In Chennai, a significant religious event, the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Kshetra Prana Prathishta Celebrations, commenced, marking a pivotal moment in the history of religious celebrations in India. Organized by the Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams (TTD), this three-week-long festivity began to honor the consecration of the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, scheduled for January 22. The event was graced by the presence of K Parasaran, a notable figure as the founder-trustee member of the Sri Ram Janmabhoomi Theertha Kshetra Trust.

Parasaran, who is not only a senior Supreme Court lawyer but also a former Attorney General of India, played a crucial role in the Ayodhya land dispute, representing a landmark case in Indian legal history. His effective arguments and legal acumen led to a favorable outcome in this complex case. At the event, AJ Sekar, president of the local advisory committee for Tamil Nadu and Puducherry under TTD, praised Parasaran's significant contributions to this historic legal battle.

In a symbolic gesture celebrating the rich cultural and religious heritage, a 10.5-foot statue of Lord Rama, crafted from fibre, was unveiled. This statue serves as a focal point for devotees, who are invited to offer their prayers to Lord Rama until January 26.

Highlighting the religious significance of the occasion, Parasaran shared insights into the glories of Lord Rama's incarnation. He pointed out that the chosen day for the commencement of the celebrations was particularly auspicious, aligning with certain Nakshatras, which are considered propitious in Hindu astrology.

Adding depth to the religious discourse, U Ve Velukudi Krishnan presented a detailed exploration of Lord Rama's incarnation in Ayodhya. Meanwhile, S Vedantam, the former president of Vishwa Hindu Parishad, provided a historical perspective, noting that the struggle for the Ram Janmabhoomi site spans over 500 years. He shared his personal journey, having been actively involved in this cause for the last five decades.

93-year-old ‘Pitamah’ of Indian laws who had said that logical end to Ram Janmabhoomi case was his last dream

The 9th of November marked a significant day in the history of India's judiciary: the Supreme Court gave its verdict in the long-standing Ram Janmabhoomi case. This case, spanning several decades, saw senior advocate K Parasaran, at the age of 92, representing ‘Ramlalla Virajman’ for the last 40 years. In a unique aspect of this case, ‘Ramlalla Virajman’, a representation of Bhagawan Shriram, was also a petitioner alongside Hindu and Muslim parties. Advocate K. Parasaran’s role was pivotal; he studiously and seriously presented many crucial aspects of the case. His contributions were instrumental in leading to a verdict that resonated with the expectations of Shriram's devotees. This article seeks to highlight some of the outstanding qualities of Adv. Parasaran.

At 94 years old, K Parasaran, the renowned lawyer who spearheaded the legal battle for the construction of the Ram Mandir, was recently seen watching the Bhoomi Pujan ceremony from his home. His dedication to this cause caught the attention of many, including BJP national general secretary BL Santosh, who, among others, shared the picture of this eminent lawyer on Twitter. It's evident from these images how Parasaran has devoted his life to the cause of Ram Lalla.

Advocate K Parasaran's deep involvement and understanding of the Ayodhya case are notable. He studied the case so thoroughly that he often recounted important dates during court proceedings without needing to refer to any documents. Demonstrating a remarkable memory, Adv. Parasaran would calculate dates of various incidents on his fingers. His extensive research and reading on ‘Ayodhya’ are so profound that it could very well fill the pages of a book.

During the Ayodhya case hearing, a notable legal confrontation unfolded in the Court between two prominent advocates: K Parasaran and Rajiv Dhawan. Advocate Parasaran represented 'Ram Lalla Virajman', while Advocate Rajiv Dhawan argued on behalf of the Muslim party.

A particularly memorable moment occurred during the final hearing of the case. Advocate Parasaran maintained a demeanor of calmness and restraint, even when Advocate Rajiv Dhawan tore a copy of the Ram Mandir map. This map had been presented in Court by the advocate representing the Hindu party. Despite this dramatic act, Advocate Parasaran's composure was noteworthy.

Today holds extraordinary significance, especially for Hindus across the nation. However, for the veteran lawyer K Parasaran, the day bears a unique importance. He once expressed that seeing the logical end to the Ram Janmabhoomi case was his last dream. This statement reflects the depth of his faith and devotion. At 93 years old, Parasaran, the lawyer for ‘Ram Lalla Virajman’, showcased extraordinary commitment and physical endurance. He argued the Ramjanmabhoomi case barefoot, standing for 4-5 hours at a stretch. This act was not just a legal duty for him; it was an act of faith, as he felt the presence of God Ram during these proceedings.

