Picture Courtesy: India Today
Convocation speeches tend to arrive with predictable cargo. Advices about success, resilience and the road ahead. Since a convocation marks the end of a chapter and the beginning of another, naturally, speakers try to leave graduates with something worth carrying forward. I graduated with the batch of 2026 from Dharmashastra National Law University, Jabalpur ('DNLU'). The third convocation of DNLU, which concluded this June, included distinguished guests such as Hon'ble Judges of the Supreme Court of India ('SCI') and High Court of Madhya Pradesh.
During the convocation, Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva, Judge, SCI, shared several insights. Two of them, in particular, have stayed with me ever since. They were not lessons about constitutional interpretation, courtroom procedure or legal doctrine. Instead, they were about what differentiates a good lawyer from a very good lawyer. The first concerned the power of a pause; second came through a simple anecdote involving a priest, smoker and lawyer.
Power of a Pause
Justice Sachdeva submitted that a brief pause between sentences allows the listener to absorb what has been said and prepares them for what comes next. The advice sounded simple. Yet as he spoke, he demonstrated the very principle he was describing. He never hurried through his words. Important ideas were allowed to settle before he moved on to the next one. The pauses were a part of the message itself.
As listeners we often focus on words. However, the real communication resides between sentences. A good teacher understands this instinctively. After explaining a difficult concept, they pause and allow the class to process it. A storyteller does it to create anticipation and emphasis. Composers too understand that the silence between notes is just as important as the note themselves. Pauses have been all around us this time. What holds for teachers, storytellers, composers holds equally in a courtroom.
Persuasion does not occur while the speaker is talking, rather when the listener is thinking. It is oxymoronic that in a profession where words are the primary tools of the trade, silence can be one of the most powerful tools as well.
Lawyer's Submission to a Priest
The second lesson came through an anecdote. Justice Sachdeva narrates, a man approached a priest and asked: “Can I smoke while praying?”. Naturally, the priest was offended by the suggestion. “Certainly not”, he repiled. The man troubled by the reply went to a lawyer and explained the entire scenario. The lawyer replied, “I will get you the permission”. He went to the same priest and asked “Can my client pray while smoking?”. This time the priest respondedly differently. “Of course, every moment is a good time to pray. Praying is such a pious thing”.
At first glance, questions appear identical. In both situations, a person is simultaneously smoking and praying. The facts have not changed. But the outcome is completely different. This is such because the focus of the question changed. The underlying reality remains exactly the same, yet the way it is presented changes how it is received. People do not merely respond to facts, but also to how those facts are framed. A good lawyer may know his laws and precedents, however, a very good lawyer knows how to present it as well.
Way forward
Leaving from my convocation ceremony with degree in hand, these were the thoughts I found myself with. Not a doctrine or sensational exchange. Just a pause between sentences. And the difference between smoking while praying and praying while smoking. Simple as they may seem, when practised together, they can prove invaluable for a young graduate stepping into the professional world.
Views are personal.