Why Aruna should be on some body's mercy.

Rejection of Aruna's euthanasia plea by SC may be totally correct from legal point of view as addressed in our constitution and defined by our judicial system. Court might be right in its decision from legal point of view, but here human aspect is totally ignored. Law may be blind, but it should not be so blind also. Court may be expert in legal matters but what about the things which comes under medical science. Decision on euthanasia should be taken by medical board. Like court there can be three to four level to prevent misjudgment. If docs can't take right decision so judge also. No one other than god can give a good life to Aruna, which medical science know very well. She can never come to normal life, then why she should be made to suffer only because our constitution does not or not proficient to address such type of problem. Now it is high time to rethink on restructuring of our constitution so that needy people can get justice. People should not live at the mercy of legal system or any body who is not properly qualified to deal with the thing.

Disoriented or poor PM.

What's the problem with our PM. Why he is getting disoriented. Sometimes he feels shame for corruption and someties he says that prices are rising due to increase in income of common people. Being economist how he is reacting like this. I can understand his position. He is unable to bear pressure.He is right to say that income of people has increased, but not of common people, it is of Raja's, Kalmadi's, political leaders and sarkari babus. Since their income has increased in manifold, that's why prices are rising. With money of 2G scam only there can be interest free budget, huge subsidy for farmers, petrol and on many essential things. There will not be fight between state and centre for share of booty(taxes). PM wants state to abolish/reduce local taxes, why centre can not do same in the best interest of public. He feels shame due to corruption. Actually he is feeling shame that even small babus are also able to do corruption and going scot free. In his view leaders and bureaucrat are not involved in corruption, they are shaping the nation. Now small babus must be cautious, because for image improvement they will be made bakra. Raja is arrested but Kalmadi is still enjoying his life outside jail. Why, because his is from congress. So, again Raja is made bakra. Criminal like Sohrabuddin's killer in jail but 1984 killer is enjoying monarchy. May God bless our PM with some wisdom.

2010: Year of Corruption

Year 2010 have passed but many things have gone unnoticed. Year 2010 will be remembered for disclosures of many corruptions, Year 2010 will be remembered as year of corruption for thousands of years. But here I have fearness that the way Sonia and party is involved in appeasement to safeguard throne, Year 2011 may not become history as year of corruption.Corruption in India has not only become multi billion dollar industry but become somewhat legal with Thomas as CVC, even the world is aslo recognising India as legally corrupted country. Whatever like Aadarsh housing society, CWG, 2G, etc we know is only the tip of the iceberg. You go in any office for any work without greasing the hands of from peon to head of department or even local leaders to ministers your work will not be done. You will be forced to pay. If you try to disclose this matter your job will be struck in legal proceeding, ultimately you will be sufferer. Here my suggestion is that government should legalize by making law and fix the bribe amount and time of job, at least people will have some relief.

If you go by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) report which is not accepted by Kapil Sibal like god of honesty like leader has said that the Indian exchequer has lost anywhere between $22 billion and $45 billion in the 2G Scam - an amount which could have fed every destitute Indian for the for the next 10 years or funded some of the employment programs for at least five years and could have reduced every citizen's tax rate by 15% for a year or so. And while we are concentrating on just a handful of incidents, there could be tens of thousands of incidents of bribery that go unnoticed - be it while giving an industrial licence or even while issuing a SME loan! You can not imagine the magnitude. How less it is na for our country? If we go by what Management Guru C.K.Prahalad has to say, then the cost of corruption to the country might well exceed Rs. 250,000 crore.

Corruption have not only damaged the brand image of India, but also stands to hamper the country's growth story. Ogranisation like FICCI have started calling for "summary punishment in a fast-track process for anybody found indulging in corrupt practices," but it is a distant dream. The chamber "to preserve India's robust image and keep the growth story intact" has called "for transparency, accountability and probity in our system of governance. We urgently need rules and regulations that do not allow rent-seeking." The question however is: 'Who will take the task of weeding out the rotten apples from the good ones?' CVC Thomas or our PM who is involved in the act of wooing leaders like M Karunanidhi or Sharad Pawar or Mamta to safeguard his chair.

While these gory facts of continuous corruption are for everyone to see, a possible solution to this massive problem seems to elude us all. If you have any suggestion on how this rampant corruption in the country can be arrested, do share with us. Also tell us if you have encountered with any corrupt official while doing business.

Why Karkare called Digvijay.

