As a dual-qualified attorney in California and India, what first sparked your interest in the legal profession, and how did you chart your path in this field?
I come from a family of lawyers, so this profession was all I knew growing up. I didn’t realize the impact of my dad’s work at the time but saw how his efforts positively affected his clients. I remember that on many occasions, they wouldn’t have enough money for his full fees but would bring him part of their seasonal harvest. Other than that, it came to me more naturally than most people—it never felt like work, and I was so excited to go to law school and later into litigation. Isn’t it a privilege to be in a position to make a difference in people’s lives and also get paid for it?
For California, I never had plans to move, but I absolutely fell in love with the state and decided to get licensed in the one thing I knew—law!
You recently passed the California Bar Exam on your first attempt. What preparation strategies proved most effective for you, and what advice would you offer to others aspiring to clear it? How has this qualification expanded your professional scope?
As for preparation, I took an online bar prep course called Themis. Going to Berkeley Law for my LLM definitely helped, as it put me among the smartest people who have a reputation for passing this difficult exam on their first attempt. Also, it’s crucial to know one’s learning style. I really appreciate learning from my own handwriting, so I wrote everything down even though my bar prep tool didn’t ask me to. I also know that I panic toward the end, so I developed my own timeline, which was different from what the bar prep suggested. I took a study leave from work and had just one goal for those 12 weeks. I ate, slept, meditated, everything centered around my bar prep. Honestly, I loved the drive of taking on something so challenging and had fun with it. There’s no one-size-fits-all way to go about this, and I’m happy to answer specific questions for whoever wants to take this exam.
As my interest is in litigation-related work, I wouldn’t say it expanded my scope; rather, it created any scope that exists, because one cannot take even a tiny step in litigation without a license to practice.
Moving from legal practice in India to building a career in the United States must have involved navigating many differences. What were the key hurdles you faced in adapting to the U.S. legal system, and how did you overcome them?
Oh, so many! I did not have anyone from my family or extended family who was a U.S. lawyer. From choosing law school to taking the bar, applying for internships, jobs, and visas—every step presented hurdles, or should I say, kept life interesting, as my friends like to put it. The biggest one for me is the visa, with, dare I say, the state of affairs right now. Also, finding a job in the U.S. is so different from India. In India, we don’t network enough, which I had to teach myself after moving here. I want to give credit to Berkeley, as they had a whole program to train international lawyers to get acquainted not just with the U.S. legal system but also with its unique job market. I didn’t expect it, but my Indian work experience was valued by U.S. employers as I think the two things, we have in common with them is that they value the “grind,” which they could supposedly see in my resume, and our common law system—and that’s probably why I was a preferred candidate for many jobs I applied to before joining the Office of the District Attorney, Alameda County.
Work environments in both countries are completely different as well. There are different work ethics, professional relationships, sense of humor, and protocols. However, one funny realization is that lawyers everywhere are more or less the same kind of people so it was still a familiar territory.
You have served as an editorial board member for leading legal publications and also worked as a law clerk. How did these roles deepen your understanding of the U.S. legal system and prepare you for your current role?
U.S. law school journals, and also Indian ones- stimulate a legal mind well. It’s so good to become aware of different ideas, methodologies, and international legal issues, and I think my favorite part of being in a journal was building community with like-minded people. I was in the Ecology Law Quarterly with other environmental law nerds and had some great academic and fun discussions in the process.
My clerkship with the District Attorney’s Office was my first U.S. job, which makes it special to me. I feel fortunate to have worked for a highly reputed government office in the Consumer, Environment, and Special Litigations Department. It was a fast-paced environment, and there couldn’t have been a better way to learn U.S. law and see it in action than that. I worked on civil procedure assignments, evidence code, and criminal code—all at once. One of my first assignments at the DA’s Office involved prosecuting a corporation after a factory fire that significantly affected air quality for people in that vicinity, given California’s high ambient air quality standards. These assignments strengthened my understanding of environmental enforcement and also informed my approach to research, brief-writing, and attention to detail in my current role.
During your LL.M. at UC Berkeley, you specialized in Energy Law and Clean Technology while contributing to journals like the Berkeley Technology Law Journal and Ecology Law Quarterly. How did these academic and editorial experiences influence your perspective on the intersection of law, technology, and environmental sustainability?
A topic that’s very close to my heart is climate change. We treat it as “important” but not “urgent,” which troubles both my personal and legal mind. At Berkeley Law, I enrolled in courses such as Environment and Energy Law, subscribed to technology- and environment-related journals, and participated in clean energy student groups to engage with these issues and understand the work of scholars in the field. Being surrounded by like-minded people strengthened my commitment and deepened my understanding of how cleaner technologies are urgently needed on a global scale. The intersection of use of environmental resources and law is particularly interesting to contrast between the US, Europe and Indian laws. We have many vulnerable communities who get affected first by the impacts of degrading environment and climate crisis, and there is a lot of work that remains to be done to protect them.
In your current role, you work to support mesothelioma victims and their families. What drew you to this area of law, and how do you balance the legal complexities with the human and emotional dimensions of these cases?
I honestly don’t know how to answer this question. From my practice in the Allahabad High court, Lucknow, to here in California, I have struggled with getting too attached to the outcome and client’s problems. I don’t know if that makes me a better or a worse lawyer. But I try to overcome that by something my senior told me early on during my India days that “you play a very small role in the grand scheme of things.” I owe my client to do my best work for their entrustment in me as their lawyer but I sure cannot change their destiny. Very recently, a client of mine passed away from mesothelioma (cancer) before the case went to trial which happens more often than not in this field. I witnessed his struggle through the deposition and eventually he just couldn’t make it to the end of the case. It breaks my heart but if I have done my role well, then it becomes easier to strike that balance. This also keeps me on my toes to put in the hard-work.
