Neha Rathi, an Advocate on Record at the Supreme Court of India, brings a distinctive perspective to litigation shaped by her early training in journalism and a sustained commitment to issues of public importance. Her legal journey from London School of Economics to the corridors of Supreme Court is deeply rooted in constitutional values, human rights and public interest litigation. In this conversation, she reflects on her shift from journalism to law, her formative years in litigation, landmark constitutional matters, and the role of writing and public discourse in influencing legal thought and public policy.
This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team
What first drew you towards law despite having an academic background in Journalism?
My purpose was always to work on issues of public importance. Writing was and continues to be my first love. But I realised that I could continue to write while also being a lawyer, but I won’t be able to practice law while being a full time journalist. Another thing that drew me to law as a subject were concepts of equality, liberty, secularism, justice which are essentially what make the Indian Constitution “a grand experiment” and I was keen to dive deep into these concepts. Soon after joining Campus Law Centre at the Delhi University, I also realised I enjoyed the academic rigour, the case law format of teaching & litigation and my interest in law developed further.
What was it about Human Rights law that made you pursue masters at LSE and how did the exposure prove beneficial for you?
During my journalism studies and later at law – the subjects I was most interested in were Constitutional Law, Gender Justice, Environmental Law, International law and the like. So the decision to specialise in human rights law came naturally. By the time I applied, I had already interned with Delhi based human rights organizations, and was writing on issues which concerned the marginalised or the environment and so I felt an LL.M with human rights law as my main subject would further equip me for my future endeavours.
Studying at LSE, attending public lectures by experts in different fields, the London experience, as it were, opened many doors for me. Immediately after my LLM (since I was still in two minds about getting into litigation) I received an international fellowship by the Women’s Health Initiative at Harvard University. It took me straight from London Streets to by-lanes of Dharavi and Govandi in Mumbai and little hamlets in Thane district, where I interviewed women on issues of reproductive rights. Later I worked as a consultant for the New York based Centre for Reproductive Rights for close to two years which took me to Tanzania and the Philippines. So it was after 3 years of grassroots work that I decided to start practicing law full-time and see if it was meant for me or if I was meant to be a litigating lawyer.
In the initial years of your practice, what were the experiences that strengthened your approach towards litigation?
I feel I must have been the most reluctant lawyer that ever set foot in court. I had the rookie reluctance to wear a band and a gown, I didn’t understand the procedure, everything seemed too structured – which my vagabond heart was yet to accept as my professional self. But with time as and when I started handling important cases in my initial years such as drafting of the petition challenging the electoral bond scheme, seeking directions that political parties must be brought under the Right to Information, challenging the approvals given for hydro-power projects in Alaknanda river and various other corruption cases in different states, my approach to litigation and its impact gained ground.
I started my journey in litigation with Mr. Prashant Bhushan – it was quite an obvious choice really- given his body of work in public interest. His approach to law as a means to bring about change, his ability to speak truth to power and knack for looking at issues no matter how complex from a first principles perspective – gave me confidence to carry on.
What was that turning point in your life that motivated you to pursue the AOR qualification and how did you prepare for it?
Since I don’t come from a family of lawyers, becoming an AoR in itself felt like a big feat. I still value it, as AoRs perform a very important role at the Supreme Court. It was much later that I realised that there are advocates who simply aim at being arguing counsels at the Supreme Court bypassing the AoR route!
About the AoR exam- I attended the AoR lectures delivered by Sr. Advocates which were quite informative. Subjects such as Professional Ethics and Leading Cases are quite enriching and must be studied by all lawyers, regardless of the exam. I think what helped crack the exam in my first attempt was the fact that I was already working at a Chamber, where I was drafting petitions and filing them on a daily basis.
What has been the most challenging case you’ve handled so far and how did you prepare for it?
I think the ongoing challenge to the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) Order has been and continues to be the most challenging case I have handled so far. As Court appointed Nodal Counsel, I had to coordinate with the entire petitioner side (comprising at least 25-30 petitions or more) which meant preparing convenience compilations for the court which is a huge task in itself, drafting written submissions, preparing for my own brief where I represented Mahua Moitra, briefing multiple seniors on important aspects of election law concerning this case. What sets this case apart is also the fact that throughout the last 6 months this case has been heard at short intervals, multiple applications were filed by us and heard as the process continued and various important interim orders were passed by court.
Having two hundred published articles in national newspapers and magazines, how do you think contributing to academic discourse and public policy enhances a lawyer’s perspective?
For me, writing has never been very distinct from legal practice, it is another way of engaging with the law – it requires a similar kind of clarity of thought, rigour and accountability, albeit the structure and audience may be different. I think it is a lawyer’s job to stay abreast with what is happening around her and attempt to add to the existing pool of knowledge. The written word has its own charm and its own impact and it is up to a lawyer to bridge the gap or join the dots between the law as it is and what it can be or should be and present it in a way that any reader, not necessarily lawyers, would find interesting.
With your current empanelment and your role as an AOR, how do you see the future of your practice evolving, and what aspirations do you have for it?
I feel I still have a long way to go as I am now 10 years into the profession, which in the legal field is not a very long time. I realise not having a family background in law or contacts high up the ladder deprives one of certain opportunities- but at the same time – the profession also takes care of your finances. I just want to continue to do more work and gain more experience in all fields of practice, not only PILs. In my limited experience, I have seen that work begets work, one well-drafted well-argued case begets many more, so long as one is honest to one’s profession and genuinely thinks for a better result for one’s clients, word of mouth can keep one’s office running.
What advice would you offer to students who wish to build a career like yours and reach significant heights in litigation? What resources would you recommend?
My advice to law students who are yet to embark in the world of litigation would be to take up internships with advocates in different courts. An internship offers exposure to real-world litigation and helps identify both one’s interests and disinclinations. Another advice would be to learn to read judgments and bare acts early on. In fact, whether it’s law books or a history book or simple fiction, especially classics, any and all reading helps one get a deeper insight into the human mind, conflict and resolution. Don’t be afraid to ask questions, most fellow lawyers and seniors actually like to guide young lawyers. I have very often sought quick advice on a case from senior advocates even in court corridors, and they have been more than happy to guide me. For resources, I think reading the newspaper, taking subscription to publications such as livelaw etc and being updated about what is happening in courts, around the world or in your own neighbourhood, and how it impacts those around you – makes you a more informed, empathetic, discerning person, and definitely a better lawyer.
Get in touch with Neha Rathi –
Very well answered. Know Neha through many litigations…she is a thorough and very responsible lawyer. Glad you interviewed her.