Today Diggi Raja cleared doubt by producing evidence of Karkare call to him. But I am unable to understand that why Karkare called Digvijay Singh. What relation he had with Diggi Raja. In what capacity Karkare called Digvijay Singh. Hemant Karkare was Maharashtra ATS chief. As a bureaucrat he was supposed to report his boss, DGP of Maharashtra or if he was highly ambitious than he would have reported directly to Maha home minister or Maha Chief minister. If he was fearing his life then he would have shown his concern to either Maha home minister or Maha Chief minister or he would have contacted Home ministry through proper channel. Sometimes it creates doubts that why Karkare called Digvijay Singh. This also indicates nexus between politician and bureaucrat. Many high level bureaucrat are involved in seeking blessings of political leader. Was Karkare also involved in this game of appeasing his political boss to get appreciation or promotions. Was this affecting or influencing the cases he was investigating. If this is true then it is shocking. Every body know how Karkare was dealing with hindu terrorists. I read in news paper that Karkare threatened Purohit for dire consequences and spoiling life of his daughter. The way ATS dealt Malegaon blast or other blasts done by hindu terrorists, he never dealt same way with Mumbai blast terrorists. Why such type of nefarious appeasement. With this way government is trying to create rift between communities so that they can rule even without proper majority support of people. But wrong things never lasts long. I hope these types of things will never create rift among common people for longer time. Definitely people will understand all these misdeeds and respond in a way, the Bihar responded.

Are Gurjars nexalite or terrorist?

Since eight days Delhi Mumbai rail route has been jammed by Gurjars. Till now neither Gurjar leaders are thinking about the inconvenience caused by their unjustified (court has already rejected their demand)to common people nor government is doing any thing to remove this blockade. This is nothing less than terrorism. Constitutionally their demand are wrong that's why court has ruled out, still they are forcing government and troubling common people. They should be booked for contempt of court. They have damaged railway track, who has given them authority to do this. These acts are done by either terrorists or nexalites. Gurjars must be dealt severely. But I believe in giving first chance to negotiation. Bainsla is most selfish and stubborn leader. Actually he is not a leader. He has started loosing ground so to make his ground he has involved in terrorist act. If he were a great leader then he would not have made his wife another Rabri Devi.
In democracy how few handful of people are allowed to take whole nation for a ride. I also believe in right to strike for lawful and justified demands. But right to strike does not mean troubling other especially innocent and common people. Since there is no organisation of common people, otherwise they would have been thrown from railway tract for taking whole nation for a ride. Bainsla must be punished severely. He is trying to fulfill his selfish desires for that he does not mind to trouble lakhs of common people. If he has got problems with government then he should stop government from work, but he is stopping railways. Presently our country is facing with the problems of terrorism. Think about this, there is terrorist attack and we are unable to mobilise our forces due to strike by Gurjars or terrorist may take advantage of this situation and may go with their nefarious design smoothly. In any case communication should be stopped, because it slows down whole nation and sometimes it may cause grave danger to security of our nation. There must be provision in our constitution to declare such type of leader as gaddar should be punished severely and immediately. They are playing with national security. I request Gurjars to reject those psycho leaders and go Bihar way. If they think that their demand is genuine then either prove in court or to country and get it fulfilled. I hope god will give them little wisdom.

The New Nababs or vultures.

The new nawabs
By Priya Sahgal and Kaveree Bamzai | India Today – Wed, Dec 15 12:32 PM IST

When Ratan Tata moved the Supreme Court, claiming his right to privacy had been violated, he called Harish Salve. The choice was not surprising. The former solicitor general has been topping the legal charts ever since he scripted a surprising win for Mukesh Ambani against his brother Anil. That dispute set the gold standard for legal fees. On Mukesh's side were Salve, Rohinton Nariman and Abhishek Manu Singhvi. The younger brother had an equally formidable line-up led by Ram Jethmalani and Mukul Rohatgi.

The lawyers' fees alone, at a conservative estimate, cost the Ambani brothers at least Rs 15 crore each in their famous war over natural gas. -
India Today

The dispute dated back three-and-a-half years to when Anil filed a case against his brother for reneging on an agreement to supply 28 million cubic metres of gas per day from its Krishna-Godavari basin fields at a rate of $2.34 for 17 years. The average legal fee was Rs 25 lakh for a full day's appearance, not to mention the overnight stays at Mumbai's five-star suites, business class travel, and on occasion, use of the private jet. Little wonder though that Salve agreed to take on Tata's case pro bono. He could afford philanthropy with one of India's wealthiest tycoons.

