By Maleeka Naqvi
Youngest person to be called to the Bar, Barrister at the age of nineteen none other than Muhammad Ali Jinnah who began his journey towards a remarkable career that spanned nearly five decades. The only Muslim barrister in Bombay. As an Advocate he possesses a gift which cast a spell on the court, the judges, the juries, the solicitors and the clients all alike. The boldest Advocate that no judge dare to bully him and it’s because of his remarkable command on Law. He practiced in civil, criminal and high courts, and above all in the highest tribunal of the Common wealth.
Muhammad Ali Jinnah was considered to be a combination of Sir Edward Marshall Hall (who was a brilliant British barrister and had earned himself the title of “The Great Defender”) and Sir John Simon (who was Lord Chancellor of Britain (1940-45) One of Jinnah’s legal apprentices’ M.C. Chagla, who went on to become the first Indian Muslim Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court remembers him in his Memories Roses in December (1973).
“What impressed me the most was the lucidity of his thought and expression There were no obscure spots or ambiguities about what Jinnah had to tell the court. He was straight and forthright, and always left a strong impression whether his case was intrinsically good or bad. I remember sometimes at a conference he would tell the solicitor that his case was hopeless, but when he went to the court he fought like a tiger, and almost made me believe that he had changed his opinion. Whenever I talked to him afterwards about it, he would say that it was the duty of an advocate, however bad the case might be, to do the best for his client”. His ‘presentation of a case’ was nothing less than a piece of art”
One of Jinnah’s fellows barrister from the Bombay High Court remembered that ”Jinnah faith in himself was incredible ‘he recalled that on being admonished by a judge with ”Mr. Jinnah, remember that you are not addressing a third-class magistrate ‘Jinnah shot back,
My Lord, allow me to warn you that you are not addressing a third-class pleader.
Sir Stafford Cripps Frank Mores, then Editor of Indian Express, once wrote:
“Watch him in the court room as he argues his case. Few lawyers can command a more attentive audience. No man is more adroit in presenting his case. If to achieve the maximum result with minimum effort is the hallmark of artistry, Mr. Jinnah is an artist in his craft. He likes to get down to the bare bones of his brief in stating the essentials of his case. His manner is masterly”.
Lord Spence said ” I think the Privy Council is the most critical. It is a friendly court but is tremendously critical and no one who had first class brains a great power of advocacy and above all great tact and politeness would have made in so short a time such a fine practice as Mr. Jinnah did before the privy council.”
The glaring example was the famous Caucus Case of 1907 which considered one of leading case of M.Jinnah.When the general elections to the Bombay Municipal Corporation were to take place. At that time, one of the constituencies was that of the Justices of Peace for the town and island of Bombay. They had to return 16 members. Sir Pherozeshah Mehta was consistently returned for many years by that constituency. Pherozeshah had by his services both inside and outside the Corporation acquired a commanding position in the Corporation. Some European members as well as the then Municipal Commissioner, Mr Sheppard, formed a clique which was in those days called the ‘caucus’ to defeat Pherozeshah at the polls. The poll was taken in the Municipal Hall on February 21, 1907 at a meeting of the Justices when the Municipal Commissioner, Sheppard presided. The result was declared the next day and 16 ‘caucus’ ticket candidates succeeded and Pherozeshah Mehta stood seventeenth. Public indignation on the declaration of the result was very great. The 16 person who got in, was Suleman Abdul Waheed of Ladha Ibrahim & Co., who had contracts with the Municipal Act, disqualified from being a councillor. A petition was presented to the Chief Election Judge to declare that he was disqualified from being a Councillor and that Sir Pherozeshah Mehta, who stood 17 got automatically elected to the Corporation. Mr. Jinnah represented Sir Pherozeshah Mehta. Mr. Jinnah’s cross-examination of witnesses especially of Lovat Fraser, Editor of Times was devastating. Mr. Jinnah urged that:-
Mr. Haji Noormahomed gave his vote to Sir Pherozeshah on the first occasion, and exhausted his right of voting. On the second occasion when he voted for all the 16 candidates he acted contrary to law. A second illegal act could not destroy the legality of the first. The Counsel cited the case of Queen vs. Avery in support of his argument. Mr. Jinnah’s contentions were accepted by the learned judge and Sir Pherozeshah was declared as duly elected to the Corporation. By getting the verdict in favour of Sir Pherozeshah Mehta, Mr. Jinnah was recognized as one of the leading lawyers.
The biographer of M.A Jinnah, namely, Hector Bolitho, after an extensive research, has narrated many episodes that speak loud and clear about the probity of M A Jinnah as a professional lawyer. He writes:
Once, when a client was referred to him, the Solicitor mentioned that the man had limited money with which to fight the case. Nevertheless, Jinnah took it up. He lost but he still had faith in the case and he said that it should be taken to the Appeal Court. The solicitor again mentioned that his client had no money. Jinnah pressed him to defray certain of the appeal expenses out of his own pocket, and promised to fight the case without any fee for himself.
