Before Memory Fades: An Autobiography

by Fali S. Nariman

A revelatory, comprehensive and perceptive autobiography – candid, compelling and authoritative Starting with his formative years, when he had the good fortune to interact with many eminent judges and advocates, Fali S. Nariman moves on to deal with a wide variety of important subjects, such as: q The sanctity of the Indian Constitution and attempts to tamper with it. q Crucial cases that have made a decisive impact on the nation, especially on the interpretation of the law. q The relationship between the political class and the judiciary. q The cancer of corruption and how to combat this menace. The author outlines measures to restore the now-low credibility of the legal profession. He also delineates his role in several high-profile cases. In recognition of his track record, the Government of India nominated him to the Rajya Sabha. He describes the highlights of his tenure there. Both members of the legal profession and the lay reader will find the contents informative and useful.

Genres: Nonfiction, Law, Biography, Autobiography, India, History, Politics

372 pages, Hardcover

First published June 1, 2010

About the author

Fali Sam Nariman is a distinguished Indian Constitutional jurist and senior advocate to the Supreme Court of India since 1971 and has remained the President of the Bar Association of India since 1991.Nariman is an internationally recognised authority on international arbitration. He is one of India's most distinguished constitutional lawyers and he has argued several leading cases.He remained Additional Solicitor General of India May 1972- June 1975.

He has been awarded the Padma Bhushan (1991), Padma Vibhushan (2007)and Gruber Prize for Justice (2002) and has remained nominated member of the Rajya Sabha, the Upper House of the Parliament of India for a term (1999–2005).Also honoured by NDTV among the 25 living Indian legends on December 14, 2013.

Born in 1929 in Rangoon to Sam Bariyamji Nariman and Banoo Nariman, Fali did his schooling from Bishop Cotton School, Shimla. Thereafter he studied B.A. (Hon.), in Economics and History from St. Xavier's College, Bombay (now Mumbai), followed by a Law degree (LL.B.) from the Government Law College, Mumbai in, 1950, after standing first in the Advocate's Examination and been awarded the Kinlock Forbes Gold Medal and Prize for Roman Law & Jurisprudence.His father initially wanted him to write the Indian Civil Service Examination. Since he could not afford it at that time, he chose law as his last option.

Nariman started his law practice at the Bombay High Court. After practicing for 22 years, he was appointed a Senior Advocate in the Supreme Court of India in 1971, a position he retains to date. He said that "My senior's senior, Jamsetjee Kanga was my mentor. He was like a father figure to me. He died at 93 and he is the one who, at the age of 92, told me that he was still learning. He had a tremendous memory and so does my son Rohinton. He was an Ordained Priest and so is Rohinton."[8]

Nariman was instrumental to the development of the Indian Constitution's Law. Nariman was Additional Solicitor General of India from May 1972 to 25 June 1975, resigning from that post upon the Declaration of Emergency on 26 June 1975.

Nariman argued in favour of Dow chemicals (the owned by Union carbide) in the infamous Bhopal gas disaster case, which he admitted as a mistake in recent times.He was instrumental in getting a deal between victims and the company outside court, which offered an amount of $470 million to the victims. He also argued in the famous case of the Supreme Court AoR Association, in which the Supreme Court took over the appointment of judges in the Higher Judiciary. He also appeared in many important cases like Golak Nath, S.P. Gupta, T.M.A. Pai Foundation, etc.

Nariman is the recipient of the Padma Vibhushan (in 2007) and Padma Bhushan (in 1991), respectively the second and third highest honors granted to civilians by the President of India. Both awards were for Nariman's contributions to jurisprudence and public affairs. Nariman was awarded the Gruber Prize for Justice in 2002.He dedicated his awards to his alma mater Bishop Cotton School in Shimla.

His books serves as an outstanding scholarly treatise on the Constitutional Law, its interpretation and application. His concern as a citizen of India laces all his writings and remains an inspiration for every student of Indian Law.

Reviews

[Vishy · Rating 4 out of 5]

I saw in the news recently that Fali Nariman has passed away. I felt sad when I heard the news. Fali Nariman was one of the great lawyers from India. He spent a significant part of his career working as a lawyer at the Supreme Court. He is one of the last of the greats – someone who was born before Indian independence, who started his law career at around the same time India became a republic, who has seen in close quarters most of the big happenings in the country from a legal, constitutional perspective and who has been part of those happenings. He is also from the time when lawyers were well read and very articulate – Nariman quotes from Shakespeare and Chesterton and Matthew Arnold and James Barrie and Omar Khayyam and other classic writers in his book.

