No my Lord, it doesn't add up. Again!

 

The previous blog dwelt on the interview of ex-CJI Mr. Chandrachud by Sreenivasan Jain. Actually, the interview could’ve been much worse. Sreenivasan didn’t ask a number of questions, possibly because of lack of time or because he was gobsmacked by the assertion of original desecration of a temple to build Babri Masjid when there was no evidence of it. 

Following questions would’ve tied up Mr. Chandrachud in knots further. 

What was the point of all those lengthy deliberations, wastage of everybody’s time including the Court’s when the action component was missing? He declared the action of the Speaker of Maharashtra Assembly illegal but didn’t do anything about the result of the action which led to formation of the Shinde government. He declared the Electoral Bonds unconstitutional but didn’t bother about recovery of the loot made by the parties from the electoral bonds. Plus, even though the “actual” donor information was available with SBI, he didn’t ask for it so the two A’s possibly got away because they might’ve donated through proxies or trusts. Even after taking Suo Moto cognisance of Manipur problems, there was no effective action or direction. If ever there was a case for urgent Governor’s rule, it was in Manipur which is still burning. 

Then there were cases where the government blatantly violated the Supreme Court order. The Supreme Court itself had held that the independence of the Election Commission is fundamental to democracy. On 2.3.2023, It had ordered a three-member Committee consisting of the PM, LoP and CJI to determine the appointment of the Election Commissioners. The government enacted a bill (28.12.2023) and replaced the CJI with a Cabinet Minister, nullifying the ECI independence. All that “fundamental to democracy” bit was blown to smithereens. The conduct of the CECs and the Election Commissioners thereafter has been there for the whole world to see. Since this one thing strikes at the heart of democracy, the minimum expectation from the Court was either a stay or a day-to-day hearing to settle the issue urgently. 

In one case, he facilitated dilution of his own order through inaction – Delhi Services Case. The Central government had completely stymied the functioning of Delhi Chief Minister by putting the bureaucracy in an adversarial position to the elected government. On 11.5.2023, CJI’s own bench held that no elected government can function without the bureaucracy being accountable to it and so, apart from public order, police and land matters, the elected government of Delhi would have full powers and would have transfer and posting control over the concerned bureaucrats. However, a few days after the order, on 26.7.2023, the Central government circumvented it by issuing an ordinance giving the Lieutenant Governor all powers to overrule the National Capital Civil Service Authority headed by the Chief Minister. What then is the point of an elected government in Delhi? As the Supreme Court had gone into constitutionality and passed the order, prima facie, the ordinance was unconstitutional and required immediate and strong intervention by the Court. That didn’t happen. 

Justice Chandrachud’s administrative actions too have dealt body blows to the polity. The government appears to be trying to completely control the judiciary through delay and cherry-picking of appointment and transfer of judges despite collegium recommendations. On 5.12.2023, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul’s bench was due to hear the case pertaining to it. Strangely, it was mysteriously “deleted” from the list without any reason. Justice Kaul wryly remarked, “I will just say one thing. I have not deleted the matter. I am sure the Chief Justice knows about it…some things are best left unsaid, sometimes.” Mr. Chandrachud was CJI from 9.9.2022 to 10.11.2024. There were also scores of complaints regarding assigning of politically sensitive cases to a particular judge or benches comprising the same judge. 

His personal conduct has been open to opprobrium. It appears that even though he retired on 10.11.2024, he was staying in the government bungalow till August 2025, a full nine months after and vacated it only after the Supreme Court requested the authorities to evict him. Even more reprehensible were his justifications. First, he tried to justify it on grounds of accessibility concerns for his children with disabilities. Hello, if that be a ground, so many government servants would just occupy their government quarters in perpetuity. Then he asked why the controversy when he was paying market rent. The rules required that he should have vacated it within three months (media reports suggest that he could stay in a lower, type VII quarters for six months while 5, Krishna Menon Marg is type VIII quarters) and since it was a designated bungalow for the CJI, propriety demanded that he should have vacated it on the day of his retirement so that his successor could’ve moved in – even Prime Ministers vacate their designated quarters within a day. Why he has been allotted different government quarters now is not understood. Why he accepted the same is of graver concern. Media not questioning it enough speaks of a circle of silence. 

