People have faith only in the Supreme Court, Senior counsel RS Suri

Senior Advocate Rupinder Singh Suri has been in the profession for four decades. Suri served as the Standing Counsel for Punjab in Supreme Court during the times of Sikh militancy. Suri was also the President of the Advocates-on-Record Association. In this interview with Bar & Bench’s Murali Krishnan, RS Suri talks about the ‘Punjab problem’, his views on one-upmanship among judges and why the senior members of the Bar should train young lawyers. .Bar & Bench: Why did you take up Law?.RS Suri: Law was not a ‘first option’. It happened because I had the least objection to it. When I finished my MA in Economics, I was at a crossroads. I did not want to be an IAS officer, a chartered accountant, a company employee or a businessman, so I came to law by the process of elimination..B&B: Where did you enrol?.RS Suri: I enrolled in Delhi in 1976, and did tax work for around seven years. I was also simultaneously working with Dr. Chitale, and in 1984 I founded the law firm Suri & Co..B&B: How did that happen?.RS Suri: While I was into my tax practice, I was advised by Justice S Ranganathan, who later became a Supreme Court judge and DR Khanna, who later became a High Court judge, that I should not remain in a well but must go into the wide ocean..On their advice, I realised that unless I cut my umbilical cord with tax I would not be able to survive. Everybody had the impression that I was a tax lawyer. So in 1984, I stopped tax work completely and started virtually from zero..And God was kind enough..B&B: You have served as standing counsel for Punjab. Could you speak about that?.RS Suri: I was standing counsel for Punjab in two periods totalling to about 15 years. I was there during the crucial time of terrorist activities and the ‘Punjab problem’. I was given the charge of handling criminal work..Today, ‘Standing Counsel’ is a diluted concept in Supreme Court. But as a Standing Counsel, I had the full authority to handle the matters or to give it to other panel lawyers. I could ask for anything and it was provided. I was accountable to my State and to the judiciary..And I must say that the judiciary gave us lot of respect..B&B: Tell us more about the “Punjab problem”?.RS Suri: We were right at the heart of a troubled Punjab and police action. It was a harrowing time in Punjab. The police is usually a much maligned force. But I have to say that 3,200 policemen died in Punjab and they did not die shaking hands. They did not have [good] weapons. The terrorists were far better equipped..I think KPS Gill has to be given credit for what I consider as winning the “soft war”. As of today, I am very sorry to say that I find the police force also divided on political lines. Even today, all police officers owe their allegiance to KPS Gill. That is the kind of loyalty that he invokes. I don’t know whether history is going to credit him or not, but I feel that he and Beant Singh brought India back. Of course, Mr. Siddharth Shankar Ray also played a role..B&B: On a different note, you must have dealt with cases in which you had an emotional attachment? .RS Suri: My emotions will not necessarily be a convincing argument for the court. It is not that I do not use emotion. But I use it as a tool to get across to the judge and for convincing the judge about the sensitivities involved in the issue. Otherwise, I am totally objective..B&B: You have served as President of the Supreme Court AoR Association. Do you think AoR system violates Article 19(1)(g)?.RS Suri: Let me put it this way; if the AoR system was not there, I would not be there in the Supreme Court. In the Supreme Court, to sustain yourself you have to get briefs. Since the stakes are very high, litigants engage the very best of the lawyers and they should. The AoR system gives an opportunity to youngsters to sustain themselves. I got [appointed as counsel for] State of Punjab, only because I was an AoR..B&B: As the President of AoR Association, you might have had the opportunity to observe judges from very close quarters..RS Suri: As the President of the AoR Association, I was invited to the parties of the judges. What I have noticed is that strict bureaucratic protocol is observed even during such functions. The Chief Justice will sit in one corner, the junior most judge will sit in another corner. Their vehicles will also come and go in the same order. Every six months they keep changing houses. This one-upmanship does not go well with the serenity, dignity and humility of the judges. But all credit to the Supreme Court, it has been evolving and emerging. It has gone beyond what our Constituent Assembly envisaged..B&B: What about this current tussle between the Supreme Court and the Executive?.RS Suri: Till the 90’s, there were excesses on the part of the Executive and hence, the judges took over. Now, the judges have exceeded their limits and the executive is reacting..I personally think that discussions between the executive and the Supreme Court have not taken shape in an organised manner. For this, I would say that the Bar has failed. They could have played a major role, particularly the institution of law officers. Judges cannot go and claim anything. They convey it either through the Bar leadership or through the law officers. And I think they (Bar) could have played a far better role..B&B: Coming back to your journey, when were you designated Senior Advocate?.RS Suri: I was designated in 2009, about seven years ago by the Supreme Court. I would say that my role as Standing counsel played a big part in it, because the judges would not have noticed me otherwise..B&B: Do you agree with the