Opinion The power of a short message

When we were students over two decades ago,the telegram played a crucial role in our lives — to convey or receive exam results,interview calls and decide career paths. The late-night knock of the telegram wala was followed by his annual visit on Holi and Diwali,even when the telegrams stopped coming.

The telegram could be express or ordinary,standard form or personal,short or detailed (cost permitting),but the service was 24×7. It brooked no resistance and provided access to justice. Once sent out it would reach its destination and slowly move along the corridors of authority with often-unexpected results. Its younger cousin,the phonogram,has already disappeared into oblivion in a world with instant messaging,email and fax.

My brush with the telegram began in my early days as a lawyer. One day,back in 1991,when a client was detained and no information on his whereabouts was available,I was at a loss as to what to do. The client’s family had visited the police station but to no effect. An arrest was likely,but meanwhile,the police would have their prey spill the beans. So how was I to protect the constitutional right to silence of the detainee?

There was no GPS and no cell phones,and access to the senior officers on their landlines was through a web of junior officers,more daunting than the Great Wall of China. My father heard me out and then told me to note down a telegram and get the family to send it out. My response was,“A telegram? To whom?” To the chief justice of the high court,the commissioner and lieutenant governor,he said. “And apply for a certified copy tomorrow. It will be evidence against illegal detention in the future.” I was perplexed,but took his advice,though I was unaware of the result since the client moved on.

Until then,this use of the telegram in my legal work had eluded me. I was to later learn of its impact and the respect it drew from errant officials. A short while later,another client was detained by the enforcement directorate. His young wife was beset with worry. My father again advised me to draft a telegram.

I forgot about it and later,after midnight,over dinner at a relative’s house,when he asked me if I had sent it out,I admitted my slip. We went from dinner straight to the Lodhi Road telegraph office in Delhi and I signed off a telegram recording a protest against my client’s detention without arrest and a fear that a confession would be obtained,which in a later prosecution would have deadly effect.

Early next morning,we were woken by a telephone call from the instructing lawyer. The client had “fallen” from the sixth floor of Loknayak Bhavan,near Khan Market in Delhi,and was dead. The matter did not end there. It was reported in newspapers,and Justice Kuldip Singh of the Supreme Court took suo moto notice and began inquiring into the matter. Initially,an inquiry by a district judge was ordered in 1992 and based on the report,the SC issued directions. After the investigation,two officers were chargesheeted and tried. At the heart of it was the telegram sent by me complaining about the client’s illegal detention. I wonder if an email can ever have such an impact.

The writer is senior advocate and additional solicitor general,Supreme Court