K Parasaran and his Illustrious Career

K Parasaran, an esteemed senior advocate at the Supreme Court, boasts an impressive legal career that spans over six decades. During this time, he held the prestigious position of Attorney General of India from 1983 to 1989, a testament to his legal acumen and expertise. His legal journey also includes serving as the Advocate-General of Tamil Nadu in 1976, further solidifying his reputation in the legal fraternity.

In recognition of his contributions and services, K Parasaran was honored with two of India's highest civilian awards: the Padma Bhushan in 2003 and the Padma Vibhushan in 2011. Additionally, in 2012, he was nominated to the Rajya Sabha by the President of India, where he served for a period of six years.

K Parasaran said that the historic wrong was committed by Babar and it needed to be corrected

Throughout the Ramjanmabhoomi case, K Parasaran demonstrated remarkable vitality and preparation. The final arguments of this case, lasting 40 grueling days, saw Parasaran display an infectious energy. He arrived well-prepared for each session, which typically ran from 10:30 am to around 4 or 5 pm. Notably, it was K Parasaran’s legal ingenuity that led to Ram Lalla being made a litigant in the case, significantly bolstering the position of the Hindu litigants.

During the hearing, Parasaran argued that a historical error was made 433 years ago by Babar when he constructed a Mosque at the birthplace of Lord Ram, and that this mistake needed correction.

One of the most striking arguments made by Parasaran in this case was his emphasis on the uniqueness of the site for Hindus: “Muslims can pray in any other mosque in Ayodhya. There are 55-60 mosques in Ayodhya alone. But, for Hindus, this is the birthplace of Lord Ram, which we cannot change”.

Since 2016, K Parasaran’s appearances in court have been selective, taking up only two major cases - the Sabarimala case and the Ayodhya dispute. During these hearings, he expressed a deep personal desire, stating: “My last wish before I die, is to finish this case.” This statement underscores the profound personal and professional significance that the Ayodhya dispute held for him.

Chief Justice of Madras High Court called him ‘Pitamah’ of Indian laws

K Parasaran, a legal luminary whose career spans several decades, is not just revered for his contributions in high-profile cases like the Ram Janmabhoomi but also for his involvement in the Sabarimala case. His expertise in matters of Hindutva is widely recognized, and he is often considered an authority on the subject. Parasaran's extensive legal career included a tenure as a Member of Parliament in the Rajya Sabha from 2012 to 2018, further showcasing the breadth of his influence and respect in legal and political circles.

A preferred lawyer for many state governments, Parasaran's depth of knowledge extends beyond legal statutes. He is known for his profound understanding of religious texts, which he adeptly cites during court arguments, integrating legal acumen with religious scholarship.

Sanjay Kishan Kaul, the former Chief Justice of the Madras High Court, bestowed upon Parasaran the honorific title ‘Pitamah’ of Indian laws. This title reflects Parasaran's stature as a patriarch in the legal domain, someone who has immensely contributed to the field without compromising on his religious beliefs. This acknowledgment by a figure like Kaul underlines the respect and esteem Parasaran commands in the legal community, both for his professional prowess and his personal integrity.

K Parasaran: God’s Advocate interview by Amita Shah on 14 Feb, 2020

In an insightful interview conducted by Amita Shah on February 14, 2020, the setting perfectly complemented the subject. The living room, adorned with paintings of Krishna and Radha, an image of Krishna as a child, and a sculpture of Ram with a bow and arrow, set a serene backdrop. As the aroma of south Indian filter coffee filled the air, K Parasaran entered, a picture of traditional dignity. Dressed in a white veshti, an indigo-blue sweater, a checked muffler, and with a tilak on his forehead, he carried a stick in hand. The 92-year-old Supreme Court lawyer reflected on the changing times, saying, “I had to go for a function and it took me so long to get ready. It used to take me just 15 minutes to get dressed for court. These days, I take around 40 minutes to wear my pant, shirt, coat, collar, shoes and still may forget markers, identity card or handkerchief.”

