Mumbai:

Full many a gem of the purest ray serene
The dark unfathomed caves of the ocean bear,
Full many a flower is born to blush unseen
And waste its sweetness in the desert air.

“A journalist quoting Elegy! That is quite unusual,” he laughed as he poured more tea. I was a bit confused. Here was a person whose views on many issues were not to my liking. I had to find out why he always represented the richer classes and admired the US so much. I was no armchair Marxist, but his unstinted support to the US policies the world over had annoyed me. So was his defence of the former Indian princes.

We had a freewheeling talk. I knew of his middleclass background, which valued a good education more than anything else did. Law was a natural avocation, and he rose by sheer merit and hard work. Literature, English language and the use of the right word for the right occasion were his passions. Palkhivala cherished democratic ideals but I did not agree with him that the western concept of democracy would solve all the problems in the world.

Quite clearly, Palkhivala was the greatest ‘gentleman lawyer’ of his time. Well briefed, he had an intuitive feeling for the law’s hidden interpretations, which others missed. His arguments were exact, packed with learned quotations as well as humorous quips from writers like Will Rogers.

A student of literature myself, I was amazed at the variety and depth of his reading. Besides poetry, Palkhivala adored the great essayists Lamb, Chesterton, Hazlitt, A G Gardiner and F L Lucas. In good humour, we argued about the merits of Dr Johnson who is seldom read these days. “Read his Lives of the Poets,” he suggested. “It is the ultimate in literary criticism.” I agreed, but found his novel Rassellas disappointing. “Oh, he wrote it only to make some money,” laughed Palkhivala. “Dr Johnson is no novelist.”

From fiction to fact
For Palkhivala, individual freedom, freedom of speech and fundamental rights counted more than anything else. That was why he was attracted to the American system of politics, practised by presidents like Roosevelt and Jimmy Carter.

The Soviet system was reprehensible because it did not recognise these qualities. But Palkhivala was a bit defensive when asked about the longstanding American support to some of the worst dictators in the world, all in the name of fighting communism. “The American knowledge about international affairs is limited,” he admitted.

But his admiration for the capitalist American system and the way of life was unbounded. He particularly appreciated the role of private industry and how little the American people depend on the government. “This is how it should be,” he told me. “Leave the government to manage national defence, space control and things like that. The rest should be with the private sector.”

That was why he welcomed the liberalisation process and showered praise on Dr Manmohan Singh, the former finance minister. “That is a man who knows his job and is incorruptible.” As for the democracy practised in India, Palkhivala, I suspect, came to develop some apprehensions.

“Can there be democracy without discipline?” he asked me. He was a vigorous opponent of the national emergency and the press censorship imposed by Indira Gandhi, former prime minister. Referring to those days, he said the Allahabad High Court judgement, which unseated Mrs Gandhi, could have been easily overturned by the Supreme Court.

“The judgement was faulty on many counts,” he explained. In fact, Palkhivala was among those who urged Mrs Gandhi to resign as the prime minister, fight and win the case in the Supreme Court and emerge triumphant. He even offered to represent her at the Supreme Court, but Mrs Gandhi chose to declare an emergency.

Lawyer par excellence
He was not a rich man’s lawyer as believed by a section of people. The cause moved him, not the size of the fee. Most of the famous cases he argued in the Supreme Court on major constitutional issues were free. “There is no sin or harm in making money,” Palkhivala explained. He admired men like J R D Tata who, rather than hoard wealth, spread it evenly for expanding industry, setting up foundation and institutions and promoting talent. “Rich people, like JRD did, should do a little more of nation-building,” he said.

Palkhivala admired Nehru as a person but argued that his economic policies had set India back by 50 years. “The socialistic pattern of society did not work and should have been abandoned,” he pointed out. “But we carried on and it led to the licence and permit raj taking deep roots in the country and ruining our economy.”

So Palkhivala attacked the central budgets every year before huge crowds, which assembled at the Brabourne Stadium in downtown Mumbai. It was one of the major events of the year. The speeches were meticulously prepared, full of punch lines and learned quotations, all delivered without reference to notes.

He was very ill when I met him last. The pain was also in his mind. He was disturbed at the domination of Indian politics by criminal elements, the growing corruption and communal divide and indiscipline. “Religion is a beautiful thing but strictly personal,” he argued. “How can it be used as a political issue?” He was more distressed at the mindless violence, destruction of public property, lack of civic sense and a political system that does little to check these.

“We have such rich religious texts and cultural traditions here,” he said. “We could be the model nation to the rest of the world, but look what we are doing to ourselves,” he lamented. Palkhivala slowly withdrew from public life and, I suspect, began to feel a bit helpless. Perhaps, death came as a welcome release (See ‘’).

Formerly a senior journalist with The Times of India and Reader''s Digest, Gangadhar is a columnist for a large number of print and electronic publications. He can be contacted at vgangadhar1@rediffmail.com

  also see : Noted jurist, constitutional expert Nani A Palkhivala is no more