Welcome to the world of new nawabs. The lawyers' fees alone, at a conservative estimate, must have cost the Ambanis at least Rs 15 crore each. Both the brothers had booked their legal teams in the same hotel, first the Oberoi and, after the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, the Trident. "Well, if you're going to write all this, then you can also add that Mukesh bought me a pair of pyjamas as well," laughs Salve, recalling how he was called to Mumbai suddenly from Orissa where he had gone for a day's hearing. "I told Mukesh I had packed nothing. He insisted on buying me the essentials."

It's not the essentials as much as the frills that raise eyebrows. The veteran Jethmalani is surprisingly the most modest in his fees since he does not charge rates according to the strength of the client's purse. But as the crises have multiplied, lawyers' fees have exploded.

**************************************************
Harish Salve, 54- Landmark case: Won the gas dispute for Mukesh Ambani, though what he enjoys most is being amicus curiae in the Forest Case of T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union of India and Others.- Legal Style: Is a master strategist. Gives a balanced argument rather than an aggressive, one-sided view.- Fee per appearance: Rs 2.5 lakh to Rs 3 lakh. For a full day, it's Rs 25 lakh.- The indulgence: Drives a Bentley.
**************************************************
Ram Jethmalani, 87- Landmark case: Got the Jain Hawala case against L. K. Advani squashed; is currently defending former Gujarat home minister Amit Shah.- Legal Style: Argues forcefully. Has an acerbic wit.- Fee per appearance: Rs 5 lakh.- The indulgence: Has an indoor badminton court built in his MP bungalow that is the envy of Lutyens' Delhi.
**************************************************
Mukul Rohatgi, 55- Landmark case: Represented Anil Ambani in the gas dispute.- Legal Style: Is a slogger. Argues aggressively and goes straight to the point.- Fee per appearance: Rs 2.5 lakh to Rs 3 lakh and Rs 25 lakh for a full day.- The indulgence: Drives a black Bentley, has Souza on his walls, a holiday home in Goa.
**************************************************
Majid Memon, 55- Landmark case: He represented Yakub Memon but could not set him free.- Legal Style: He argues in the court with his right leg on a chair.- Fee per day: Rs 10 lakh. Charges Rs 2 lakh for a bail application.- The indulgence: Likes to travel, makes frequent trips to exotic locations.
**************************************************
Satish Maneshinde, 50- Landmark case: He secured bail for Sanjay Dutt in the Bombay blast case and for Salman Khan who allegedly killed one person while driving drunk.- Legal Style: Argues calmly in court and looks straight into the judge's eyes.- Fee per day: Rs 10 lakh.- The indulgence: His Mercedes and a passion for Page 3 parties.
**************************************************
Aryama Sundaram, 53- Landmark case: Represented the West Bengal Government against Haldia Petrochemicals and UBS Securities against sebi.- Legal Style: Persuasive speaker, argues his case in a measured tone.- Fee per appearance: Rs 3.5 lakh
**************************************************
Arvind Datar, 53- Landmark case: Was one of the lawyers in the Vodafone vs Income Tax case.- Legal Style: Says one lesson he learnt is to never antagonise a judge. It's not only your bread and butter but your client's life.- Fee per appearance: Rs 50,000 to Rs 5 lakh.- The indulgence: His first car was a Toyota Corona in 1990. Now he drives an Audi. Has penned a three-volume commentary on Constitutional law.
**************************************************
Abhishek Manu Singhvi, 51- Landmark case: Won the right to fly the tricolour for Navin Jindal.- Legal Style: From logical in court to rhetorical flourish in Parliament to snappy sound bites for the media on tv.- Fee per appearance: Rs 2.5 lakh to Rs 3 lakh. For a full day, it's Rs 25 lakh.- The indulgence: A limited-edition Visconti pen with a custom-made nib and watches from every luxury brand.
**************************************************

The 50 court hearings in the Haldia Petrochemicals vs the West Bengal Government cost the former a total of Rs 25 crore in lawyer fees and the 20 hearings in the Bombay Mill Case, which dragged on for three years, cost the mill owners almost Rs 10 crore. Large corporate firms, which engage star counsels on behalf of the client, also need to know their quirks.

For instance, Salve will only accept the first brief. He will never be the second counsel in a case. Some lawyers prefer to be paid partly in cash but the best are content with cheques. Some expect the client not to blink while picking up a dinner tab of Rs 1.75 lakh at a Chennai five star. A lawyer is known to carry his home linen and curtains with him while travelling on work. A firm may even have to pick up a hot Vertu phone of the moment or a Jaeger-LeCoutre watch of the hour to keep a lawyer in good humour.

