Eminent jurist, senior advocate Fali S Nariman passes away at the age of 95

In June 1975, Fali Nariman resigned as the Additional Solicitor General of India, which he was appointed in 1972, to protest against the Indira Gandhi government's decision to declare the emergency

Eminent jurist and senior advocate Fali S Nariman has passed away at the age of 95. He served as the president of the Bar Association of India from 1991 to 2010 and was awarded the Padma Bhushan (1991) and Padma Vibhushan (2007), among India's highest civilian honours, for his contributions to the field of law.

Nariman was born on January 10, 1929, in Rangoon, Burma (now Yangon, Myanmar). He completed his education in law at the Government Law College in Mumbai and started his legal career in the early 1950s. Nariman quickly gained recognition for his exceptional legal acumen and advocacy skills.

Throughout his career, Nariman held various prestigious positions, including serving as Additional Solicitor General of India (1972-1975) and as a Rajya Sabha member (1999-2005). He had been associated with several legal bodies and institutions, including the International Commission of Jurists and the Indian Law Institute.

In June 1975, he resigned as the additional solicitor general of India to protest against the Indira Gandhi government's decision to declare an emergency. Nariman was the father of Rohinton Nariman, who served as a judge of the Supreme Court.

Fali Nariman was involved in several landmark judgments in India.

Kesavananda Bharati v State of Kerala (1973): Nariman assisted Nani Palkhivala in arguing against the government's attempt to amend the Indian Constitution to curtail fundamental rights. This case resulted in the "Basic Structure Doctrine," which limits Parliament's power to amend certain core principles of the Constitution.

Maneka Gandhi v Union of India (1978): Nariman represented Maneka Gandhi in this case, which expanded the scope of the right to personal liberty and laid down important principles regarding due process and procedural fairness.

SR Bommai v Union of India (1994): Nariman represented the State of Karnataka in this case, which dealt with the issue of imposition of President's Rule under Article 356 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court laid down guidelines to prevent arbitrary use of Article 356.

Naz Foundation v Government of NCT of Delhi (2009): Nariman argued against the constitutionality of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalized homosexual acts. Although he wasn't directly involved in the judgment, his arguments laid the groundwork for subsequent legal challenges leading to the decriminalization of homosexuality in India.

In addition to his legal career, Nariman was also a respected public intellectual, frequently expressing his views on constitutional matters, human rights, and legal reforms through articles, lectures, and public appearances.