This book, his autobiography, came out in 2010. I got it at that time. But for some reason I couldn't read it till now. I didn't know why I had to wait for the man to die before reading his book. I feel ashamed.

In his book, Nariman describes his childhood in Burma and how his family moved back to India when the Japanese invaded Burma. He also describes his schooling in Shimla and his favourite teachers there, briefly touches on his college life in Bombay, and later tells us how he became a lawyer. Then we get to know more about his work, about the fascinating people he met, and the interesting experiences he had.

The book starts in chronological fashion, but after sometime it becomes topical, and each chapter feels independent and is about a particular topic. One is about the Emergency, another is about his favourite judges, some are on legal topics like how water sharing disputes among states are handled in India, how judges to the Supreme Court are appointed. There is one big chapter dedicated to his role as a lawyer in the case related to the Bhopal gas tragedy. The autobiographical, anecdotal parts of the book are easy to read. The chapters in which Nariman talks about the law are harder. The level of difficulty is between an article meant for the general audience and a legal brief. A lawyer will find those chapters easy to understand, but a general reader will find them challenging. But it is possible to get through this by careful reading, looking at those sections of the Constitution and reading articles on the relevant judgements, most of which are probably available online. Those chapters cannot be read like a regular book, but need more closer reading like a textbook.

My favourite parts of the book were about his childhood and other personal chapters at the beginning of the book, and the parts of the book about his favourite lawyers and his favourite judges and the chapter in which he talks about the Emergency and Constitutional amendments. Nariman asks an important question in that part – how much Constitutional amendment is allowed and is it possible for a government to amend away the whole Constitution including suspending things like fundamental rights? Is there something called the basic structure of the Constitution which cannot be touched or is everything open to amendment and change? It is an important question, it is a fascinating question, and Nariman spends considerable amount of time on it.

My least favourite part of the book was the one on the Bhopal gas tragedy. In the case related to this, Nariman represented Union Carbide, the company which was responsible for the tragedy, in the court. I expected that he'd explain what happened in that case from his perspective, why he took it up and how he defended it, and whether he had any moral compunctions in doing that, as he was working against the victims here. But, unfortunately, Nariman resorts to legalese here, and reproduces a long article which he wrote on this topic, in which everything is vague and obtuse and hard to understand. If we show enough patience and are able to wade through the legalese, we can get to what he is saying, but whatever he is saying doesn't answer any questions. It is frustrating to read that chapter because it is such a stark contrast to the rest of the book, which is crystal clear. Representing Union Carbide in that case was a black spot in Nariman's career. But it was a distinguished career in which he did many good things and fought the good fight many times, and so what is the fun in a long distinguished career if there isn't a big bad blackspot somewhere? This was his. My only disappointment was that he didn't own up to it.

I loved reading Nariman's book. Parts of it were easy to read and flowed smoothly, while other parts were challenging to read. I'm glad I read it, though it took me many years to get to it.

Fali Nariman inspired generations of lawyers and judges. He was active in his work till the end. He even published a big book on the Indian Constitution last year, when he was 94. His passing is a big loss to the legal fraternity and to his well-wishers everywhere. But Nariman lived a long life, a good life, a rich life, in which he did many amazing beautiful things. It is time to celebrate that. Nariman ends his book with these lines –

"I belong to a minority community, a microscopic, wholly insignificant minority, which spurned the offer made (at the time of the drafting of our Constitution) – to Anglo-Indians and Parsis alike – to have, for at least a decade, one special representative in Parliament. We rejected the offer. In the Constituent Assembly, Sir Homi Mody said that we Parsis would rather join the mainstream of a free India. We did, and we have no regrets. We have made good, just as my mother's ancestors (the Burjorjees of Calicut) – two centuries ago – made good in Burma.

I have never felt that I lived in this country at the sufferance of the majority. I have been brought up to think and feel that the minorities, together with the majority community, are integral parts of India.

I have lived and flourished in a secular India. In the fullness of time if God wills, I would also like to die in a secular India."

