R Basant turns down fee for assisting Supreme Court as amicus, ₹45 lakh donated to trust

The Supreme Court recently lauded senior counsel and former judge R Basant for providing pro bono assistance as an Amicus Curiae to resolve a long-drawn family dispute [Farhat Sheikh vs Javed Zaki and ors]..The Court further revealed that after the senior counsel refused to take any payment for his services, the parties before the Court volunteered to make a sizeable donation to a charitable trust run in memory of Basant's mentor."Since the Amicus did not agree to receive any amount as honorarium for the work done, the parties have made a voluntary donation of Rs 45,00,000/ (Rs 15 lakhs each) to a registered public charitable trust – Adv. K. Bhaskaran Nair Foundation, a public charitable trust registered under the Income Tax Act, 1961 to perpetuate the memory of Late Advocate K. Bhaskaran Nair, Calicut under whom the Amicus had started his legal career as a junior," the Court's May 17 order said. .Fear of media affects performance of judges; need judges who can withstand pressure: Retired Justice R Basant.The Bench of Justices JK Maheshwari and Sanjay Karol further appreciated all the lawyers who appeared alongside Basant for their efforts in settling the long pending case."It is the duty of the Court to acknowledge the assistance rendered by Mr. R. Basant, learned Amicus Curiae, the ESCROW Mr. A. Karthik, assisted by Mr. Akshay Sahay, to bring this litigation into a happy settlement between the members of the family. The Court is grateful for rendering such service by them and we acknowledge their assistance. We also acknowledge the cooperation rendered by Mr.Nazmi Waziri, Sr. Adv, Mr. Khowaja Siddiqui, Adv, Mr. Sanchit Garga, Adv. Ms. Mithu Jain, Adv. for disposal of this long drawn litigation.".The case before the Court was a family dispute which involved multiple parties.Basant, as well as his associate A Karthik, had been praised by the Supreme Court in 2017 as well for their assistance in helping the parties arrive at a settlement in the matter, without charging any remuneration for their services.However, one of the parties failed to comply with the settlement terms, after which the matter went back to mediation in 2022. After the case was settled again, the Court disposed of the matter by its May 17 order. .[Read order]