What advice would you give to students aiming for an international legal career, and how can they stay ahead of global legal developments?
Just a few simple things. First, one needs to figure out if they want to study here, do an LLM or a JD, or directly take the California Bar (the only U.S. bar open to foreign attorneys without coursework). My advice would be to study here first, as it helps one get acquainted with the culture and decide whether it’s the right fit. Moreover, getting a job is nearly impossible without a strong network, which a renowned university greatly helps with. A warning—it is very expensive. I chose Berkeley over other good colleges that offered me scholarships because it was one of my dream schools, but one should always rank priorities according to their circumstances. Advance research on scholarships and on-campus jobs could help. I had an on-campus job that helped me a lot financially during school. It’s important to work smart—so if the plan is to immigrate to a new country, students should also consider Canada, Singapore, or the UK (the more welcoming ones in today’s environment).
One thing I would have done differently is to have a better long-term plan at least a year in advance of actually applying. I didn’t understand at the time that this decision would completely reshape my life as I know it. But I would love to help anyone who has doubts about the process or wants to learn from my experiences—feel free to reach out to me on LinkedIn.
With the demands of your profession, how do you maintain balance in your personal pursuits, and what is your vision for the future of your practice?
The litigation work culture in the US is similar to India as the work never stops from the inception of the case till the verdict. One can easily preoccupy themselves as there is always so much to do. However, in my experience, that sometimes leads to isolation, and when you are thousands of miles away from family, building a community becomes equally important. When I’m not working, I spend time with my friends, which is my number one priority as rejuvenated weekends significantly boost my motivation through the week. We often travel and hike in nature, as California is truly blessed with pleasant weather throughout the year. Of course, there are weekends that turn into working ones when the need arises like meeting a court deadline on Monday but I don’t mind that because I genuinely love what I do and take pride in showing up for my clients who are unfortunately struggling to live.
I’ve always believed that being a lawyer is nothing less than a superpower- it gives us the tools to understand, question, and change things that most people simply have to accept. Right now, my focus is on mastering California law and becoming as confident in this system as I was in India. The process of adapting to a new legal culture has been challenging but also deeply rewarding—it’s pushed me to grow, think differently, and refine my craft. Whatever I’ve gained intellectually, I’d definitely want to leverage it to contribute to the Indian legal landscape in different ways, for eg. I am working on a research paper on a social legal challenge that India faces; Grow as a multi-jurisdictional professional, and have fun along the way.
With such a diverse academic background, what initially inspired you to pursue law, and how did your early education in India, your LL.M. at The George Washington University Law School, and your PhD at the University of Technology Sydney shape your focus on technology, intellectual property, and governance?
My journey into law began with a fascination for the Indian Constitution, a passion I nurtured from around the age of 17. I initially enrolled in a Bachelor of Economics at Delhi University, largely following my parents’ preference, but quickly realized that statistics and quantitative subjects were not my strength. They were very supportive when I decided to leave and pursue law instead, a field that truly aligned with my interests in governance, rights, and regulatory frameworks.
During my legal studies in India, I completed the mandatory year of pupillage and internship, which gave me a clear sense early on that conventional legal practice was not the path for me. After graduating from law school and completing my internship, I chose to work for a media technology company in a legal-business role rather than a core legal role. While I did not learn a great deal about practicing law in that role, I gained invaluable insights into how media companies generate revenues through media rights. This first job laid the foundation for my current role at the Asia-Pacific Broadcasting Union (ABU), where I continue to work at the intersection of law, technology, and media rights.
After my LL.M. at The George Washington University Law School, I stayed on for a year as a legal researcher at the Estelle and Melvin Gelman Library, working on a grant-funded project. It was during this period that I developed a deep interest in rigorous legal research and began considering pursuing a PhD in the future.
Several years later, after moving to Malaysia to work for ABU, the PhD opportunity finally presented itself. In 2019, I received a scholarship from the University of Technology Sydney to write my doctoral thesis under two highly respected IP scholars. I chose to focus on the intersection of copyright, performers’ rights, and dance, an unconventional topic that few IP scholars are willing to supervise. My co-supervisor (a leading Australian IP scholar), who happened to be a trained ballet dancer, was supportive of my choice. This allowed me to combine my academic interests with my personal passion as a trained contemporary Indian dancer and a student of Anand Shankar.
These experiences (from my early fascination with constitutional law, to my LL.M. research, to my PhD under distinguished scholars) have shaped my focus on technology, intellectual property, and governance. They reflect a trajectory guided by curiosity, rigorous research, and the desire to leverage law to protect innovation and creativity across diverse domains.
In the early phase of your career in India, what were the most formative experiences that laid the foundation for your practice and motivated you to specialize in intellectual property law?
From an early age, I have always had a global mindset, shaped in part by my father’s encouragement to think beyond borders. Growing up in a family of fourth-generation entrepreneurs, I also knew deep down that one day I would start my own venture. These early influences gave me the confidence to chart a non-conventional path in law, one that could combine rigorous legal expertise with innovation, business, and a global perspective.
In the early phase of my career in India, I was profoundly shaped by what I observed in conventional legal practice. I was concerned by inefficiencies in the justice system, the backlog of cases, and at times, lapses in ethics among practitioners and judges. It’s not that the whole Indian legal system is flawed, but these experiences made it clear that a traditional legal career was not for me. I had always envisioned a professional journey that would take me beyond India, allowing me to work on global challenges and innovations.