It touched me somewhere deep in my heart when I read that.

Sharing some of my favourite parts from the book.

Quote 1

"...the writ of habeas corpus which was granted by each one of the nine high courts in the country was denied by the highest court. The judgments of the high courts of India which took the contrary, more liberal view, were declared erroneous, and set aside by the apex court. By denying habeas corpus, the Supreme Court had set back the clock of liberty, proclaiming its helplessness against arbitrary arrests and malafide detentions. It was judicial pusillanimity at its worst!

The lone dissent was that of the seniormost judge in the Supreme Court (next only to Chief Justice Ray), Justice H. R. Khanna, who refused to rationalize tyranny. He would not bow down to insolent might. 'Life and liberty are not conferred by any Constitution' he said, 'they inhere in men and women as human beings.' But Khanna was in a minority - a brave minority of one. Historians of the Supreme Court will doubtless record that it was only in the post-Emergency period (not during the Internal Emergency of June 1975 March 1977) that the highest court gave vent to expressions of grave concern about violations of human rights! A sobering thought for human rights activists - and for judges and lawyers.

In a book titled 'Six Men', Alistair Cooke, eminent broadcaster and says of the late Duke of Windsor (for a few months King Edward VIII before he finally abdicated), 'He was always at his best when the going was good.' It was when the going was rough (while the Emergency of June 1975 lasted) that a few of our judges (alas, too few!) were at their best. One of them (and the most notable of them) was H. R. Khanna, with his lone dissent in the infamous Emergency Case (ADM Jabalpur). He showed what a brave judge could do. "The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy." Khanna knew, when he signed his dissenting judgment, that he was signing away his future chief justiceship – which was only a few months hence. Khanna was No. 2 on the court (seniority-wise), and (other things being equal) would have become the chief justice of India on the retirement of Chief Justice Ray on 28 January 1977. Inexorably, when the time came, 'other things' were not considered equal (by the government of the day). Khanna was 'superseded. Justice M. H. Beg (No. 3) was appointed the chief justrice of India. Khanna resigned – but in a blaze of glory! It is for good reason that Khanna's portrait (though not a very good likeness of him) hangs in the court where he sat – Court No. 2.

Jean Monet, father of the European Union, once said that the world is divided into two types of people – 'those who want to be somebody and those who want to do something.' Khanna is remembered, and will always be remembered, long after many chief justices of India are forgotten, because he did something for which he deserved to be remembered.

One of the lessons of the Internal Emergency (of June 1975) was not to rely on constitutional functionaries. These functionaries failed us – ministers of government, members of Parliament, judges of the Supreme Court, even the president of India."

********

Quote 2

"But a written constitution safeguarding the rights of citizens does not add up to very much – they are just words. When the historian, Edward Gibbon, completed the first volume of his classic, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, he was permitted to present it to the Duke of Gloucester, brother of King George III. He was well received. When, a few years later, he presented the second volume of almost equal length, the prince received the author with considerable affability, saying to him, as he laid the heavy volume on the table, 'Another damned, thick, square book! Always scribble, scribble, scribble! Eh! Mr Gibbon?' Not only academicians and politicians but a good many intellectuals around the world have harboured similar sentiments about the proliferation of documentation in the area of human rights – declarations, conventions, resolutions, treaties... Words, words, words ... The United Nations (UN) is long on instruments relating to human rights (they say), but its member states are significantly short on performance. Universalization of human rights may well have been achieved, but only on paper. Effective implementation is lacking. There is much truth in this criticism. Sovereign nation states often impede the quest for universalization. What governments profess (around the world) and what they practise (within the state) hardly ever coincides. The most important single factor in the implementation of human rights is not documentation, but the spirit of the people."

*******

Quote 3

I was privileged to appear before Justice M. Hidayatullah when he presided on the bench of the Supreme Court as chief justice of India from February 1968 to December 1970. He was erudite, but carried his learning lightly. Always charming and courteous to the Bar, he had a flair for the appropriate turn of phrase (the French call it, le mot juste). But it was not only in his judgments that he was eloquent. His brief but precise introduction to the sixteenth edition of Mulla's classic work on Mohammedan Law is a piece of writing unmatched in India's legal annals.

