A good lawyer is an asset for the judiciary, says advocate S S Naganand

Senior Advocate SS Naganand during an interview with DH on his new book 'Story of the Clan'

Hailing from the small hamlet of Sondekoppa near Nelamangala, senior advocate S S Naganand is an eminent lawyer and recipient of the ‘Living Legend of the Law’ award from the Bar Association of India.

Chronicling his professional life and weaving it with the history and evolution of Bengaluru, Naganand’s recent book ‘Story of the Clan’ gives an insight into the legal practice in the city.

In an interview with Ambarish B of DH, Naganand shares some insights into the book.

You started as a chartered accountant and switched over to law to continue with what your grandfather S D Ganesha Rao and father S G Sundaraswamy had started. How was the transition from CA to law?

I am fortunate to belong to a family which had a historical perspective in law. The office started by my grandfather in 1925 was continued after him by my father and by the time I qualified, my elder brother had joined the chambers as a lawyer.

But there was a fairly large volume of corporate law and taxation which the office was handling. My father felt that I should become a lawyer so that we will develop that branch of practice of law. Many tax matters which my father used to handle as a senior advocate, he used to assign me.

You have talked about the role of an advocate as an officer of the court in the book besides highlighting that he also has a dual responsibility. Could you elaborate on this and what is expected of clients while approaching an advocate?

When a client comes to a lawyer it is the lawyer’s duty to assist the client, just like a doctor diagnoses a patient. If a person comes to me with a problem, my duty is to study the case, then apply the four corners of law and explain to him or her about the problem and the possible solution.

A lawyer is also an officer of the court in the sense that he has a duty towards the court to be fair, to be clear, to not suppress facts, to speak candidly. There is a line we have to draw in our profession as to what point we will act as counsel for the client and do anything legally and lawfully necessary. At the same, we should not cross the ‘Lakshman Rekha’.

After an illustrious career as an eminent advocate, your father kept declining the offers of judgeship. What was the reason to decline those offers? And, what was the reason you declined such an offer in 2000?

We had hundreds of cases in every jurisdiction. There is no field of law that is not being handled in the office. My father felt that there was such a vast practice and no second line for him who could take over the practice and run it. If he accepts judgeship then the chambers will have to fold up. The second reason was that the salary of a judge at that time was Rs 2,500 per month. The family had obligations to maintain a family temple, there were around 25-30 people working in the office. More or less for the same reasons, I also declined when they offered it to me in 2000. In my opinion, more than anything, a good lawyer is an asset to the judiciary. Today, I cannot name a good cross-examining counsel in Bengaluru. So, your service as a lawyer to the judiciary is as important as the service of a judge.

There is an elaborate account of old Bangalore in the book. One of the special mentions is about the use of bicycles those days. Now, there have been efforts to bring back cycle tracks. Do you think cyclists can still use roads in Bengaluru?

I believe it is possible. But the thing is, we are a nation of lawbreakers! There is not a single educated person I know who honestly believes that he should follow the law even if it gives him some trouble. What kind of society we have become where others’ rights are not respected.

They made cycle tracks and all bikes go on cycle tracks. What to do with them? How many of them will you prosecute? If the cycle track is strictly implemented, at least some people will think of using them.

Check out latest DH videos here