Preserve original thinking in the era of super-specialisation, Aryama Sundaram urges law students

C. Aryama Sundaram, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India, addressing at Justice unplugged: The Hindu and VITSOL law conclave, Taj Connemara, in Chennai on March 22, 2025.
| Photo Credit: R. Ravindran

Senior advocate C. Aryama Sundaram on Saturday (March 22, 2025) urged law students to preserve original thinking, even in an era of increasing specialisation.

“We are in an age of super-specialisation, navigating highly specialised fields of law. However, do not sacrifice original thinking. I always appreciate my junior colleagues who propose an original idea — even if flawed — rather than merely reiterating what has already been stated in a judgment,” he said.

He was speaking at the law conclave Justice Unplugged: Shaping the Future of Law in Chennai, organised by the VIT School of Law (VITSOL), VIT Chennai, in collaboration with The Hindu.

Mr. Sundaram highlighted how original thinking had shaped landmark judgments, citing Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) as a prime example. “In the Kesavananda Bharati case, the courts recognised the injustice of discarding fundamental rights and duties enshrined in the Constitution. They asked: How do we protect them? Through a series of original ideas, they made explicit what had always been implicit, and developed the basic structure doctrine to safeguard constitutional morality and the vision of our forefathers,” he explained.

He also highlighted the evolving role of lawyers as social architects, stressing that integrity is indispensable to the profession. “The power vested in lawyers today carries far greater responsibility than in the past. A lawyer is no longer merely a private professional but a vital force shaping the fabric of society,” he observed.

‘Challenge status quo’

Emphasising the need for legal education to foster civic consciousness and a deeper sense of societal responsibility, he urged law students to challenge the status quo. “Remember, today’s dissent often becomes tomorrow’s law. Justice H.R. Khanna stood alone in ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976), yet his dissent is now revered. The majority verdict was ultimately overturned with unequivocal condemnation,” he added.

Mr. Sundaram concluded by emphasising the importance of reading for aspiring lawyers. “Reading is indispensable — be it literature, philosophy, or current affairs. No lawyer can attain true intellectual depth without a diverse foundation. Knowledge, in any form, is an asset — never a liability,” he said.