His extrajudicial utterances were not without humour. His description of the three great organs of state: the executive, the legislative and the judiciary – will be long remembered for the barbed innuendos. About the proliferation of bureaucrats in the government, he adapted an old nursery rhyme to produce what he described as 'a poem of truth' :

"One civil servant with nothing much to do
Wrote a Memorandum and there were two,
Two civil servants over cups of tea
Formed a working party, and there were three
Three civil servants drafting forms galore,
One whispered 'Planning' and then there were four
Four civil servants found they could not thrive
Without coordination, and then there were five."

And so it went on to the last lines which were :

"Nine civil servants very busy men,
Just ask them what they find to do.
You'll find they have grown to ten."

About Parliament, his observation was that only a handful of people really took seriously to the task of law making. Others were silent spectators, which (he said) was not a bad thing, because a legislature which said nothing and did much was to be preferred to one where members talked too much and did nothing! And as for the judiciary he believed that in writing judgments, judges should not pontificate or indulge in grandiloquence. Quoting Dr Johnson he pointedly compared 'certain writings' to a meal which is 'ill-killed, ill-dressed, ill-cooked and ill-served', an apt description of judicial opinions that are badly written! Haddi, as he was popularly known, loved quoting Samuel Johnson. Even his scintillating autobiography is titled 'My Own Boswell'. It does one good to remember a judge as eloquent and as distinguished as Hidayatullah.

His lasting memorial for posterity is the judgments he has left behind. After 59 years at the Bar, I am convinced that the finest epitaph for a judge is, 'He never wrote bad judgments - only elegant ones, eminently readable by one and all!' A fitting epitaph for dear Haddi.

*******

Quote 4

"At this ripe old age (besides the family and staff) what sustains me are two things. First (and frankly), the possibility and the thrill (even now) of winning a difficult case ('The race is over, but the work is never done while the power to work remains!'). And second, the affection of all my colleagues at the Bar (young and old) whose company I greatly value and enjoy, so much so that a couple of years after being allotted (by the chief justice of India) a small chamber in the building on the road opposite the Supreme Court (after I kept it for a few months), I surrendered it because I did not find it of use. I did not like sitting alone in my chamber waiting for my (fewer and fewer) cases to come up in court. At 80 plus, it is better to sit in court, and listen and learn (as Sir Jamshedji used to say) or sit in the lounge and talk to friends (old and new) at the Bar.

At this age, one does not – one should not – think of one's professional future.

A few months ago, I addressed an international seminar in New York and was introduced to the audience by a 'friend' who said (with a wink and tongue in cheek) that 'Mr Nariman is also President of the Bar Association of India almost since the time of the Norman Conquest'; a gentle hint, perhaps, that I retire from official positions (and active practice). Well, who knows, someday I might. But as advised at present, I propose to die with my boots on!"

******

Have you read Nariman's book? What do you think about it?

[Arun Pandiyan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fali Sam Nariman was an Indian jurist who has grown up with the Constitution. With a remarkable track record in legal field, he has attained eminence over the years receiving several prestigious awards such as Padma Bhushan and Padma Vibhushan at national level and Gruber Justice Prize at International level. Later, he was also nominated as Rajya Sabha member under NDA government. Succinctly written in his very own trademark witty and comical touch, this book is an endearing autobiographical narrative of a living legend of law who is known for quitting his office as an Additional Solicitor General (ASG) of India after the proclamation of emergency.

This book tracks the life of Fali Sam Nariman, a Parsi by birth whose parents migrated to India after the Japanese invasion of Burma, during the Second World War in 1942. To recollect the age old memories of the strenuous journey from Rangoon to Delhi in order to reach a refugee camp shows how impersonal wounds of war and unrest permanently leaves a scar on people who are forced to flee their homeland. He remembers:

“In the trek out of Burma, apart from biscuits and sweets which my mother had thoughtfully stocked up for the journey, there was not much to be consumed by way of food. In early 1942, we arrived at a refugee camp in Imphal where we first ate our hot meal after three-week trek. It was here that we were given the sad news of Rangoon having fallen into the hands of Japanese Army. There was no going back now. Our arrival in New Delhi marked the first turning point of my life – landing as a refugee from Burma, uprooted from hearth and home.”