Having turned 90, Parasaran had almost retired, but he made exceptions for the Ram Janmabhoomi and Sabarimala cases. He shared his lifelong connection with the Ayodhya case, citing his daily recitation of verses from Valmiki’s Ramayana since his early thirties as a guiding force in his life. Representing Ram Lalla Virajman in the title suit was his last wish. On the Sabarimala issue, where he represented the Nair Service Society opposing entry of menstruating-age women to the Ayyappa shrine, Parasaran emphasized its impact on religious freedom.

Just as he was considering stepping back from active work, Parasaran was presented with a new responsibility: hosting a trust to oversee the construction of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya. This trust, the Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust, approved by the Union Cabinet, was to operate from an address symbolically fitting for its purpose: R-20, Greater Kailash Part I, with "R for Ram," as described by his son Mohan Parasaran, also a Supreme Court lawyer. The office, located in the basement, features a large poster of the Venkatakrishnan deity (Parthasarathy, a name for Krishna), underscoring the religious and cultural significance of the task at hand.

The unexpected offer to join the Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust took K Parasaran by surprise. He expressed his initial hesitation, saying, “I never expected it. I was wavering. I have detached myself from everything. At this age, I hope I can do justice.” However, he chose not to elaborate on his decision to accept the role, citing privacy concerns. Parasaran also maintained discretion regarding the Trust's operations, stating that all decisions would be made collectively by its members, which include four religious gurus and key figures in the Ram Mandir movement.

Despite his advanced age, Parasaran finds himself immersed in responsibilities. He remarked on his busy schedule, “I have not had rest for 10 minutes today.” Reflecting on his distinguished career, he served as the Attorney General of India from 1983 to 1989 under various prime ministers, earning respect across political lines. His son, Mohan, highlights this, noting that leaders from Indira Gandhi to Narendra Modi held him in high esteem. Parasaran's contributions were recognized by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee Government with the Padma Bhushan in 2003 and by the Congress’ Manmohan Singh with the Padma Vibhushan in 2011. Additionally, Vajpayee involved him in the committee to review the Constitution's workings, and the Congress-led UPA nominated him to the Rajya Sabha in 2012. His legal expertise was sought by former Tamil Nadu Chief Ministers M Karunanidhi and J Jayalalithaa, and he represented the Congress-led Government in the Indira Sawhney case in 1993.

Parasaran clarifies his stance on politics, asserting his apolitical nature: “I never involve myself in political cases. I want to be apolitical. Otherwise, can you expect Vajpayee to give me Padma Bhushan and Congress Padma Vibhushan?”

Reflecting on the Ayodhya case, he described it as one of the most challenging in his career. The significance of the case was underscored by a statement from the presiding judge in the Allahabad High Court, who acknowledged the nation's anticipation for the judgment. Parasaran reflected, “A case like that has never happened in the past and may never happen in the future. The court called it a title suit, so it will not come under any controversy. They maintained its secular character to go into intricacies of the case. This case was something unique.”

In October 2019, during the hearings of the Ayodhya case, K Parasaran showcased his commitment to legal traditions. Despite an offer from the bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi to sit while arguing, he chose to stand, citing it as the tradition of the bar. "It was the tradition of the bar to stand and argue," he insisted. His dedication was further evident in his rigorous work schedule, alongside a team of six lawyers, working seven days a week. One of his team members, Aditi Dani, fondly remembers Parasaran’s care for his team, saying, “Sir would ensure that we never went hungry while we worked.”

Known for his dynamic courtroom presence, Parasaran often surprised with spontaneous arguments, ones not pre-written in his submissions. This ability to improvise effectively was a hallmark of his legal acumen. Anirudh Sharma, another lawyer on his Ayodhya case team, recalls a particular instance on the concluding day of the arguments. Despite having prepared written submissions, Parasaran chose to argue extemporaneously for two hours. This adaptability was a part of his daily routine; he would prepare handwritten notes each day, only to revise them constantly. Sharma describes Parasaran’s extraordinary capabilities: “He has a photographic memory, can argue extempore on any topic and is a workaholic. We have to keep in mind that we are working with a master.”

Unlike many modern lawyers who rely on technology for fact-checking and historical references, Parasaran draws from his vast reading. He integrates knowledge from diverse sources like Roman and English jurisprudence and Sanskrit texts, including the Bhagavad Gita. Sharma emphasizes the unique nature of Parasaran, “There’s nothing ordinary about him though he seems simple.”