My first professional role at RSG Media Systems exposed me to the commercial side of media rights. I gained important insights into how media companies generate revenue, yet I realized I wanted a deeper understanding of law itself, particularly in areas intersecting with technology, creativity, and business. Intellectual property law naturally emerged as the perfect bridge between these interests.
Admission to The George Washington University Law School for my LL.M. became a decisive step toward my vision of becoming a global legal professional. That experience, combined with my subsequent PhD and international roles, reinforced my trajectory toward innovation-driven law, entrepreneurial ventures, and intellectual property strategy. Looking back, these formative experiences (my global outlook, early exposure to media and business, and rigorous legal training) laid the foundation for my focus on technology, IP, and governance on a global scale.
What inspired your transition from practicing in India to building an international practice, and how did you navigate the challenges of adapting to different legal and professional ecosystems?
My transition from practicing in India to building an international practice was a natural evolution, shaped by the global environment in which I was raised. Although I grew up in India, most of my father’s clients were foreigners. Our home constantly hosted visitors from across the world. This exposure gave me a deep comfort with cross-cultural interactions and a global perspective from an early age. I did not even have an official “Indian” name until I was 15. My relatives and friends often laughed at my nickname, which didn’t sound very “Indian.” Even in Southeast Asia, people sometimes ask me, “Where are you from?” despite my distinctly Indian surname. From food preferences to clothing choices, many of my everyday habits are shaped by this international environment, reinforcing my adaptability and ease in multicultural settings. Even my astrologer once remarked that I would thrive in international environments, a prediction that, in hindsight, aligns closely with the trajectory of my career. These experiences have been invaluable, enabling me to navigate diverse legal, business, and cultural landscapes with confidence and nuance. These experiences have been invaluable throughout my career, enabling me to navigate diverse legal, business, and cultural landscapes with confidence and nuance.
While this global exposure came to me naturally, I actively built additional skills to thrive in international environments. I learned basic Mandarin, took courses in cross-cultural negotiations, and continually sought opportunities to expand my knowledge. Adapting to different legal and professional ecosystems required not only understanding local laws and professional norms but also honing skills that allow me to connect effectively across cultures. It was challenging at first, and even now, navigating international scenarios is not always easy.
These experiences, combined with my grounding in international law and intellectual property, enabled me to develop a practice that is both globally relevant and locally effective. My upbringing instilled confidence and adaptability, and my commitment to continuous learning has been critical in navigating challenges and building an international career.
You’ve worked extensively on media rights, sports agreements, and international lobbying. What have been the most complex challenges in balancing broadcaster rights with the rapid evolution of digital and OTT platforms?
I have worked extensively on media rights, sports agreements, and international lobbying, which has given me deep exposure to the complexities of balancing broadcaster rights with the rapid evolution of digital and OTT platforms. The ongoing challenges reflect the nuances involved so much so that the broadcasters’ treaty has not been adopted even after more than 20 years. Even within my organization, we constantly debate fundamental questions such as “what constitutes broadcasting” and “who qualifies as a broadcaster” in a rapidly changing digital environment.
For me personally, one of the biggest challenges arises when distributing rights. OTT platforms are inherently non-territorial, which creates complexities when determining the exclusivity of sports rights in specific territories. Resolving these issues requires careful negotiation, strategic foresight, and an in-depth understanding of both the technology and the legal frameworks governing media rights.
The rise of OTT platforms has added additional layers of complexity. Traditional licensing frameworks often struggle to accommodate streaming models, on-demand services, and cross-border content distribution. For instance, the recent bill in India aimed at regulating OTT platforms highlights how governments are still grappling with these shifts, trying to balance consumer access, content regulation, and the protection of established media rights.
Navigating these challenges requires a combination of legal expertise, strategic negotiation skills, and a clear understanding of how technological disruption transforms the media landscape. My work in this domain has sharpened my ability to reconcile competing interests, draft adaptable agreements, and anticipate regulatory trends, ensuring that broadcasters’ rights remain protected even as the definition of “broadcasting” continues to evolve.
As a legal consultant advising start-ups and international organizations, how do you approach contracts and IP licensing across jurisdictions such as Asia-Pacific, Europe, and the US? What recurring challenges do start-ups face when entering these markets, and how can they prepare for them early on?
As an IP expert and co-founder of a clean-tech startup, I have seen first-hand how critical a robust IP strategy is to a start-up’s success. Advising start-ups and international organizations across Asia-Pacific, Europe, and the US, I approach contracts and IP licensing with a global mindset. Every jurisdiction brings its own legal frameworks, enforcement mechanisms, and cultural nuances, and agreements must be carefully crafted to balance protection, commercialization, and investor confidence.
Start-ups often face recurring challenges when entering new markets. IP regimes are fragmented, copyright, patent, and trademark protections differ, and licensing agreements can become complex when crossing borders. The biggest hurdles arise when trying to align a start-up’s ambitions with local regulatory realities while ensuring that innovations remain secure.
Preparation is essential. I advise start-ups to embed IP strategy into their business plan from the outset i.e. conducting thorough market and IP due diligence, clearly defining the scope, territory, exclusivity, and enforcement rights in contracts, and engaging experienced legal counsel early. This approach not only reduces potential disputes but also builds trust with investors and partners, enabling the start-up to scale efficiently while safeguarding its core innovations.
For me, the interplay between law, technology, and business is endlessly fascinating. Helping start-ups navigate these complexities while protecting their innovations has been one of the most rewarding aspects of my career, and it underscores why IP strategy is never an afterthought. It is the backbone of sustainable growth in a global marketplace.
As Co-Founder of Mabill Technologies, how are you leveraging AI and IoT to build sustainable HVAC solutions, and what role does intellectual property strategy play in protecting and scaling this innovation?
