Gaurav Bhatia on the living constitution and litigation at Parul University!
About Shri Gaurav Bhatia
Shri Gaurav Bhatia is a Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court of India, designated in 2019, and a National Spokesperson of the Bharatiya Janata Party. He delivered a PU Talk on the living Constitution, followed by an extended interactive session with students of the Faculty of Law. His political views expressed during the session were his own.
The Constitution as a living document
Shri Bhatia opened by urging students to dream big yet keep their feet on the ground, and framed the Constitution as a gift from its framers resting on equality, liberty, fraternity and justice. He tied these to dignity in a line that stayed with the hall.
“Life is not about breathing. Life is about adding soul to your life span. And dignity is that soul.”
He explained why the Constitution had to be a living document through the image of a tailor asked to stitch a single garment that would fit a person from infancy to old age, the framers’ task of building a framework that keeps fitting a changing society. He pointed to Articles 32 and 226, the constitutional remedies before the Supreme Court and the High Courts, as proof that rights acquire meaning only when they can be enforced, and recalled Dr. B.R. Ambedkar‘s warning that a good constitution in dishonest hands can fail, while a flawed one in honest hands can succeed.
Rights, duties and responsible freedom
The debate was largely focused on the issue of rights versus responsibilities. There are reasonable limitations on freedom of speech, he said, which are part of the Constitution and the right to criticise and oppose is not the same as speech that incites violence or disharmony. He claimed to have seen a “fabricated” photo of himself on the internet with quotes he never used, and he said he wouldn’t retaliate, but called for platforms to be “responsible” for content that infringes on privacy or dignity.
“Governments come and go. This country should remain. This country can remain strong only when the Constitution is strong.”
Why he would choose litigation again
In the interactive session, an LL.B. student asked whether, entering law in 2026 with AI reshaping the field, he would still choose litigation. He acknowledged AI as a useful tool but drew a firm line: “AI is a good hand tool, but it cannot be a replacement for judges to give justice,” because the sense of justice, mercy and human judgment cannot be reduced to calculation, and “a lawyer is forever reading.” His answer about the gown was unambiguous.
“The black gown that I wear, I will wear that black gown every time and I would like to enter the court.”
Asked about young advocates building personal brands on social media, he advised substance over visibility: “The time that you spend in making a reel, just pick up a law, just pick up a judgment, read that.” He explained the balance between Article 19(1) (a) and public order and dignity, and gave an admonition about the age of AI content: “One shouldn’t post something that is just for likes and retweets, but for somebody else it might destroy their dignity. As a spokesman and advocate he said he would prefer to keep his integrity intact rather than win a debate at the loss of his conscience. If you too wish to work at the intersection of AI & Law, explore law programs at Parul University, including B.A. LL.B. (Hons.), B.B.A. LL.B. (Hons.), and B.Com. LL.B. (Hons.), and build a strong foundation in the legal domain!