Post retirement, he has purchased a Mercedes-Benz-E-Class E200 (cost approx. Rs. 92 lacs) and the matter came to light when the registrar of the Supreme Court wrote to Delhi Transport Commissioner requesting a specific registration number for it. Both the cost and that request of the registrar regarding a private vehicle of a private citizen raise eyebrows. It’s also a matter of concern that while annual declaration of assets is mandatory for all government servants, the Supreme Court judges are exempt from it – I feel, they should be leading by example. 

Given the above and the previous blog, I feel, the title of his book, “Why Constitution Matters” is a bit rich. Constitution does matter, but this is not the way to make it so.

 

No my Lord, it doesn't add up

I took that limited-time subscription of Rs. 99 just to watch the full interview of ex-CJI D.Y. Chandrachud to Newslaundry. At the end of it, I was left wondering what was he thinking when he organised or agreed to the interview – there had earlier been a devastating takedown of former CJI Gogoi by the same interviewer. I think, his Lordship was very keen to be interviewed – the possible twin purposes may have been promoting his upcoming book (Why the Constitution Matters) and managing a governmental position or a QUANGO (Quasi-Autonomous Non-Governmental Organization) or some such. 

The ex-CJI was visibly rattled from the get-go by the first question when Sreenivasan retailed the google results for his legacy – Consequential, Confounding, Controversial, Contradictory. When Sreenivasan got to specifics, it kept getting worse. 

The first one was the Ayodhya judgement. Right from Day One, everyone and his uncle knew that Justice Chandrachud was the author. At one point while still in office, he decided to go public with ownership of the authorship but it backfired badly because he attributed it to divine guidance, etc.. Now, in interview after interview he is trying to get out of the authorship saying “I’m a disciplined soldier of the system and will not reveal"; "all five judges have authorship"; "unanimous agreement", etc.. However, once the genie is out, it can’t be put back. While defending the judgement during the interview, he tied himself up in knots and finally blatantly misled saying there was evidence of a Hindu temple having been desecrated for building a mosque. This was in direct contradiction to the judgement as per which there was no evidence that an underlying structure was “actually demolished” to build a mosque. He then tried to justify not dividing the land for both parties quoting law and order apprehensions. Hello, my Lordship, that was not your remit; your remit was pronouncing on the evidence and the law; it’s the Executive which is supposed to look after law and order. 

Where was the law and order consideration when he allowed the survey of the Gyanvapi mosque to determine the religious character of the place when changing the same is not permissible under the Act? In the interview he tried to justify it by talking about determining whether it was a place of archaeological importance (an exception allowed) whereas that was not a part of any of the pleadings. It was just somehow artificially finding a justification after a decision. He also claimed that there has always been undisputed Hindu worship in the cellar (this was fact-checked as wrong assertion). Plus, the structure is a mosque so if any Hindu worship has ever been allowed in any part of any mosque premises, the structure would be erased? That one action allowing the survey opened such a Pandora’s box that many parts of the country were simmering, many suits were filed all over the country and there were several deaths until one of his successors finally put a lid on it through a stay. While questioned on the law and order implications and outcomes, suddenly he switched to “truth” even at the cost of unpopularity. 

He ducked the question of abrogation of Article 370 saying the judgement has spoken. Then why was he answering all those other questions? Restoration of statehood for J & K/ Kashmir was a related question raised. His bench didn’t go into it apparently because the government assured that it wants to restore statehood. On the question of not fixing or asking for a timeline, his defence: one has to trust the government. OMG, if Supreme Court trusts the government, then where is the need for its existence? Every time there is a question, government will just say, “Trust us, it’s all good.” 

There was the extraordinary matter of Ganesh Puja celebration at his residence with the PM attending. [It is not understood why these things happen with uncanny regularity. Whenever there’s any important matter being handled by the Supreme Court and is likely to be grossly inconvenient to the ruling party, the PM decides to visit the Supreme court premises or the President invites the CJI or the PM participates in a Puja at the CJI’s residence or the CJI’s mother is invited as Chief Guest at an RSS function.] While justification regarding the Ganesh Puja matter was advanced in terms of the invitation being in a personal capacity and it being a private matter, there was no information as to why the cameras and the photographs then. 