As Co-Founder of Mabill Technologies, we are focused on leveraging AI to build predictive maintenance solutions for HVAC systems. We have plans to develop a proprietary AI algorithm in collaboration with a university, with Mabill retaining full intellectual property rights while giving proper attribution to our academic partner. From Day One, I have approached this venture with a strong IP strategy, ensuring that our innovations are protected and positioned for scalable growth. Our IoT roadmap, which will enable real-time monitoring and optimization of HVAC performance, is planned for rollout in the second phase of development. By combining AI, IoT, and a robust IP strategy, Mabill aims to deliver sustainable, efficient, and market-leading HVAC solutions.
Having advised both start-ups and WIPO on IP law and sustainable innovation, how has your research and writing influenced your approach to balancing commercialization, investor confidence, and long-term climate impact?
Having advised both start on IP law and working with WIPO for a short consulting project, my research and writing have shaped a practical and principled approach to balancing commercialization, investor confidence, and long-term climate impact. I have come to recognize that investor confidence is ultimately built on trust. Trust that the technology is robust, the team is capable, and the IP is well-protected. My work in IP strategy ensures that innovations are defensible and scalable, which in turn is likely to assure investors. At the same time, my focus on sustainable innovation means that we do not sacrifice long-term climate impact for short-term gains. This dual lens of trust and sustainability guides how I structure ventures, communicate with stakeholders, and make strategic decisions that align profitability with purpose.
What advice would you give to students aspiring to a career in intellectual property law? What practical steps and resources should they focus on during law school to prepare themselves for this field? It’s great to aspire. However, I would advise students not to get overly fixated on choosing a specialization too early. Intellectual property law is a fascinating field, but it is very niche. What matters more in law school is building strong foundational skills that will serve students across any area of law.
One of the most critical skills is learning how to read i.e. not just reading casually, but developing the ability to process complex legal texts quickly and efficiently. I truly learned this during my PhD. It has been transformative for my career. Many students underestimate the importance of speed reading and speed writing. Nonetheless, in today’s world, these skills are what will set students apart. AI can retrieve statutes and perform basic drafting, but the ability to read deeply, synthesize quickly, and write clearly remains irreplaceable.
In practical terms, law students should focus on cultivating analytical thinking, precision in writing, and the ability to quickly absorb large volumes of information. Internships, research projects, and exposure to different areas of law will also help develop versatility, which is especially important in niche fields like IP. Some of the best IP lawyers I know are creators, inventors, or entrepreneurs themselves. This combination of legal skill and practical, hands-on understanding of innovation gives them an edge. A strong foundation, combined with curiosity and disciplined study habits, will equip students to succeed whether they ultimately specialize in IP or elsewhere.
How do you see the future of intellectual property and media law evolving with emerging technologies, and what is your vision for the evolution of your own practice in the coming years?
The future of intellectual property and media law is poised for a sea change, driven largely by emerging technologies such as AI. Traditionally, IP laws have been human-centric, focusing on human creators and inventors. AI disrupts this framework, raising fundamental questions: Who qualifies as an author? Can a machine or AI system hold authorship? Jurisdictions across the world are actively debating how to address these challenges, and IP laws will likely need to evolve to accommodate non-human-generated works and AI-assisted inventions.
In media law, licensing for OTT platforms remains one of the biggest challenges, particularly given their cross-border, non-territorial nature and the rapid pace of digital disruption. These shifts require not only technical legal expertise but also a strategic understanding of business models, technology, and regulatory frameworks. For me personally, determining the exclusivity of sports rights in specific territories for OTT platforms is a particularly complex challenge.
I am registered to take the California Bar Exam, which reflects my legal training and commitment to professional rigor. However, my primary role today is as a founder and legal strategist rather than a conventional practitioner. My goal is to build Mabill into a leading venture while simultaneously establishing my thought leadership brand. I plan to revisit the decision to sit for the exam depending on Mabill’s growth trajectory, ensuring that my focus remains on driving innovation, scaling the business, and shaping the intersection of law, technology, and sustainable solutions.
I see my role evolving from a technical-legal expert to a legal strategist and systems thinker. I aim to blend my legal background with high-level strategic input for start-ups in regulated sectors such as clean-tech. As a thought leader and clean-tech founder, I am no longer a conventional lawyer. Nonetheless, law continues to inform my work, enabling me to provide insights that protect innovation, anticipate regulatory trends, and support sustainable growth in a technology-driven world.
You have authored books on the EU AI Act and IP monetization in the AI era, published peer-reviewed articles on piracy, TRIPS, and broadcaster rights, and contributed policy insights at global forums such as WIPO. How do you see this scholarship and thought leadership complementing your role as both a legal strategist and a tech founder and what broader impact do you wish to create in shaping the future of IP and technology law?
My work as a scholar and thought leader directly complements my role as both a legal strategist and tech founder. Authoring books on the EU AI Act and IP monetization in the AI era, publishing peer-reviewed articles on piracy, TRIPS, and broadcaster rights, and contributing policy insights at global forums such as WIPO has given me a nuanced understanding of the intersection of law, technology, and innovation. These insights allow me to advise start-ups and investors not only on compliance but on strategic IP and legal frameworks that drive value creation and reduce regulatory risk.
Being a tech founder, myself gives me a first-hand perspective on the challenges innovators face i.e. how to scale responsibly, protect core technologies, and navigate complex cross-border regulations. This combination of scholarly rigor and operational experience enables me to provide high-level strategic guidance that is legally sound, commercially viable, and investor-ready.