current system of designation of Senior Advocates? It is now a subject of litigation with allegations of non-transparency..RS Suri: I feel that it would be opaque only if two or three judges are involved. But since the full court is involved in the decision making, only rarely would one suffer..However, one area of concern is that Supreme Court lawyers are not recommended for High Court judgeship. What the High Courts hold against Supreme Court lawyers is that they are not members of the High Court Bar. Therefore, good lawyers, who are exposed to the liberal thought of the Supreme Court are denied the opportunity to be part of the Bench..So, my opinion is that Supreme Court judges should have a quota where they can directly recommend eligible lawyers from Supreme Court Bar for High Court judgeship. The lawyers who have been appointed to the Supreme Court from the Bar have done very well – why would they not do well in High Courts?.B&B: Would NJAC have been better than Collegium?.RS Suri: I do believe that judicial appointments should not be the domain of judges alone. The executive should at least have a presence in the process and the right to express its views..This is for the reason that judges are extremely busy and don’t have time to follow up each candidate, meet him or know his credentials. They rely on the feedback of other people. Then, the objectivity of the person briefing the Collegium judge becomes a factor. Thus, there is no rational system to streamline and process the information about candidates..We have had very good judges during the Collegium. But that holds equally true during the times of executive appointments. The Bhagwatis, Chandrachuds and Krishna Iyers were products of the [era of] executive dominance. So, my view is that there should be a proper balance between the executive and the judiciary, so that the best people can be inducted..The importance of the Supreme Court has increased manifold, so much so that people have faith only in the Supreme Court. If this institutional faith is diluted, India would be in for big trouble. India has got many destructive forces, and each one of us has to be very vigilant to preserve the unity, integrity and sanctity of our Constitution and our institutions. We have to work hard towards it..B&B: You argued in the Presidential reference in the Satluj Yamuna canal link case?.RS Suri: Since, the matter is sub-judice, I should not say much about it. But yes, I enjoyed working on it and arguing the matter. There have been very few Presidential references, so there was that tension to do a good job. It was an experience of a lifetime. There was a lot of criticism that the reference was made in 2004 but was heard only in 2016. But that was because of sensitivity of the judges. They did not want to upset the applecart of peace..But no regrets! I think Punjab did its best. When the case started, Punjab’s image was that of a rogue State which had not honoured its agreement. We could submit before the court about the legal position and that whatever Punjab has done is strictly as per the letter and spirit of the Constitution..The unconscionable contracts have been cancelled because water level has gone down. Moreover, all the agreements are political agreements. None of them were made on scientific basis. No environment impact study has been done in Punjab about this. So, there is a need to have a re-look at it and redistribute the water..It is a lifeline for Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan and has to be dealt with objectively and not emotionally..B&B: How do you unwind?.RS Suri: (Laughs). The question of unwinding arises only if I am wound up. I don’t feel wound up..B&B: After 40 years of your career, any concerns about the Indian Bar and role of seniors like you?.RS Suri: In keeping with my father’s thinking, I am now trying to give back to the Bar. Since my father always felt opportunities come with education and exposure, I have donated and established two libraries for my fellow colleagues. I intend to establish more libraries and medical facilities..One area of concern is that Bar is not taking the effort to train lawyers who come to Delhi and who are not well-equipped to render the kind of services they are expected to. These people have come from remote places after having bid farewell to their hometowns. Once they come to Delhi, it is difficult to go back because nobody wants to go back as a failure..One cannot teach ethics or expect great conduct from a person who is not assured of food and shelter because that is his first commitment – to survive and look after his family..I personally feel that the Bar should pay a lot more attention in equipping these lawyers so that they can deliver. They must be informed about the vital importance of English language in the Supreme Court. They must be given orientation in soft skills – public speaking, time management, how to discipline oneself..If ever I come into a leadership position again in the Bar, my focus would be on training lawyers. I have been training persons in leadership roles and soft skills as part of my long association with the Indian Junior Chamber..When it comes to lawyers, if you can ensure that these youngsters are trained properly, preferably before the age of 35, then they will be able to show their full potential. To be very frank, I think the Senior Bar is not playing that role. The Senior Bar works on the basis that ‘since these people are not up to the mark, let us kick them out”. In fact, they should work the other way round. Since these people are here, let us take them in and upgrade their quality..You never know which seed will blossom and in what manner.