At the end of the interview, I wondered what happens now to the governmental position or the non-governmental QUANGO which could be a possible motive for the interview. Well, it takes two to quango but Sreenivasan was not playing ball.

[To be concluded]

Customs, Police and a cautionary tale

 Recently, a logistics company, Wintrack tweeted: 

From October 1, 2025, our company will cease import/ export activities in India. For the past 45 days, Chennai Customs officials have relentlessly harassed us. After exposing their bribery practices twice this year, they retaliated, effectively crippling our operations and destroying our business in India. We deeply thank everyone who has supported us during these difficult times. 

Customs dismissed the allegations as “serious and false.” Wintrack named three officials, shared screenshots, mentioned bribe amount/s and also “discount” on the bribes. The episode led to such a flood of others pouring out their tales of harassment by and bribery of Customs officials on the internet that the Union Finance Ministry has now ordered an enquiry and also issued a statement. 

Well, I too have a Customs story. 

This was when I was S.P., Calcutta Airport. I learnt that the airport gate leading to the Customs enclosure had become almost a free zone with anyone entering and exiting it freely. This had serious implications for the airport security. The airport is only as secure as all its access points and any breach anywhere compromises the whole system. As per the rules, there were only two ways to enter an airport, either through a legitimate ticket for travel or an Airport Entry Permit (AEP). 

I directed the Police personnel to strictly implement the above rule without any exception, regardless of the gate. I was astounded by the backlash from Customs. Their Assistant Commissioners threatened my officers and even their Additional Commissioner wrote a D.O. letter asking me to “stop such practices which was impacting their rules of business.” When I pointed out that I shall not be able to allow anyone in without one of those two documents because that was violative of my “rule of business,” she chose to approach my seniors. 

Additional Commissioner of Customs was very senior to me in rank and rated audience by the high and mighty in the Police. I received a call from a DGP asking how come Calcutta airport had collapsed under my watch. I politely told him that I was as of that moment sitting in the airport and all about me things were bustling along and I definitely would’ve noticed if it had indeed collapsed. He was not convinced and ordered an IGP to look into the matter. I was accordingly summoned by the IGP to explain. 

What had happened was this. Those days, smuggling from Bangkok used to be big. There were these operators from Fancy Market in Kidderpore, the smuggling hub of Calcutta who used to regularly fly to Bangkok and come back with smuggled goods to the full extent of their purchasing power. After arriving at Calcutta airport, they would have no money for paying the Customs duties or the “alternative demands” so they would be allowed to go out of that gate and auction the goods out at the airport itself (the gate would be crowded with touts in sync with the arrival of those flights) and come back with the money to pay. The procedure is that if the legitimate Customs duties were to be paid, the goods needed to be “officially seized,” valued, and later released from the Customs warehouse against payment of the duty amount. This apparently was anathema to the Customs officials because that would obviate any “negotiations” or other dealings. I also offered to accept a third document, i.e., written authorisation by the Customs officials for any re-entry but that too was not acceptable because it would create a paper trail, hence no possible “negotiations.” 

So I went to that Nuremberg trial chaired by the IGP. I had prepared a two-page note detailing the full picture and submitted it for “his kind perusal.” The IGP was flanked by two DIGs and I was seated facing the three of them and shrinking by the minute. While the IGP was reading the note, the two DIGs took turns to berate and abuse me left, right and centre for “not being practical,” for creating friction with other agencies, for making things unnecessarily difficult for all concerned and so on. This went on for a good 10-15 minutes. Then the IGP finished reading the note, looked up and asked, “Agar smugglers ko tight kar raha hai to aap logon ko kya dikkat hai?” Immediately, the two DIGs changed their tune and complimented me for doing such a stellar job. I breathed again. 

Armed with that validation, I went back and hand-picked four officers with unimpeachable integrity to supervise that particular gate (in the four shifts). The Customs officials and the touts threatened to get them eliminated. I deployed visible and substantial police escorts for them to and from their residences. I also found that after the last international flight at around 9.30 PM every day, there used to be a party in the Customs enclosure to distribute the booty and the “negotiated amounts” collected during the day over sumptuous food and booze supplied from a nearby (famous) hotel and the officials used to be in an expansive mood then, expansive enough to throw Rs. 10,000 or so as tips for each of the hotel staff doing the catering. These hotel guys were also entering without any permit. I personally stopped them and again the Customs officials contacted a lot of my seniors on the plea that I was making them starve. However, this time, it didn’t cut any ice with anyone. 