My broader vision is to shape a legal and regulatory ecosystem where emerging technologies like AI are harnessed responsibly, IP rights incentivize creativity, and sustainable innovations (especially in sectors like clean-tech) can scale globally. By bridging the worlds of law, entrepreneurship, and technology, I aim to help founders, investors, and organizations anticipate market shifts, protect their assets, and unlock long-term growth opportunities.
With over 15 years in the legal services industry, what initially drew you to this field, and how has your journey from initial years evolved to leading practice at your current company shaped your professional outlook?
From my childhood, law was almost a family tradition. My grandfather, my father, and my uncle were all lawyers. Growing up surrounded by legal discussions and a home office full of clients made it natural for me to follow that path. I never doubted that I would become a lawyer. On the way I adapted a bit and embraced tech along with solving legal issues for my clients.
You completed your LL.B from India and an LL.M from the University of Leicester. How did studying law in both India and the UK shape your perspective, and what aspects of each system have influenced your approach to legal practice?
After my LL.B in India from Madhusudan Law College at Cuttack, I wanted to broaden my horizons. I first considered Australia, but a friend encouraged me to go to the University of Leicester. It turned out to be the best decision. I immersed myself in arbitration, met amazing mentors like Camilla Anderson and Martin Hunter, and gained an international perspective that I still have with me. I spent a lot of time studying and preparing for the vis moot competition at Vienna, although I don’t regret it a bit, but I wish I had networked more and built more contacts. I advise youngsters who reach out to me before embarking on their masters journey to spend more and more time networking with people and building those meaningful relationships. I wish someone would have told me this. While you won’t realize the power of networking in your 20s, it will certainly come to your aid in your 40s when you are in a leadership role and your friends are all leaders at various organizations across the globe.
Having worked across diverse industries telecom, technology, automobile, and banking what common industry specific challenges do clients face in contract management and eDiscovery, and how do you navigate these challenges?
As a legal services professional our role is always industry agnostic but in all the major industries like telecom, tech, banking, and automotive, clients often struggle with large amounts of data. This is where we become a bridge between law and tech. I use technology to simplify that complexity. It’s about making things clear and efficient so they can focus on their business rather than the legal maze. My other area of focus has always been on Contracts Lifecycle Management and I see a lot of clients across industries struggling to manage their contracts. I have developed a deep expertise in Contracts Lifecycle Management (CLM) helping clients streamline their contracts by creating standard playbooks, doing industry benchmarks and helping them with preferred and fallback positions.
Your international experience spans the US, UK, Canada, and Southeast Asia. How have differences in culture, legal frameworks, and business practices across these regions influenced the way you manage cross-country teams and navigate work in diverse jurisdictions?
Working in the US, UK, Canada, and Southeast Asia taught me that while legal frameworks differ, people and culture drive action. The US focuses on clients and results. The UK puts importance on governance and structure. Canada mixes process with teamwork, while Southeast Asia values relationships. Managing teams across countries means adjusting communication styles, decision-making processes, and delivery methods. For instance, I find a balance between being efficient and respecting hierarchical norms in Asia. These experiences improved my ability to switch between frameworks, honor cultural differences, and still achieve globally consistent results. This skill is essential when handling matters in multiple jurisdictions.
As Director of Forensic and Financial Crime, you lead operations, client management, and business development. How do you balance the strategic aspects of growing the practice with the day-to-day demands of execution, and what does a typical day in your role look like?
My role is really about balancing two worlds including driving the growth of the practice and delivering for clients. On any given day, I might be working on market strategy in the morning and then jumping into a client call by the afternoon and taking a Global call in the evening. The key is prioritization and making sure the team feels empowered so both sides run effectively. By God’s grace, I’ve been fortunate to be part of some very large, even unicorn-level matters in both eDiscovery and CLM, and I’ve navigated the deep lanes of execution along the way. But what truly shaped me was the shift into strategy and that only comes with experience and tenure. I’ve learned that being perfect at one thing will take you far, but to move further you need to embrace imperfection, broaden your scope, and take risks. One of my mentors once told me, you are not an avenger, you will not get a single chance to save the world, you are a common man, make sure you do small things and do them well every single day. This has remained with and has shaped how I look at leadership and growth.
You’ve been at the forefront of integrating technology, including GenAI-powered review solutions and accelerators, into legal processes. What role do you see technology playing in reshaping contract lifecycle management and eDiscovery over the next few years?
For me, technology isn’t just a tool anymore, it’s central to how we provide legal services. With NavigAite ( a GenAI tool developed by my team), for example, I’ve seen how GenAI can change reviews by making it faster, more accurate, and easier for clients. It goes beyond just spotting PII or privilege. It helps teams build facts, create timelines, and make decisions with confidence. In CLM, GenAI is taking away the tedious tasks of clause extraction and risk checks. This allows people to concentrate on negotiation and strategy. I often tell clients that the real change is moving from tools that support to platforms that actively guide outcomes. What excites me the most is seeing teams that were once doubtful now asking for more demos. They can feel the difference. That’s when you know technology is changing how we work. It is a matter of time that embracing tech will no more be an option, it would become a necessity for survival.
Having handled high-stakes matters such as global outsourcing contracts and multi-jurisdictional cases, what has been your most challenging project so far, and how do you navigate the pressures that come with such complex work?
Interestingly, my most challenging project wasn’t a large one; it was a 4 day long review which literally decimated my brain into pieces. The client was pushing us hard, and we had to adapt every few hours. It taught me that change management is crucial in our field. If you can handle constant shifts, you can handle anything. Handling changes while balancing risks is key to our profession and someone who masters this, is poised for success. Sometimes you will be in a situation where you feel “that’s it, I am done” but remember everything changes and it changes for good, just hang in there and have some patience.