Some are even paid to not appear at all for the other side - Aryama Sundaram was retained by Anil Ambani in the gas feud but he did not fight the case. Or take Raytheon when it was fighting the Jindals. Raytheon had paid seven top lawyers a retainer fee of Rs 2.5 lakh each just to ensure that the Jindals would not be able to make a proper case on a taxation issue.

They miscalculated when a star lawyer fought the case at the last minute. "I don't take negative retainers," shrugs Rohatgi, former additional solicitor general. "A lawyer's job is to appear for any client that comes to him. It's not for the lawyers to judge if a client is good or bad but the court." Indeed. He is, after all, the lawyer who argued so famously in court that B. Ramalinga Raju did not fudge any account in the Satyam Case. All he did was "window dressing".

Some high profile cases have continued for years, providing a steady source of income, from the Scindia succession battle which dates to 1989, to the JetLite Sahara battle now in taxation arbitration to the BCCI which is currently in litigation with Lalit Modi, Rajasthan Royals and Kings XI Punjab.

Think of the large law firms as the big Hollywood studios and the senior counsel as the superstar. There are a few familiar faces to be found in most of the big ticket cases, whether it is the Ambani gas case, Vodafone taxation or Bombay Mills case.

Explains Salve, "There is a reason why we have more than one senior advocate on a case. When you're arguing, he's reading the court. He picks up a point or a vibe that you may have missed." Says Raian Karanjawala whose firm has prepared the briefs for cases ranging from the Tata's recent right to privacy case to Karisma Kapoor's divorce, "The four jewels in the crown today are Salve, Rohatgi, Rohinton Nariman and Singhvi.

They have replaced the old guard of Fali Nariman, Soli Sorabjee, Ashok Desai and K.K. Venugopal." He adds, "The one person who defies the generational gap is Jethmalani who was India's leading criminal lawyer in the 1960s and is so today."


The demand for superstar lawyers has far outstripped the supply. So a one-man show by, say, Rohatgi can run up billings of Rs 40 crore, the same as a mid-sized corporate law firm like Titus and Co that employs 28 juniors. The big law firms such as AZB or Amarchand & Mangaldas or Luthra & Luthra have to do all the groundwork for the counsel, from humouring the clerk to ensure the A-lister turns up on the hearing day to sourcing appropriate foreign judgments in emerging areas such as environmental and patent laws. "We are partners in this. There are so few lawyers and so many matters," points out Diljeet Titus.

As the trust between individuals has broken down, governments have questioned corporates and corporates are questioning each other, and an array of new issues has come up. And as the government has weakened, the courts have become stronger. The lawyer, says Sundaram, with the flourish that has seen him pick up many Dhurandhares and Senakas at pricey art auctions, has emerged as the modern day purohit.

Each purohit is head priest of a particular style. Says Karanjawala, "Harish is the closest example in today's bar to Fali Nariman; Rohinton has the best law library in his brain; Mukul is easily India's busiest lawyer while Manu Singhvi is the greatest multi-tasker." Salve has managed a fine balancing act where he has represented Mulayam Singh Yadav and Mayawati, Parkash Singh Badal and Amarinder Singh, Lalit Modi and Subhash Chandra and even the Ambani brothers, of course in different cases. Singhvi is Sonia Gandhi's go-to-guy on most legal issues, whether it is citizenship or filing a case against a publication.

Jethmalani is the man to call for anyone in trouble. In judicial circles he is known as the first resort for the last resort. Even Jethmalani's junior Satish Maneshinde, who came to Mumbai in 1993 as a penniless law graduate from Karnataka, shot to fame (and wealth) after he got bail for Sanjay Dutt in 1996. Now he owns a plush office in Worli and has become a one-stop shop for celebrities in trouble, from getting bail for Rakhi Sawant when a youth committed suicide after she called him namard (impotent) to representing Salman Khan in a drunken driving case.

With wealth come perks. In 1992, Karanjawala and Desai were chatting in the Supreme Court car park when former law minister Ashoke Sen zipped by in his Fiat. "What Ashoke, small car?" asked Desai to which Sen replied, "In Bangla we have a saying: known Brahmins need not wear the sacred thread." Now the car park is filled with Bentleys, Mercedes and at the very least, an upmarket Toyota. The symbols of success include a holiday home in Goa, Souzas on the office walls, shopping expeditions to Bond Street (where they can expect to bump into other lawyers). As Salve says, "Only Brioni and Canali make boring suits for lawyers, the blacks and dark greys." Also the pens, the watches, and in Arun Jaitley and Rohatgi's case, the jamewars. Then there is the public profile, amplified by talking head status on tv channels every other night.

