were together in college and both our fathers were judges in the City Civil Court, Mumbai. That time, it was a tradition that you allow your contemporaries and seniors to apply first. If they do not apply, then you apply. In May of 1997, then Justice BP Saraf asked me to apply for senior gown. I informed him that normally, the senior (Tulzapurkar) applies, but he anyway asked me to bring my application. Tulzapurkar purportedly informed him that he would first complete his doctorate and then apply for the gown. Tulzapurkar’s father, Anil bhai and Ashok bhai all advised me to go ahead with my application..NJ: What advice would you give to young lawyers?.NT: You must work hard. Never ever compromise on your integrity. And in litigation, your first duty is to the court.