For young professionals aspiring to build a career at the intersection of law, technology, and project management, what skills and mindset should they prioritize to succeed in today’s globalized legal services environment?
For those aiming to work at the intersection of law, technology, and project management, building a diverse skill set is key. Legal knowledge is essential, but being comfortable with technology is also important, especially in AI, contract tools, and data analytics. Strong project management and client engagement skills set good professionals apart from great ones. In terms of mindset, curiosity, adaptability, and resilience are must-haves. The industry is changing quickly, so the ability to learn, unlearn, and relearn is crucial. I often advise young professionals to focus not only on technical skills but also on understanding the business side, knowing how legal solutions contribute to business results. I follow this 80 and 20 rule where in your early years 80% is your subject matter knowledge and 20% is your soft skills, but if you don’t focus on the 20% early in your career, it will be extremely difficult to adapt when you move into senior levels where the 80 becomes 20 and the 20 becomes 80. Soft skills are equally important to hone along with other aspects. Focus on listening, drafting business emails, elevators pitch, speaking with confidence and being persuasive at an early stage.
With all the responsibilities at work, how do you balance your personal life with it? What activities do you undertake to maintain work life balance?
Balancing work and personal life in our industry is never easy, but I’ve found it comes down to being fully present where I’m needed. With my son, I make it a point to be there during his taekwondo sessions; with my wife, I support her creative journey; and when it’s time to work, I give it my all. For me, work-life balance doesn’t mean shutting off at 6 PM or ignoring calls on weekends, it’s about knowing when to prioritize work and when to prioritize family. I’m also a foodie, and that keeps me energized. I’m always looking forward to the next meal, where I’ll eat, and who I’ll share it with. It sounds simple, but it gives me daily motivation. The same applies to vacations, I always apply for my next one right after I return. Having something to look forward to, whether it’s a meal or a trip, keeps me positive, focused, and more diligent in my work.
Being dual-qualified in both India and New York is a remarkable achievement. What first inspired you to choose law as a career, and what motivated your decision to build an international practice?
Hailing from a family of prominent lawyers and businessmen, I have been exposed to the world of commercial and legal transactions since a very young age. My initial interest in law was sparked during family dinner conversations about how legal frameworks influence business strategy and drive corporate growth. Those early discussions made me curious about the intersection of law and commerce and ultimately motivated me to pursue a career in law. My interest in corporate law was primarily triggered after I participated in a corporate and securities law moot court competition in law school, where I conducted research on issues relating to insider trading and investment fraud. My constant endeavor to explore and navigate through the practical aspects and intricacies of commercial laws motivated me to pursue internships with corporate law teams at premier law firms and various multinational companies. As I delved deeper into the field, I was drawn to the dynamic, fast-paced world of mergers and acquisitions and private equity—areas where legal precision, business insight, and negotiation strategy converge. After graduation, I gained extensive transactional experience in the M&A practice at AZB & Partners, Mumbai and Trilegal, Mumbai. Qualifying in India gave me a strong foundation in company laws and exposure to a rapidly evolving corporate landscape. However, I was increasingly working on cross-border deals involving US investors, Delaware entities, and multi-jurisdictional structures. This motivated me to pursue an LL.M. in the USA, not only to deepen my understanding of the US law but also to add value in cross-border transactions. My goal has always been to operate at the intersection of jurisdictions, helping Indian companies scale internationally and advising US private equity players and venture capital firms on investments into emerging markets. New York is the financial capital of this world and home to all the big multi-national corporations, private equity firms, and financial institutions. International qualification in New York was a natural step towards building that kind of practice and seeking the desired global exposure. I wanted to be at the forefront of my practice, in the city where all big-ticket matters unfold. Being dual-qualified in both India and New York has been instrumental in shaping my legal career, particularly in corporate law, where cross-border transactions are increasingly the norm.
During law school, you completed 15 internships at some of India’s most prestigious law firms and multinational organizations. How did these diverse experiences shape your inclination towards corporate law, and what key lessons from those years continue to influence your professional approach today?
Completing 15 internships during law school gave me an unparalleled opportunity to explore different areas of law and understand how legal theory translates into practice. From interning in the corporate teams of top-tier corporate law firms to in-house legal teams at multinationals, each experience offered a unique perspective. Learning the practical aspects of transactional work while undertaking due diligence exercises and drafting agreements gave me a hands-on exposure into the professional work at law firms and a glance into the legal requirements of companies from a client’s perspective. While this industry demands long and hectic working hours with challenging work-life balance, I enjoyed the fast-paced and high-stakes environment, and more importantly, I was fascinated by how lawyers help structure complex transactions, negotiate and draft key transaction documents, and manage stakeholder expectations by aligning legal solutions with business goals. I still remember the lessons I learned from my mentor, a counsel at Trilegal that continue to guide my professional growth till date: (a) Adaptability: working across diverse teams, sectors, matters and legal issues taught me how to quickly assess context and contribute meaningfully, even with limited time or background in this fast-paced industry; (b) Precision: handling high-value transactions at law firms taught me early on that attention to detail isn’t just expected, it’s essential. It’s not limited to the role of a junior associate reviewing documents, but rather a discipline that must be upheld at every level of the deal team; and (c) Communication: be it drafting a memo or conducting a due diligence review, clarity in communication and collaboration as a team make the long working hours bearable and the work more enjoyable. Looking back, those years gave me more than just technical exposure, they solidified my decision to pursue a career in corporate law and helped me build the skillset, habits, mindset, and curiosity that I carry into every transaction even today.