Rightly labelling the chapter as ‘More Watching Than Pleading’, Nariman narrated his learning years at the bar of Sir Jamshedji Ganga, which he profoundly remembers for his learning phase by standing on the shoulders of giants. Having started his legal journey at a very young age right after his graduation in Law, Mr. Nariman epitomises the guidance on why we need to pick a career early in life and keep growing our skills and knowledge around it, without expecting much in return in its early years. If you are a law student, practicing lawyers, or a legal aspirant, you must read Chapter five titled ‘Lessons in the School of Hard Knocks’ where the author had outlined 28 advices or do’s and don’ts’ that he had imbibed during his sojourn at the Bar for six decades, recounting his own life experiences and the lessons from the mistakes he committed.

‘Advice is nice / On it I’ve thriven / Not mother’s or other’s / But what I’ve given /

For a common reader like me, who has no academic relevance with law, Nariman’s advice on how not to take things personally in professional life, how to be clear and precise with arguments and writing, the value of keeping yourself up-to-date and informed, the absurdity behind exaggeration, the importance of leaving anger and all the vitriol that goes with it outside the work and lessons on time management were sacrosanct. Chapter five should be published as a separate book under self-help genre for the amount of tangible wisdom it carries.

Two of my favourite chapters from the book were on the topics of Internal Emergency and about the author’s favourite Judges from the Supreme Court. These two chapters give us a solid understanding on how the independence of judiciary was tested the most during the most controversial period of Indian history. Recounting the infamous ADM Jablapur vs Shukla (popularly known as habeas corpus case), Mr Nariman gives us a glimpse of heroics from greats namely H R Khanna, Krishna Iyer and C.K. Dhapthary during the emergency in upholding individual liberty and freedom. Though the erroneous judgement from the Supreme Court in the case of habeas corpus during emergency is considered as a judicial pusillanimity, the whole episode on superseding seniority in appointments of chief justice and political intervention in judiciary shows how politicians despise independent judges.

The encomium on Justice Subba Rao and Krishna Iyer should be re-read to remember how fearless the later was in staying Indira Gandhi’s stay petition and unflinching in upholding the High Court order on Raj Narain vs Indira Gandhi, barring her from voting or participating in Parliamentary proceedings. If Justice Krishna Iyer was known for upholding Article 32 or right to legal aid, Justice Subba Rao was known for his relentless pursuit in conceptualizing his vision of fundamental rights, especially Article 21 or right to liberty as ‘transcendental’ or spiritual. It was a wholesome tribute to the two of the greatest judges in Indian history.

Mr. Nariman also touches briefly upon the most difficult case of his life, where he had to undergo harsh criticisms nationally and globally for appearing as a lead counsel for Union Carbide in Bhopal Gas Leak case. As Emerson said: “Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.” In country where the right to be defended by a lawyer ‘of his choice’ is a guaranteed constitutional right, Mr. Nariman asserts that he was merely doing his job as a lawyer who was seeking justice in from of monetary compensation.

Fali Sam Nariman’s professional life came to an end when he took up the role of legislator after being nominated to the upper house of Parliament. His private member bills were top notch (though we know the fate of Private Member Bill in Indian parliamentary system). Notably, the Judicial Statistics Bill to provide for collection and publication of judicial statistics, setting up a legal database and publishing an Annual Judicial Statistics Report to help assess the performance of Judiciary and to seek accountability.

Whatever job Mr. Nariman took up, it seems like he was honest to what he believed in and worked towards. He is not the one to mince words and he holds forth cogently in topics he has enormous experience on. He peppers the text with countless legal facts, innumerable anecdotes and enthralling incidents that has happened in judicial history that makes this book a fascinating and enriching reading. Towards the end, his analysis on judicial activism and the fear of majoritarianism provide much food for thought. If you identify yourself as an ardent believer of the constitution and what it stands for, there are plenty of takeaways from this book.

[Yoshita Sood · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'll probably read this every year, but this is still not my "law is my passion" book. The quest to find the one continues

[E.T. · Rating 2 out of 5]

2.5/5 While the author’s dry and old-fashioned style worked well in “The state of the nation”, in his autobiography he came across as narcissistic. Also the book is perhaps meant for those meant from the legal profession. Court proceedings and entire letters/articles with legal jargon have been reproduced and they were difficult to understand and hence boring.
In a nutshell, read “The State of the Nation” and avoid this one.

