‘AG Is The People’s Lawyer’

Shrihari Aney’s office overlooking the beautiful Arabian Sea has a large world map with a cluster of pins marking the places he has visited. And it only strengthens the adage that the further you go, more rooted you become. He has a reputation for being outspoken and he does not disappoint while talking to Prachi Pinglay Plumber in Mumbai.

Why did you resign as Advocate General ?

There was a huge uproar over my Marathwada statement and the house didn’t resume business. It had happened earlier when I wrote a book justifying separate statehood for Vidarbha. It is legitimate to ask me why did you say what you did, it is permissible to protest as well but not to allow the Assembly to function troubled me. As an AG I saw my role as representing the best interests of people. I thought there was no vindication of anything I represent if the best interests of people were not served.

Your stand and the Government’s stand were different from each other on several important issues.  

Unfortunately yes. More than once. The first was the beef ban – I was required to defend a piece of legislation. The competence of the legislature to pass the said law was challenged. That was easy to defend. The difficulty came when we were discussing the challenge to equal treatment and equal protection. There were provisions by which you could catch a person and say you have banned beef and send him to jail. They removed the burden of proof. It is counter to the known methods of criminal jurisprudence in India. I told the court this was incorrect. It is abhorrent and not acceptable. We are still waiting for the judgment now. If this part gets set aside, the state will have to prove the guilt.

Are you inclined towards the BJP politically?

I have maintained my distance from all political parties, probably because I am comfortable calling everybody names ! But jokes apart, I often find myself critical and I find it difficult to be critical if I am wedded to an ideology. I agree with a fair number of things that the present government says. But when it comes to litigation I find it difficult to defend on jingoistic basis.

Have you felt any pressure from the government?

I must say in all fairness that they never came in the way. The matter of Haji Ali Darga is an example. It was a hugely contentious matter as the same thing was happening in Shani Shingnapur and Sabarimala too. Whichever way it went, it would antagonise the Muslim elements and liberals. I went by the Constitution. If practice of religion is a fundamental right then you can’t have management come in the way of a person’s right to worship. How can you differentiate between a man’s right to worship and a woman’s right to worship?

Before becoming the CM, Devendra Fadnavis has spoken of his support to statehood of Vidarbha. Are you upset with him?

Lot of us in Vidarbha are upset that the BJP has not been actively pursuing the statehood agenda which they promised to do. I am not distinguishing between the CM, Gadkari or the party. BJP used the Vidarbha plank in the last election to consolidate their position and Vidarbha paid them handsomely. If they don’t go about it, in the next election they will have a hard time. By next election it will become the central issue in Maharashtra.

Is the demand for statehood for Marathwada and Vidarbha really viable? Do people want this?

Marathwada movement does not exist right now. It needs to become a movement, which has a philosophical, economic and social base. Demand for Vidarbha and the constitutional nod goes back in the 1950s. A referendum conducted in four cities of Vidarbha shows a minimum of 85% and a maximum of 97% people favouring a separate state. I urge the government to hold the plebiscite.

1200 youngsters died in Telangana. Why should that price be paid? We are willing to stay with Maharashtra if there is no majority. But please follow the law. The cost you are asking us to pay is what Telangana paid. It’s a measure in blood. 

Why is there a tussle between the courts and the governments on many issues?

These are sign of the times. If you read the papers, 30, 40% news concerns courts. Courts are increasingly discharging the functions of the executive and the legislature. It is hurting the system. It is against the doctrine of separation of powers pronounced in our constitution. Legislators have failed in passing laws. What is the need for court to pass a law like Vishakha? Why should the legislators not be doing it? Why should the court have to say release water to Marathwada? Is this not executive’s function ? I think this will repeatedly happen. Our systems are in a state of transition. We are not sure of role of legislature, executive and judiciary.

This web-exclusive Interview does not appear in print magazine.