Ambika Yadav is yet another tough and uncompromising lawyer who prioritises justice through law and order over anything. She talked to us at length about various shades of her life on the professional front. Here is the excerpt from the conversation:
Q. You have been an active participator in debates. Do you feel a law aspirant should participate in debates from an early age?
A. The art of debating is not an inevitable requirement for being a good lawyer. Personally, I feel instead of violent argumentation in a Court, one needs to be subtle, yet strong and persuasive in one’s submissions. He/she should be able to judge the mind of the Court. For instance- while approaching the Court for revocation of a NBW(non-bailable warrant), a lawyer ought not to be aggressive when it is he who has approached the Court for a remedy. The idea of good debator=good lawyer has changed tremendously. The legal field not only demands eloquency but also thorough legal knowledge.
Q. How far was your National Law University instrumental in opening an ocean of opportunities for you, academically?
A. Honestly, I have been a mediocre student throughout my life. One of my teachers enlightened me with this budding area of Corporate Law, for which I shall be ever thankful to her. Secondly, few of my cousins, after having graduated from NALSAR, Hyderabad were well placed as compared to cousins who pursued medical or engineering courses.
Subsequently, I enrolled for a weekend crash course at one of the leading coachings and was immensely fascinated by the pedagogy. I cracked AILET with an AIR of 48 and after I got admitted into NLU-D, the ideological diversity was stupefying. Attending sessions of Debate Socities made one thing very clear- students were hungry for knowledge,not for money or acclaim. No matter how many feats you might achieve in your career, be passionate towards it. The belief of striving hard to be successful for a cause can often sound absurd to people.
Q.How did you acquire the sense of enthusiam to stand up for the rights of the underprivileged?
A. I would like to answer this question in the light of a personal experience. The first case I took up was that of Culpable Homicide. There used to be a horde of people who were tried for offenses they didn’t actually commit. Languishing in jails, being forced to sign documents, inability to hire lawyers were just a few problems they dealt with. I was diagnosed with a spinal ailment due to which I was bed ridden. I recovered soon after, but the incident made me ponder about those who neither have the capital nor a support system for recovery. I was thus determined to work earnestly for the handicapped. I got connected to various NGOs and receive cases through them where the aggrieved are basically women and chidren who are victims of sexual abuse,orphans or the handicapped and downtrodden.
While I was working as an Associate in the Chambers of KTS Tulsi, it shattered a popular myth that top law firms primarily take up high-profile cases with good money, whereas there are still certain pro bono cases which they consider simply for a cause.
Q.What would have been your alternate career, had Law not been an option for you?
A. It would definitely be Journalism. Both Journalism and Law are known to be quite open and vast with respect to the avenues they unfurl. Moreover and particularly, Law is more of practical know-how than bookish knowledge.
Q. One of the petitions drafted by you at the National Green Tribunal was recently covered by a Hindustan Times. Can you tell us more about it?
A. The petition was drafted against an illegal construction on a land in Section 72 at Gurugram which was supposed to be developed as an open space for creation of an artificial pond to meet the water requirement of increasing population due to corporate settlements. The defendant was a local MLA who allegedly misappropriated his position to sell off the land and earn profits. The petition was fought on the ground of violation of Article 21- which includes right to quality life, since the norm of Master plan was being hampered with. The Tribunal took cognizance of the petition, ordering demolition of the colony around the open space.