[Vikas Datta · Rating 4 out of 5]

Provides a good view of the legal history of India ever since it became free with some incisive observations about the state of the nation and its polity complementing the fund of insights about the legal process and anecdotes of noted lawyers and judges. The chapter on the Union Carbide case and the inter-state water disputes are though a little impenetrable...

[Krishnaveni Sudarsan · Rating 4 out of 5]

This one is for the lawyers. Definitely a must-read, especially for budding lawyers and students of law. Apart from the fact that he's a great man and has lived an exceptional life, his stories about lawyers and judges and the courts of old days are an absolute delight to read. I am not a great fan of autobiographies and so I was expecting a good but boring experience when I went into this book. I'm certainly glad to say that the great Fali S. Nariman proved me wrong. Worth every penny.

4.5/5 ⭐

[Deepta · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very fun first few chapters and after that just kinda went downhill but it’s still a nice read I liked reading it

[BOOK BOOK BOOKA · Rating 4 out of 5]

The first part, esp about his practice w kanga, makes the law look incredibly fun so this was well needed to induce delusion before i start work

[Adil Khan · Rating 3 out of 5]

2.90 stars

My rating above is representative only of how much I enjoyed the book, and not of how useful/relevant it is. I say this keeping in mind that I annotated the 466-page book at 41 different places.

The first two and the last chapters are the most interesting, where Mr. Nariman talks about his personal life. The rest of the book is full of grandfatherly professional anecdotes, and would please a person better versed in legal terms and procedures to no end.

[Mohit Dagar · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good read for a journey into the mind of one of India’s finest advocates. Replete with references to numerous cases, the author has almost managed to keep the writing engaging, understandable, and fun for the readers.

Sense of humour of the author, along with his legal acumen, is beautifully showcased in the book.

Belonging to the legal profession myself, I was expecting to learn a bit more about the profession through the learnings that the author has garnered over decades of his practice. And, I did end up learning a lot. Some of them being - importance of hard work, humility, perseverance. I realised how rewarding and testing the field of law is.

[Bharath · Rating 3 out of 5]

Has very good coverage of Fali Nariman's professional career. The matter on the constitution, emergency and Bhopal gas tragedy are covered well and make for interesting reading. The book meanders into technical details more often than required. Would have been good if the book had more of Fali Nariman's personal life and interests.....

[Swapna · Rating 5 out of 5]

beautiful description of an elegant legal era!

[Saurabh Pandey · Rating 3 out of 5]

The title of this book is a bit interesting but the book contains details which seems to be too much for the young reader as almost all the content is from later half of the last century.

[PRANATHI S · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well written, it's mostly a professional autobiography, covering his practice, the emergency and the judges! On a lighter vein, had fun reminiscing about Golaknath all over again.