At Columbia Law School, you not only pursued your LL.M. but also engaged deeply as a Research Assistant and took on leadership roles in student associations. How did these academic and co-curricular experiences expand your perspective on law and prepare you for a global career?
Pursuing my LL.M. at Columbia Law School was transformative, not only because of the world-class academic environment, but also due to the breadth of co-curricular opportunities that enriched my understanding of the law from a global and interdisciplinary perspective. The opportunity to learn from distinguished professors and engage with the vibrant community made it an enriching educational experience! As a Research Assistant to Professor Jeffery N. Gordon, I had the opportunity to work closely on comparative legal issues, including research on complex M&A issues and legal grey areas, which not only sharpened my analytical and research skills but also gave me insight into how legal systems address ambiguity across jurisdictions. This role honed my ability to approach legal challenges from both doctrinal and policy-based angles. Beyond the classroom and theoretical learning environment, I took on leadership roles in student associations, such as, Student Editor for the Columbia Journal of Asian Law and Secretary of the Columbia Corporate Responsibility Association. I was also an active member of the Columbia Business & Law Association and Columbia Law Women’s Association. Organizing and moderating panel discussions alongside legal scholars and engaging/ interacting with BigLaw partners broadened my perspective on the practice of law across different commercial environments that I now regularly witness in my cross-border practice. My proactive participation in co-curricular activities allowed me to collaborate with my peers from diverse legal backgrounds, exchange perspectives on global legal issues, and build meaningful connections within the international legal community. Together, these academic and extracurricular engagements at Columbia Law not only enhanced my cross-cultural exposure but also equipped me with the global mindset to thrive in the US legal fraternity. In a nutshell, choosing to study at Columbia was one of the best investments I’ve made, not just academically, but personally as well. While the LL.M. program offered world-class legal training and exposure to a truly global network, living in New York added a whole other layer to the experience. I took full advantage of what the city had to offer, catching Broadway shows, exploring museums, trying out food from around the world, and just soaking in the vibe and energy of the city.
Having worked with leading law firms before pursuing your international practice and master’s degree, what cultural and procedural differences stood out to you between legal systems? What were some things you had to learn, adapt, or even unlearn to navigate these differences effectively?
Having worked on M&A and private equity deals in both India and the USA, the differences were striking. While the skillset of a corporate lawyer is arguably transferable and is not jurisdiction specific, in India, deal-making often involves more regulatory oversight, heavily negotiated transaction documents, partly due to enforcement uncertainties and foreign investment restrictions (FDI). In contrast, US transactions are typically fast-paced, more standardized, and heavily focused on commercial outcomes / business goals through precise contract drafting. For instance, I worked on a cross-border transaction that involved a Delaware entity that wanted to acquire an Indian company as its wholly owned subsidiary. As part of the transaction, I realized that Delaware enjoys significantly greater flexibility by providing the board of directors the discretion to govern the entity, whereas, in India, the corporate governance of an entity is more prescriptive and compliance-heavy with stricter rules on matters like related-party transactions, board composition, and structuring. While these legal safeguards in India serve important governance goals, they can sometimes limit the structuring creativity available in complex deals. Culturally, I had to adapt from a well-defined organizational structure in Indian law firms to a more collaborative, client-facing role in the USA, where lawyers early-on in their careers are expected to engage more directly and strategically with the client. I also noticed a shift from providing detailed legal analysis to offering simple, concise (to the point), business-oriented advice, which is critical in the US private equity and M&A space. This transition pushed me to unlearn overly cautious habits and instead focus on practical, deal-driven lawyering, a mindset that’s essential in global transactional work. One of the most appreciated cultural differences I experienced is that the “open door policy” in US law firms is genuinely practiced and not just stated. There’s a strong emphasis on accessibility, mentorship, and collaboration, regardless of hierarchy. Junior lawyers are encouraged to ask questions, contribute ideas, and engage directly with senior associates, partners and even clients, which fosters both learning and confidence.
In your current role, you represent private equity firms, venture companies, and strategic investors in complex cross-border transactions. What have been the most rewarding aspects of working on such high-value deals, and how do you approach the challenge of reconciling multiple statutes and jurisdictions?
I am currently a mid-level associate at Goodwin Procter, LLP, New York, focusing my practice on domestic and cross-border mergers and acquisitions, specifically leveraged buyouts, private equity transactions, and venture capital investments. Working on complex cross-border transactions has been incredibly rewarding, both intellectually and professionally. The most fulfilling aspect is helping clients navigate high-stakes decisions that directly shape and impact their business growth. The best part about my work is that it never gets boring! Whether it’s representing private equity firms, venture-backed companies, or strategic investors, each transaction presents a unique set of challenges and opportunities. Being at the intersection of law, business and strategy is both challenging and energizing. There is a thrill in closing complex M&A deals. One of the key complexities is managing/ coordinating cross-border work and reconciling multiple legal regimes, especially when deal terms, corporate governance standards, or enforceability vary significantly across jurisdictions. We approach this by collaborating closely with key transaction stakeholders such as RWI insurer, opposing counsel, local counsel and by ensuring alignment on key provisions like representations and warranties, indemnities, and shareholder exit rights across transaction documents. Driving projects by setting timelines for internal workstream, determining and planning internal deliverables, and leading team calls to meet deadlines to increase efficiencies helps manage risk and maintain deal momentum across borders.
Qualifying as a New York lawyer is no small feat. How did you prepare for the bar exam, and how has this qualification added value to your practice? What advice would you offer law students and young lawyers aspiring to clear the exam and pursue international opportunities?