After the airport assignment, I was posted to Calcutta Police which was a leg up. I was happy. But the happiest was the Customs set up at the airport. I believe, when the news of my new assignment filtered in, they burst into a proper Bhangra in celebration. The Airports Authority organised a big farewell for me – it was an eventful tenure, Purulia arms-drop, two almost-hijacks, a grenade incident and so on. All the agencies operating at the airport, with one exception, participated with gusto. Customs officials were conspicuous by their absence.

Leave the kids alone, please!

 

One of the youngest of my batchmates in the IPS was widely expected to head the force in his cadre one day, age at entry being very important. He was doing well in the career too. Until he realised that his son had some potential in Cricket. After that, he forgot everything else and focused single-minded on getting his son into the Indian team. He chose postings (sometimes fairly unimportant ones) whereby he could devote maximum time towards that objective and his son would get the best chance. He also stopped his son’s studies so that the latter could devote himself full-time to the sport. There must’ve been a whole lot of unimaginable hard choices – diet, commute, personal coach/ trainer, on and on. It requires such single-minded obsession and sacrifices to make it. Because, in India, almost every boy plays Cricket, growing up and the vacancies in any of the Indian playing teams are exactly eleven at any point of time. 

With all this and despite being from a fairly privileged background and even despite serious talent (remarkable knocks in the IPL), the boy hasn't been able to make it to the Indian team. One can only imagine what a kid or his family from a not-so-privileged background or from the hinterland must be going through when that all-elusive India cap beckons as a goal. Yashaswi Jaiswal selling Panipuris to sustain himself in Mumbai; Dhoni juggling between checking train tickets and playing; Hardik Pandya surviving on 5-rupee Maggi for breakfast and lunch, 365 days a year; Natarajan’s father a daily-wage labourer in Chinapampatti village, Tamil Nadu; Md. Siraj’s father an auto-rickshaw driver. 

Cut to what has happened in the just-concluded Asia cup. Starting with the Captain, Surya Kumar Yadav (SKY) who refused to shake hands with the Pak captain at the toss in their first match. The Indian team walked off the field without the customary handshakes with their opponents in the same match. In the post-match presentation, SKY made it a point to mention the Pahalgam attack victims. Pakistani player Haris Rauf made a 6-0 gesture to the crowd. Sahibzada Farhan indulged in ‘Gun’ celebration after making a half century. SKY pooh-poohed any talk of ‘rivalry’ between the two teams, quoting the head-to-head record in T20Is. Arshdeep Singh made an obscene gesture. Bumrah signalled jet crash after taking Haris Rauf’s wicket. Indian players refused to collect the trophy and medals from the Asian Cricket Council President (Mohsin Naqvi) as he was “also one of the main political leaders of Pakistan.” The latter chose to take away the trophy and the medals. Finally, the tweet calling India’s victory “OperationSindoor on the games field.”  

What exactly was the point of it all? It seems that as far as the international community and the global defence community are concerned, Pakistan won the war – witness Trump’s hosting of General/ Field Marshal Munir and the Pakistan PM, surge in stock prices of Chengdu jet company, etc.. Even our CDS admitted in public to our having made a tactical blunder which took two days to recover from in a four-day war. All these shenanigans on the cricket field will not change that. Domestically, for the discerning public, the twin spins, viz., A. we were winning and B. we didn’t cave in to American pressure, don’t add up because why then did we stop the war? 