Parasaran, modest about his role in the Ayodhya verdict, attributes the outcome to divine will, saying, “whatever happened was sankalp [resolve] of God. Ram must have decided enough is enough.” He even quotes Albert Einstein to express his philosophy: “Everything is determined by forces over which we have no control… Human beings, vegetables or cosmic dust, we all dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible piper.”

Asked about his involvement in the Sabarimala case, K Parasaran explained the complexity of the issue, stating, “There is a conflict. That’s why I took it up. There are interesting points but I don’t want to talk about it at this time.” The case, which revolves around the entry of women of all ages into the Sabarimala temple, saw significant developments in recent years. In September 2018, the Supreme Court allowed women of all ages to enter the temple, a decision that sparked protests. Then, in November of the following year, a five-judge bench, in a 3-2 verdict, decided that a larger bench should reconsider the matter. More recently, a nine-judge bench ruled that questions of law can be referred to a larger bench even in a review petition.

Despite being known for reciting scriptures in court, Parasaran clarifies that he is not as conventional as some might perceive him to be. He earned the nickname “Pitamaha” of the Indian Bar for this practice, but he emphasizes that he only recites scriptures when they are relevant to the case. “Some may not like it. Some judges like it. I have culled out several principles of modern law from the Ramayana and Mahabharata, which I cited in the Supreme Court. But I will not say anything from the scriptures unless I am able to link it to the case,” he explains.

Parasaran attributes his foundational learning to his father, Kesava Aiyengar, a lawyer and a Vedic scholar, who was his guru. Aiyengar, fluent in Latin and Greek, impressed British judges with his mastery of English, which Parasaran describes as akin to Chaucer's. “I am not a patch on his knowledge or art of articulation,” Parasaran humbly admits. After graduating, Parasaran initially worked at Madras University but soon decided to pursue law, following his father's advice to start an independent practice. Despite the challenging early days, a turning point came when he argued an admission matter in court. “When I stood up to argue, I was sweating. I was in trepidation. You can imagine my predicament before two judges who were giants,” he recalls. The appreciation he received from one of the judges, Vishwanath Shastri, during a chance encounter with his father, bolstered his confidence and marked the beginning of his illustrious career.

Mohan, Parasaran’s son and Solicitor General in the UPA regime from 2013 to 2014, notes his father's long-standing connection with the Ayodhya issue, dating back to the days of kar seva. He also remarks on the family dynamics, revealing that while his mother managed family affairs, his father, deeply immersed in his work, sometimes struggled to keep track of his five children's academic progress.

K Parasaran, in a reflection of his philosophical outlook, describes himself as a blend of a sanyasi (ascetic) and a family man, emphasizing a balanced approach to life: “attached to detachment and detached to [sic] attachment”. He holds a firm belief in the sanctity of the legal profession, particularly emphasizing the respect owed to the judicial system. He expresses a specific concern regarding the terminology used for the Supreme Court, stating, “One thing that I am not happy about is when judges refer to the Supreme Court as apex court. An apex is the tip of a triangle. Is there a base to call it apex? The Constitution calls it ‘Supreme Court’. By calling it apex court, you are devaluing the dignity of the court. Just like there is a Supreme Being, there’s a Supreme Court.”

Parasaran's respect for the Supreme Court is evident, although he has not always agreed with its rulings. He recalls a notable instance during the Emergency in 1976, when he openly disagreed with the Supreme Court's decision in the Additional District Magistrate Jabalpur vs Shivakant Shukla case. The ruling stated that “under emergency provisions, no one could seek the assistance of any court in India to try and save his life, liberty and limb”. At that time, he was serving as the Advocate General in Tamil Nadu.

Regarding media interactions, Parasaran has always maintained a discreet distance. His son Mohan recounts an instance when he jokingly accused his father of violating the Right to Information. Parasaran's response was characteristic of his professional ethos: “When I told him he was violating the Right to Information, he said as a lawyer we argue in court and the cases are decided in court. I cannot justify or criticise the courts.”

Parasaran’s career includes a long list of challenging cases, where he has faced formidable opponents like Nanabhoy Palkhiwala in the Federation of Hotel and Restaurant Associations and the Bombay Tyres cases. “To appear before Palkhiwala itself is a challenge,” he acknowledges. He also cites cases related to judges – involving the primacy of the chief justice, the collegium, and the National Judicial Appointments Commission – as particularly challenging.

When asked about his plans for the future, Parasaran’s response is succinct yet open-ended: “No next,” he says. You never know.