This time, he won; but, when the solicitor offered him a fee, Jinnah refused arguing that he had accepted the case on the condition that there was no fee.” Hector Bolitho, author of 60 books, writes further: “There was a client who was so pleased with Jinnah’s services in a case, that he sent him an additional fee. Jinnah returned it, with a note,
‘This is the amount you paid me. This was the fee… Here is the balance.” [Hector Bolitho, Jinnah the creator of Pakistan (1954), pages 18-19
Sheikh M Abdullah in his autobiography [“Blazing Chinar” (Gulshan Books (2016) Chapter 30 titled “Mohammad Ali Jinnah & Myself” at pages 220-231] briefly mentioned one of his unusual case of 1930s, that for peculiarity of its facts had attracted attention of the whole of Kashmir.
In the words of Shiekh Abdullah the Court room was flooded with people drawn from almost every section of the society even shopkeepers having shut their shops. Ref. Sheikh Abdullah & Beigh. [Muhammad Yousuf Saraf, Kashmiris Fight for Freedom (2009 edition) vol one, pages 620-621]
One Hanifa begum first husband died, she had been, then, married to one Abdul Kabir and subsequently to one Mirza Mehr.Abddul kabir had filed criminal complaint with an offence of marrying already married woman against both Hanifa and Mehr ali.
Lower court had convicted Hanifa while acquitted Mehr ali for want of knowledge. Then Mehr Ali challenged order in appeal before High court by Afzal Beigh who had lost it there. It was thought to be a hopeless case on fact.
In the words of Sheikh Abdullah, what was that razor-sharp legal acumen that Jinnah had used that took everyone in the Court room by surprise. In Islam, it may be noted, a widow can remarry only after observing Iddat, which is a period of four months and ten days from the date of death of the husband. The question was whether Hanifa had remarried Abdul Kabir during the period of Iddat. If so, then that marriage was null and void under the Islamic law and her marriage with Mehr Ali was valid. Conversely, marriage with Mehr Ali was invalid and, hence, the complaint under section 494 genuine. M A Jinnah came to the Court room without books and argued that the Iddat period of four months and ten days under the Islamic law was to be counted in lunar months only when death of a husband takes place on first of the “lunar month” otherwise it had to be counted as 130 days simple, one may say according to solar calendar. He argued further that, in the case, the Iddat period was to be calculated according to latter rule of 130 days simple and applying it to the case, marriage of Hanifa with Abdul Kabir (complainant) was during the Iddat period. Hence, it was null and void, while her marriage with Mehr Ali is valid. The whole audience was left agape with joy and jubilation. Chief Justice asked: “Mr. Jinnah. Is there any authority?” He replied: “My Lord. I am the authority”
Privy Council sparingly complimented any counsel in their judgements and decisions But Quaid e Azam abilities earned judicial approbation. His exposition evoked admiration from judges and juries alike; and the judgements of cases which he appeared always replete with appreciation.
Quaid e Azam was too self controlling and disciplined person and never crack a jokes once in a court there was such a noise of rush that it appeared that the judges would lose their temper.
”My Lord”said Jinnah in very sweet voice, ”these are my admirers. Please don’t mind. I hope you are not jealous.”Smile on the faces of judges and they magnetically charmed by the words of the great persuasive man. Then Quaid e Azam looked the crowd, raised his left hand indicating that he desired them to keep quite. The atmosphere became pin drop silence as if by magic and case proceeded.
M.C.Chagla the chief Justice of the High Court of Bombay, classically observed that ”Jinnah was a pure artist in the manner and method of his presentation. Even the most complex facts became simple and obvious when he waived his wand over them. His advocacy was the absolute clear head that he possessed, on which he justly prided himself. He had common sense, that most uncommon of qualities, in an uncommon degree.”
Mr. Jinnah was absolutely on the top of the profession, he advocated equal rights for all citizens. A great man and a great leader an upright and honourable person. It’s not possible to compile his legal career in one Article I’m not wrong if I say we blessed with a leader like Muhammad Ali Jinnah, a gift of Allah for the Muslims of this region. I end up with his saying in July 1984 when Mr. M.A.H.Isphani went to Ziarat where Quaid e Azam was seriously ill. He pleaded with Quaid e Azam that he should take complete rest as his life was most precious. Quaid e Azam smiled and said:
”My boy there was a time when soon after partition and until 1984, I was worried whether Pakistan would survive. Many unexpected and terrible shocks were administered by India soon after we parted company with them. But we pulled through and nothing will ever worry us so much again. I have no worries forever now. Men may come and men may go, but Pakistan is truly and firmly established and will go on with Allah grace.”
And yes as Quaid said Pakistan will go on by the grace of Allah.
