Justice for Sale: The Ethics of Expensive Lawyers

Poonam Sharma 

When Justice Exposes What the Apex Courts Ignore

On January 3, 2025, a historic judgment emerged from an unexpected corner of India’s judiciary — not from the Supreme Court, but from the Special NIA Court in Lucknow. Judge Vivekanand Sharan Tripathi sentenced 28 men from the Muslim community to life imprisonment for the gruesome murder of Abhishek alias Chandan Gupta during a Tiranga Yatra in Kasganj on Republic Day, 2018.

But this judgment went far beyond punishment. It tore into the veils shielding a dangerous nexus — the unholy alliance between anti-national NGOs and elite lawyers who appear in courts not for justice, but for money, ideology, or both.

For decades, India has suffered in silence as foreign-funded NGOs and their legal mouthpieces sprang into action each time terrorists, rioters, or infiltrators faced justice. But finally, a trial court judge has dared to ask the question that no Supreme Court or High Court has ever asked: Who funds these NGOs, and why do some of the country’s most expensive lawyers rush to defend accused terrorists and illegal infiltrators?

The Cabal of Complicity

In his order, Justice Tripathi named seven organizations actively involved in defending the accused in serious crimes, often involving terrorism and communal violence:

1. Citizens for Justice and Peace, Mumbai
2. People’s Union for Civil Liberties, Delhi
3. Rihai Manch
4. Alliance for Justice and Accountability, New York
5. Indian American Muslim Council, Washington DC
6. South Asia Solidarity Group, London
7. Jamiat Ulema Hind

Many of these organizations have a known history of championing convicts of terrorism, crying “human rights” even in the face of blood-soaked evidence. And always, they seem to have at their disposal high-profile lawyers whose services even an average middle-class citizen could never afford.

Justice Tripathi questioned — and rightly so — how such lawyers charge lakhs per hearing, yet show up to represent criminals who can’t even afford bail. Who pays them? Which foreign hand signs the cheque? Which agenda drives these courtroom battles?

A Demand for Transparency Long Overdue

The judge didn’t stop at condemnation. He took action. He sent a copy of his judgment to the Union Home Ministry and the Bar Council of India, demanding an audit of NGO funding and a framework to monitor lawyers’ financial transparency.

He proposed the following revolutionary steps:

• Publish the fee structures and asset declarations of all lawyers practicing in the High Court and Supreme Court.
• Ensure all legal fees are paid through banking channels only.
• Mandate disclosure of the source of the fees — especially in criminal cases with national security implications.
• File affidavits confirming that legal fees did not originate from any terrorist or foreign organization.

This is not just a legal concern. It is a matter of national sovereignty. A democracy that cannot differentiate between activism and sabotage is bound to collapse from within.

The Rohingya Case: A National Security Paradox

This isn’t an isolated incident. The disturbing trend has been visible for years. Take the example of Rohingya infiltrators — illegal immigrants from Myanmar with no legal standing in India. Despite security agencies flagging them as a threat, six of the country’s top lawyers appeared before the Supreme Court in 2017 on behalf of two Rohingya men, Mohammad Salimullah and Mohammad Shakir.

These men lived in slums. They looked like beggars. And yet, they were represented by the likes of:

• Dr. Rajeev Dhawan
• Prashant Bhushan
• Dr. Ashwini Kumar
• Colin Gonsalves
• Fali Nariman
• Kapil Sibal

Would these legal titans appear for a poor Indian farmer fighting for land rights? Unlikely. But for illegal immigrants with an international sympathy narrative, they line up like clockwork.

The same is true for the Places of Worship Act challenge and petitions against forced religious conversions — where expensive, politically connected lawyers are seen stalling critical reforms.

Even when Delhi High Court dismissed a plea seeking public school education for Rohingya children, an NGO rushed to the Supreme Court, which passed a pro-Rohingya order, completely ignoring the threat posed by unregulated illegal migration.

NGOs or Trojan Horses?

Justice Tripathi has peeled away the mask. He has shown that not all NGOs work for the public good. Many operate as Trojan horses, infiltrating the justice system to protect the very elements trying to weaken the Indian state.

Foreign funds are pouring in — often unregulated, unmonitored, and unaccounted — and they’re being used not for education, not for health, but to wage lawfare against India: to tie down nationalist reforms, delay security-oriented verdicts, and embolden infiltrators, radicals, and rioters.

 National Duty Demands National Vigilance

Justice Tripathi has done what the higher judiciary has failed to do for decades — call out the mercenary side of legal activism and expose the rot in the name of “civil liberties.” He has reminded the nation that justice is not a business, and courts are not battlegrounds for anti-national agendas.

Now, it is up to the Home Ministry, the Bar Council, and the patriotic citizens of India to demand accountability. Lawyers must be held to the same standards as public servants. NGOs must be brought under stringent national scrutiny. And above all, the judiciary must stop being a blindfolded spectator.

India cannot afford another Kasganj. Nor can it afford to let foreign puppeteers pull the strings in its courts.

Patriots must rise, not just in protest, but in defense of truth. Justice Tripathi has lit the flame. Now the nation must carry it forward.