[Vivek Anandh · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is not often that you find people who achieve the pinnacle of one’s profession and live to witness the glory. Mr.Nariman, the godfather of Indian bar, is one such exception. The very name evokes awe in the minds of many who are a part of the bar and it without any surprises also includes judges who are on the other side of the bar. My first experience of him happened when I was present in the court during his arguments against the proposed National Judicial Accountability Commission in Supreme Court. I must say there is a quality to his voice and tenor that made me think of Richard Attenborough for a moment. In comparison to the commanding and formidable opposition of the Attorney General Mr.Mukul Rohatgi, it was a mellifluous performance that one does not get to witness very often. It is sad that this incandescent voice of the bar is fading due to old age. Naturally, as an aspiring member of the bar, I picked up this autobiography of his at my first opportunity. With some unexpected eagerness, with which I generally am not associated with for biographies, I started reading the genius of a lawyer’s life. The first few chapters of the book in line with my expectations were about his personal life, written in an interesting way laced with sufficient humor to interest the reader. From these pages, it is clear that he is from a somewhat well to do background. His professional pedigree too is from the best of stables in the country, chambers of Sir Jamsedji Kanga, of which other stalwarts of the profession like Palkhiwala, Seervai too are a part of. It is actually surprising that even at this old age he remembers many interesting incidents at the bar that he fondly reminisces in this book. This part of the book moves without many surprises but with much more gentle humor making it a fast paced interesting albeit not so exciting read altogether.
The real turn in the whole book comes at the stage of his life where he accepts the post of Additional Solicitor General of India and shifts his residence to New Delhi. It happened during the time period when the whole country was at the cusp of a radical change of circumstances that will take it into one of most turbulent times that independent India is yet to go through. It was when he was holding this position that the ‘phony’ emergency, as he calls it, was declared in the country, leading to him resigning the post as a form of protest. Considering the then prevailing circumstances, when there existed no security even for one’s own life, it was one of the bravest moves that this country has ever witnessed. As a matter of fact, his resignation invited the much needed public attention to the negative effects of the emergency, which hitherto did not realize the gravity of the situation. This particular chapter gives some interesting insight into the mind of the man who mustered the courage to take such a step.
One of the opportunities that Nariman seems to have missed is to appear in the famous Fundamental Rights case (Keshavananda Barati Vs Union of India). His participation in that matter, apart from being a valuable contribution in the case, would have spiced up the reading a little more. The life of a towering personality like him will inevitably touch upon certain watershed moments of Indian judiciary for it is him who played an active role in crafting the outcome of a certain number of those pages of history. The subsequent chapters of the book take a definite turn in its tenor and content when he starts to delve into few of those instances. Fraught with controversies even to this day, his decision to defend the Union Carbide in the massive litigation initiated after the Bhopal Gas Tragedy is one such instance. Interestingly he seeks he seeks to justify his stance through this book. Prior to the litigation his reputation for the cause of human rights was internationally celebrated, no less due to his decision not to continue in the post of law officer when the emergency was declared. His reputation in this regard also caused to raise many an eyebrow when he appeared as the lead counsel to defend Union Carbide. In this chapter he explains at length the reality, for much information available to the public are emotionally prejudiced. This chapter, in particular, helped me no less in understanding several questions that many lawyers are posed in their professional life. Much of the detractors of this decision of Nariman were emotionally opinionated judging him unfairly. But through this chapter he puts up a formidable defense explaining his stance rationally. He has even reproduced two letters (one by renowned Professor Upendra Baxi) that were addressed to him questioning this decision of his. Even prior to reading this book I had several doubts that existed over the role that a lawyer plays in any judicial proceedings. Two extreme forms of reasoning can be had for this question. In one form he is seen as someone who can appear on behalf of anyone that he pleases and in the other he has to judge the cause before entering his appearance. Gandhi, as a lawyer chose the second path. He rejected any cause which he believed is not just. This reasoning of Gandhi is somewhat irrational, for he judges upon the cause of a person even before he is afforded an opportunity before the court. The detractors of this decision of Nariman too sound the like. This reasoning may somewhat put the lawyering as anything for money profession, but the role of a lawyer in judiciary itself calls for it. I personally am not able to see any incongruity in this reasoning and I find it to be rationally robust. As this subject needs separate detailed critical examination I shall refrain from digging further on this. Apart from justification or rather explanation that he offers for his stance in this controversial case, he also offers many judicial solutions to work out of such intricate situations which create difficulties both judicially and emotionally. It does seem to look a little out of place since he himself was and always has been in a veritable position to make such changes. In one page he even offers somewhat of an explanation to this as well, albeit not so convincingly.
The next important chapter is where he narrates his experience as a nominated member of Rajya Sabha (Upper House) of the Parliament. How much ever he seems to have loved it and portrayed it to be a very useful stint as the member, one cannot escape the feeling that his membership was not of much consequence. This is definitely not a surprising when considering the fact that he is nominated member without any party affiliations. Within the political landscape that is fraught with ulterior political motives in every move made, there is little that a sole member can do without the support of major parties on the floor. At its very best his membership did indeed offer the infusion of intellect in the debates held on the floor, sufficing the purpose of his nomination for the membership.
Throughout the passages one can witness the passion that this man holds for this profession. It is hard to miss that in those seemingly autobiographical passages is hidden the man’s eagerness to deliver the message about the ideals for which the profession of advocacy stands for. Hidden is his lament over the disgraceful fall of standards. Nevertheless, more than his reminiscences about the yesteryear members of the bar, who upheld the ideals of the profession, the man himself stands as an exemplar for the wannabes. One thing that I sorely missed in the book is the absence of any interesting information about his maverick of a son Rohinton Nariman. It would have been interesting, personally, to know a little more about the life of Rohinton, whose trailblazing performance as a judge in Supreme Court is raising the standards in the Indian judiciary. All in all this is an extremely interesting read and well serves as an inspiration for aspiring lawyers and lawyers alike.