How does mentioning Pahalgam in the presentation ceremony help? If Pahalgam was still a big issue after the war, why play Pakistan at all?  The conduct of the Indian team looked like the losers’ conduct, not confident winners’. It was also extremely graceless. The reprehensible conduct of the Pakistani team and officials does not justify anything because India started it all. Everyone who represents a country on the cricket field comes up through enormous struggles and heartbreaks. On their day, any team can win. In fact, Pakistan nearly won the finals. Given that, SKY’s utterances (Pakistan no rivals, etc.) speaks of unconscionable lack of respect for opponents. Well before the tournament, it was known that Mohsin Naqvi is the current president of Asian Cricket Council. If India participated in the tournament of the same Asian Cricket Council despite that, then why can’t he present the trophy? That tweet equating the match to Operation Sindoor. The final was extremely close and it was anyone’s game. So, going by the tweet, if India had lost the match, would it have meant that we were defeated in the war? 

Just think of the kind of risks we as a nation were taking by using the players as pawns in the larger political game. After all the drama of no handshakes, mention of Pahalgam, derisive dismissal of rivalry talk and all the other in-your-face gestures, if we had lost the finals, it would have been such a body blow to the nation’s psyche. That last ball six of Miandad in peace times took us decades to recover from. This one would’ve taken ages. 

During the most successful war of modern times (1971) which India won comprehensively in just 13 days taking 90,000 Pakistanis as prisoners, a young Pakistan Captain (Asan Malik) defended a position called Hilly so well that the Indian forces did not succeed in capturing it in several attempts. Even though we captured the post finally, our Chief of Army Staff, later to be Field Marshal, Sam Manekshaw, impressed by the Captain’s valour, sent a personal letter of appreciation and even recommended a gallantry award for him to his superiors. During his subsequent visit to Pakistan, he reiterated his request to his counterparts there. He also ensured that the 90,000 prisoners were treated well and with dignity in India. This is called respect for the opponent. And, graciousness in winning, even when the win is such an enormous one. 

These cricketers are young kids who have obsessively devoted most of their years to Cricket. MoM in the final match, Tilak Verma is just 22 years old. Cricket is what they are best at and all that they know and all that they should be doing. Let the cricketers play their Cricket (when the circumstances permit) and let the battles be left to the battlefield. Please!

Troll nation

 

Recently I quit a WhatsApp group. I have been reflecting upon the conduct of the group and its members. 

The group was called “democratic.” 

One single person, late in the night, DECIDED that since there’s an option in WhatsApp called ‘timer,’ it should be tried. And, he did. Because, he could, as he was one of the admin members. He didn’t bother to consult the other admin members. He didn’t bother to find out whether that was what the other members wanted. He just did it. Because, it was his version of democracy. And, he had DECIDED. 

Some of the other admin members pushed back. Ultimately, one of the (very) lowly members (viz., me) pushed back. But, in the name of democracy, this one person held firm and stuck to his stand. Because, he had the power – he was admin, no less! When push came to shove, he did what every bureaucrat in the annals of history had done. He organised a poll. Not “before,” but “after,” having blocked all the other members from saving their individual preferences. He also suddenly remembered democracy again. There was one type of democracy before he peremptorily blocked everyone else from individual ‘saves.’ Under this second type of democracy, members had to now vote before his “democratic” action could be revoked. Even though the concerned admin vigorously rang up other members to support the timer, more members voted ‘against’ the timer than ‘for.’ So, there had to be a third type of ‘democracy.’ Poll extended for a week, extendable for a fortnight, a month, a year, or so on, ad infinitum (the time period decided by him), until enough times the coin dropped ‘heads.’ Meanwhile, that “democratic” decision to block the saves continued. 

Such is the basis upon which “democracy” is built. Amen! 

There was another member whose world began and ended with one particular dispensation (OPD) and its policies. So, whatever OPD decreed or promoted had to be defended at all costs. So, if OPD committed the country’s Air Force to battle under some “cloud theory” of escaping radar detection, that was a masterstroke! Obviously, there was plastic surgery which made Lord Ganesha’s elephant head possible. The 2,000 rupee notes had chips embedded (wonder what happened to the chips since the notes are now gone). Shivaji statue had laser eyes to detect terrorist movements in the sea – the statue has now collapsed so we all are quite vulnerable. 

There was another guy for whom everything reminded of caste. If someone even posted a nice painting or said the sky was blue, he would rave and rant and splutter about how Brahmins have been so evil. And, heavens forbid, if anyone even mentioned reservations … I tried telling him everything reminded me of sex but at least I didn’t put it in ALL my WhatsApp posts but the irony passed him by. 