Most of the prized lawyers such as Salve, Jethmalani, Sundaram and Rohatgi do some pro bono work as well, if the cause is right. But in all this, the pil bar has come crashing down, upheld only by men such as Rajeev Dhavan and Prashant Bhushan. "I subsidise my pil work by taking on commercial cases, which I needed when I had to send my daughters to study in the US," says Dhavan. In many cases, it's the take-off point for a job in the government like Indira Jaising's work with Mumbai's homeless pavement dwellers which has got her the additional solicitor general's job. As Dhavan notes, the dense gravity of private marketing lawyering has created black holes in activist lawyering.

Says an angry Sorabjee, "To charge Rs 30 to 40 lakh per day is nothing short of extortion. It is no excuse to say that the client can afford it. Lawyers are professionals, not tradesmen in a market place. I get mad if a client says fees are no question. You think you can buy me? You can charge heavy fees but not extortionist fees." The octogenarian constitutional expert charges Rs 2 lakh per appearance as opposed to the going rate of Rs 2.5 lakh to Rs 5 lakh charged by younger lawyers. Sometimes, if the court breaks for lunch at 1 p.m. and the matter has come up for hearing at 12.45, the lawyer even bills the client for two separate appearances.

In Mumbai, for instance, veteran criminal lawyer Majid Memon charges Rs 2 lakh simply for securing bail in a sessions court. There are those who recall him coming to the tada court in 1996 on an old scooter. He now drives a Mercedes. In Chennai, Arvind Datar charges anything between Rs 50,000 and Rs 5 lakh per appearance.

As for the chartered flights, they all claim that this is a necessity rather than a privilege. "The advocates come to us with that offer (of chartered flights). It's not flaunting of power but the idea is to return the same day from a badly connected destination, says Singhvi, putting on his most earnest expression. Rohatgi complains of being claustrophobic on small planes. "During peak hours, chartered flights don't get preference over commercial," he adds with the jaded fatigue of a seasonal traveller.

There is a reason for this exorbitant fee structure. In recent years, the stakes in corporate litigation have hit the roof, as in the Rs 12,000-crore Vodafone vs the Income Tax department case. Moreover, the legal fraternity argues that when clients don't mind paying investment bankers fees worth millions of dollars, then why are only lawyers coming up for censure? The fate of several crucial corporate battles hangs on the slender thread of which matter is listed before which court and which lawyer would work there. "Why should we earn less than the CEO of a big corporation?" asks Sundaram. Except that this CEO often goes on to become a minister in the government-law as a profession offers immense mobility-and deal with the same organisations he once represented.

Most corporate bosses also have their legal favourites. For instance, Nusli Wadia's favourite lawyer is Fali Nariman who hates "skullduggery"; ITC's was Desai but he has since been replaced by Salve; the late Madhav Rao Scindia's family favours Singhvi. Of course, the Ambani brothers too have their chosen legal soldiers: while Anil's first choice is usually Rohatgi, his brother opts for Salve. As does Ratan Tata. The Birlas go with Sen. Many have created mini-dynasties, whether it is Singhvi, Salve or Rohinton Nariman.

"Sometimes, it's the thrill of the forensic complexity that counts, not winning or losing," says Singhvi. He recalls how during the Ambani gas case, a friend called and asked him, "The stocks are fluctuating wildly. You're the oracle: which way will it go?" Singhvi laughed and said he had no idea. Salve agrees. "Mukesh called me that morning and said we have done our best. The rest is up to God," he recalls.
However, Rohatgi who appeared for Anil says, "I had a premonition we would lose. But Anil thought otherwise." Salve adds, "After the judgment, Mukesh was too choked to speak. Nita said they had one more request. I should handle the media. She said, Harish bhai bahut negativity ho gaya. There should be no loose comments." Clearly a lawyer's brief is not just limited to courtrooms.

Ironically, it was during the Battle of the Brothers last year that Salve told the Supreme Court how Mukesh Ambani had told him about the millions of dollars demanded by laptop consultants just to create holding companies, resulting companies and other such complexities. Quick to retort, Rohatgi had quipped, "Is this how Salve justifies his high fees?" Grinning, a sheepish Salve said, "I plead guilty on my behalf and on behalf of my colleagues." But it was Justice R.V. Raveendran who had the last word, "The only difference between Salve and the consultants is the laptop." And perhaps the Bentley, the BMW and the Mercedes.

Passionate About India: To change this ‘demonocracy’ to a democracy, we mu...

Passionate About India: To change this ‘demonocracy’ to a democracy, we mu...: "Last week I was very fortunate to be a part of this wonderful, moving and inspirational seminar on the ‘Power of One’ (coverage of the same ..."