[Siddarth · Rating 4 out of 5]

As he claims the memoir isn't about his personal life, it's all about his career.

It starts from his days in Burma before independence, ASG & his resignation from the office protesting emergency to his role as MP in the Rajya Sabha.

He spoke of Stalwart lawyers during the initial days in Bombay & dedicated some part of the book to the SC eminent chief justices Subbarao & Krishna Iyer.

I was expecting more details about the Keshavananda Bharati case & Inter-State river case, particularly the Kaveri river case, he represented Karnataka but he gave detailed interpretation of the Minerva Mill case only.

I was very curious about the Bhopal Gas tragedy for which he defended Union Carbide but he didn't refer to any reason for the tragedy & who were all involved.

I am surprised by his MP tenure in the Rajya Sabha & Reformation Bill he proposed, sadly they didn't pass.

Overall, it's a good book for those who are interested in the Constitution & law. It would be better if it's arranged in chronological order & lucid manner.

[Prasad GR · Rating 4 out of 5]

Nariman’s is a traditional autobiography that strings together key events from his life and touches upon momentous happenings around the world during this time. A raconteur par excellence, Nariman holds the reader’s attention through most parts of the book barring those few pages where he goes deep into legalese that may not interest a lay reader. But for this one minor aspect, this is an autobiography that reaffirms one’s faith in this genre.

His account of some key cases that he was a part of, his endearing portrait of numerous personalities, and his views on a variety of subjects, all make this a fascinating book about a life lived fully. RIP, Nariman.

[HAMZA IQBAL · Rating 5 out of 5]

Informative, enjoyable, encouraging yet an easy read, such writing style is a testimony to the greatest Indian lawyer living. Full of humility, he is a living legend who has inspired generations of lawyers, and this book is the best way to know his mind and advice he has to offer. As a practicing lawyer, having read this book I can only wish if I can have the opportunity to ever work with him. Full of useful advice, warnings and information for any lawyer/law student, and a new domain for anyone from non legal background.

[Ganit · Rating 4 out of 5]

Outstanding history of judiciary in India. Packed with numerous one-liners. Some detailed account of cases like Bhopal Gas Tragedy were incomprehensible. Passages on Justice Subba Rao, Krishna Iyer were enlightening as well as satisfying.

[Shikhar Sheel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very to the point. Does not discuss much about his personal life. Maybe he didn’t have one. It’s a very good read to know the insights of how the judiciary functions and the great personalities that he encountered during his long career.

[Indraneel Dabhade · Rating 5 out of 5]

A doyen of the Indian judiciary system, Fali Nariman is an example of a success story for a minority community shaping India's destiny. Fali's viewpoint (and narrative) takes the reader behind the legal scene from the tumultuous years of the emergency up to the current decade.

[Bhavik · Rating 5 out of 5]

An autobiography of a legend..pure motivation. A must read for someone who is working in the field of law or pursuing a legal degree. Language used is quite simple and easily understandable. I feel very greatful to go through the life of a great Advocate and indeed a great man with pure soul.

[Ankur Vyas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great book

Great insights into the mind and heart of the great lawyer, statesman and tye exceptional intellectual that is Fali S Nariman.

[naina · Rating 4 out of 5]

a very interesting read to know about the author as well as events connected to him and no so connected.though its an autobiography but it never gets boring and its full of humor.

[Harshit Singhal · Rating 4 out of 5]

Go through when free.

[Rupesh · Rating 4 out of 5]

more of accounts on people than court & legal process i was looking for from a stalwart.
but it was interesting read..i recommend

[Gourav · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good read. Especially liked the description of the time of emergency under PM Indira Gandhi.
Sheds a light on various intellectuals who wore the black coat to light up our dark times.

[Prabhakar Singh · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Before Memory Fades" is a book every Indian should read.

[Yogesh Tak · Rating 4 out of 5]

Lot to learn from his journey.

[Ramya Viswanathan · Rating 4 out of 5]

A bit dry in parts, filled with a lot of legal language as I suppose one should expect. Ends well.