One guy thought that he was “the chosen one” to spread the outpourings of the toxic IT cell and try and fashion the group in its image. It was not even acceptable to him if nobody responded to his rants. He would cast serious aspersions on the intellectual abilities of his batchmates if others remained silent. 

Two guys once got into a heated argument and then the admin (used to be a lone person then, the creator of the group) was asked to intervene. The admin did so but it was apparently not acceptable that the admin had not taken a stronger stand. The then lone admin quit the group – for more than a decade, he had worked assiduously to keep the group together, … and civil. 

The problem is not with WhatsApp as a platform. The problem is not even with most of the WhatsApp group members. The problem is with the systematic injecting of the venom that has made us into such a hateful nation of trolls that “hatred” is our default option. The bigger problem is that the “injecting” has been SO successful that highly educated people (IIMs are the pinnacle of educational excellence in India) and people who have seen the ins-and-outs of government and politicians and their seamier sides at play (civil servants) have been mesmerised into idolatry. I quit my IIM batch group in the past. I’ve now quit a civil services group. I’ve also quit a retired people’s group. I guess, I self-enforced my social media ban. Other governments en-forced social media bans from the outside, with disastrous results. With time, they’ll probably pivot to the Indian model (of immersing social media with so much venom from the inside and creating so many trolls that no ban would be necessary). Just a hope – India will learn from these incidents. It’s a small, dwindling, now-barely-flickering hope. We live in dark times.

Why do they hate us so much?

 

Nepal has been up in flames recently. Although international media has given the news short shrift, things appear to have been really bad there. News about Nepal made me cast my mind back to my United Nations deployment in Sierra Leone. The guns had fallen silent. Peace-keeping was practically over. A very small group of us were engaged in what was called “capacity building” – the deaf leading the blind? Since it was a small group, we interacted with each other continuously and extensively. One Nepalese officer used to spend much of his time in my office room. One day, while discussing someone else, he just burst out saying, “Who toh Indians se bhi gandaa hai!” [“He is even dirtier than Indians!”] before realising that he was actually talking to an Indian. I was furious and threatened to report him for a racist comment like that and he panicked and apologised profusely. I let it go; however, it made me think how hated we are amongst our neighbours. 

The next time I came face to face with the hatred was nearly a full-blown diplomatic crisis with me at the centre of it. I was working with Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (BCAS), the security regulator for all things aviation in India. The previous hijacking of an Indian aeroplane (IC 814) had been orchestrated after the plane took off from Kathmandu and we were concerned about the security arrangements at Kathmandu airport. I was leading a team of officials from different organisations and ministries for an audit of Kathmandu airport as far as it pertained to our operations there. 

Actually, this is a routine matter and within international obligations under the ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organisation) mandate. Any ICAO signatory country is obliged to allow inspection of their aviation security arrangements by officials of any other signatory country having aviation operation to and from the former. We were inspecting airports in many countries and officials of other countries used to inspect our arrangements too. I never expected how big a problem my visit was going to be. 

Just a day or two before our trip, the Indian High Commission’s office informed me that there was a glitch and that the Nepal government was not willing to permit us. I told them we were coming anyway because we could always travel to Nepal under the existing agreements and if they permitted the audit, fine; else, we’d come back. Later I heard from my IPS colleague at the High Commission that the High Commissioner was not-a-little amused, aghast, and, somewhat admiring – he chuckled, “I like these guys’ attitude!” He worked hard to facilitate the trip and the audit. 

When we landed, I was shocked by some of the headlines in the Nepalese newspapers. “India is sending people to destroy our sovereignty.” “Now Indian arms will land in Nepal.” “We are an independent nation.” And, so on. I was also told that the matter of issuing Airport Entry Permits for us was raging in their legislative body (I think, it was called a legislature then) because a Minister had raised strong objections to our proposed audit. 

Something funny happened though. A very senior police officer of Nepal (different from the previous mentioned) who had served in the team headed by me in Sierra Leone heard that I was in town, visited me in his personal capacity and took me around the airport and its facilities and discussed a lot of the details, apart from discussing the (good?) old days. The next day, partly because the particular minister realised that I was able to access things without the permit and partly due to the efforts of the Indian High Commission, we were “formally” granted the permits and rest of the audit went smoothly. 

I was appalled by the incident. However, I was even more appalled by the attitude of some of the officials in my delegation. The moment we “officially” entered the airport, the guys in my delegation started “directing” the Nepalese officials and “dictating” what they should or shouldn’t do. I called a time-out, gathered them in and told them to strictly follow protocol; their job was not to “oversee” but to observe and ask questions after asking for permission; any observations would be communicated between the governments on govt-to-govt basis through proper channels and any “directions” to the Indian aviation agencies would be communicated during a closed-door de-brief meeting. Believe me, my delegation officials were sputtering and straining at the leash so I had to be even harsher than the previous words suggest. 

Even though this was a small incident, it does mirror how we, as a country, have managed to gather so many enemies and so much hatred in our backyard. We are big and that is our privilege but that is also our burden. We need not be overbearing. Also, we could be a little more gracious, and sensitive. Sensitive, above all.

Ode to an alma mater

It is inevitable that human civilisation will self-destruct at some point in time. Then the cycle will start all over again. Hunting-gathering, rudimentary tools, stone age, bronze age, iron age, nuclear age and so on. At a future date, when they excavate, they might find a beautiful structure at present-day Bannerghatta in Bengaluru. There would be inexplicable stone structures spanning an area of present-day 54,000 sqm. It might look like this:

They will find stone structures like this on the following pattern over 54,000 sqm area:

They will use carbon dating or whatever methods and date the constructions to present day 1973-1983. Gradually, with the help of other artifacts and some imagination, they’ll recreate some of the structures to have looked like:

 

They will be surprised at some of the similarities of the structures to two other structures found quite far away. They wouldn’t know that these latter were called Fatehpur Sikri and Madurai temple today. They will be amazed at the structures’ spatial synthesis and energy efficiency with passive cooling strategies. The facilitation of natural light and ventilation will take their breath away. Every so often, the lines of the architecture will baffle them because they will see sudden changes of scale and occasional breakings of corridors; however, the structure would make sense when taken as a whole. 

What they wouldn’t know is that the whole complex was designed to foster an environment of learning and interaction. If they reconstruct the buildings with lush surroundings they will find the whole complex leaning on a sequence of spatial experiences. The overall sequence of movement – from the lush, open campus to the semi-open corridors and eventually to the more enclosed and protected spaces would generate multiple threshold conditions. These unique locations in the plan would allow the functional spaces to interact and assimilate more freely with the overall theme, creating fluid and easy connections between the spaces for movement and the spaces for work. 

They wouldn’t know the genius of the architect, Balkrishna Vithaldas Doshi for whom, “Architecture was an extension of the body, and it was where the mind dwelt.” Like all Doshi’s creation, this structure, with its harmonious blend of traditional Indian and modern architectural elements would be seen but the underlying philosophy would escape those in the future. They may not know that the design ethos was to create a space that transcended the physical boundaries of buildings, encouraging openness and fluidity, seamlessly integrating indoor and outdoor spaces, facilitating a dialogue between nature and built form. The structure would be representative of architectural norms at a time when the country was on the cusp of embracing modernity. 

They may well surmise a few things, e.g., that it was a place of learning, but they wouldn’t know how, by creating an atmosphere where one didn’t see divides and doors, it promoted a sense of community among the students and faculty. How the courtyards, corridors, and fenestrations were meticulously designed to facilitate natural light and ventilation, creating a conducive atmosphere for education and contemplation. How the inclusive spaces encouraged creativity and interaction. How the campus blended historical inspirations and modern functionality, making it a unique example of how architecture could bridge the past and the present. Or how over a career spanning six decades, Doshi created such a profound impact on the architectural fraternity and society at large that he was awarded the prestigious Pritzker Architecture Prize (frequently referred to as the Nobel prize of architecture) in 2018, becoming the first Indian to receive this honour. 

Above all, they wouldn’t know how the campus and the buildings housed a beacon of academic excellence called IIMB which nourished such a large number of world leaders and how enormously the architecture contributed to that process. They also wouldn’t know that although the institute was already 10 years old then, the author’s batch was the first one in that campus.

[The pathway to excellence]