Preparing for the New York Bar Exam was intense, especially coming from a non-US legal background. While I recall it as being a traumatic experience, I did learn a lot along the way! I approached it with a structured plan and a strict routine. I enrolled in a bar prep course, followed a study schedule, and focused heavily on practicing questions and timed essays to build both speed and familiarity with the exam format. I mostly focused on practicing past exam questions because they really helped me get a solid grasp of the legal concepts and figure out how to manage my time during the test. Consistency and discipline were key. I used to wake up early to read through the study modules and watch all the videos and then spend the whole day practicing questions. This helped me understand and apply the legal concepts without the need to cram them up. Qualifying as a New York attorney not only adds credibility in one’s practice in the USA but is also a requirement for most BigLaw firms in making their decision to hire you to practice law in New York. As a New York qualified attorney, I am able to advise on US legal aspects directly, particularly in deals involving New York law-governed documents, which are common in my area of work. My advice is to treat the bar exam like a full-time job for those one to two months. Focus on understanding the test, its format/ structure and not just the law. No matter which bar prep course you choose, practice, practice and practice! This is very important. You don’t need to ace the exam (no extra points for high scorers) – you only need to pass it! Follow a study routine which works best for you but stick to it. There might be days when you may lack the motivation to study or feel burnt out but believe me, keep at it, be positive and put in the hard work because it definitely pays off!
With such elaborate professional responsibilities and a demanding work schedule, how do you strike a balance between your personal and professional life? What strategies or habits help you manage it all effectively?
Balancing a demanding career in corporate law with personal life is definitely a big challenge! However, with time and experience I’ve found that setting clear boundaries and prioritizing both work and downtime is essential. While my law firm does strongly emphasis on physical and mental wellbeing by organizing retreats, wellness days and initiating activities to relieve work stress etc. I make it a point to schedule focused work hours and then fully disconnect during personal time, whether that’s spending time with family, exercising, or pursuing hobbies. I believe that following a proper routine and managing time consciously are key habits. I endeavor to stay organized and avoid burnout by using my vacation days to travel, which I deeply enjoy. I plan my weekends ahead and try to squeeze in activities which I really want to do such as watching a Broadway show or even going on hikes! Even when I get very little time for myself during rough days or intense work phases (when we are signing or closing a transaction), I try to do something that makes me feel calm and relaxed. I listen to music, play the piano or read a novel. I try to exercise regularly, stay hydrated and remain active during the day. Ultimately, I have learnt from my experience that work life balance is less about reaching a perfect equilibrium every day but more about putting in consistent effort to recharge and stay mentally fresh, which ultimately makes me more productive professionally and personally.
Looking back at your journey, what advice would you give to students and young lawyers aspiring to build an international career like yours? Are there specific resources, skills, or values you recommend they focus on to thrive in this path?
Looking back, I’d say building an international legal career requires a combination of strong technical skills, cultural curiosity, and adaptability. Moving to another jurisdiction and pressing the restart button in your professional life is not easy. One should have an open mind to adopt change and the strength to address any unforeseen challenges. It is important to develop a global mindset: stay curious about different legal systems, business cultures, and geopolitical trends. First and foremost, young lawyers still in law school should gain internship experience early on to understand the practical side of the legal profession. It’s essential to go beyond textbooks and see how law operates in the real world. A strong resume with good academic performance, complemented by diverse co-curricular and extracurricular activities, can significantly strengthen an application to study abroad. During my time in law school, I was an active mooter, and I continue to stay engaged with the community by judging some of the most prestigious moot court competitions globally. For those aiming to pursue an LL.M. in the US especially in corporate law, I strongly recommend gaining some hands-on experience in M&A or private equity transactions before applying. The LL.M. is a significant academic and financial investment, and it’s important to approach it with clear intent and direction. Students should not come with the sole aim of landing a job. The LL.M. is also an opportunity to grow as a lawyer, broaden your perspective, and experience true global exposure. Along the way, networking is absolutely key. Building meaningful and genuine relationships with alumni, law firm professionals, professors, and peers can open doors and provide lasting value well beyond the program. Finally, I would say: cultivate resilience and humility. The path can be challenging, especially as you navigate cultural, academic, and professional differences. But those who remain adaptable, open-minded, and solution-oriented will not only succeed but they will thrive.
Your career trajectory is truly inspiring. Having started your journey in India, what initially motivated you to explore opportunities abroad? Was an international legal career always your goal, or did it evolve with time and experience?
While an international career was always intriguing, I did not really plan for this move. I relocated to Hong Kong for personal reasons and in hindsight, this was the best God gifted turn in my career destiny.
After working at Khaitan & Co for over two years, I was constantly fidgeting with the idea of pursuing an LLM from the UK/US to enhance my skills. In fact, my initial career plan was always aimed at being part of the Indian Judiciary after procuring an LLM. However, I ended up with a real life LLM (something like the real life MBA) upon my move to Hong Kong.
Sorry but nothing riveting about my international legal career albeit a very fulfilling one indeed (whatever be the catalyst).
In the early stages of your career, you worked with several top-tier law firms. What were some of the key takeaways from those experiences that helped shape your foundation in dispute resolution?
Yes, I was fortunate to intern and work with many reputed law firms, legal professionals and even clerks with a High Court Judge before joining Khaitan & Co in Mumbai. Given our Indian legal education system is largely based on rote learning and lacks the practical and critical thinking aspects of the law, it is crucial to explore your interests by way of practical traineeships during your law school breaks. I would say these internships not only built a foundation in dispute resolution (for me personally), they were essential in preparing me for the private practice role I undertook with Khaitan & Co. It is your first tryst as a professional and guides you to (i) figure out where your interests lie (i.e. private practice, corporate in-house, academia and several other fields within the practice of law), (ii) develop interpersonal and communication skills, and (iii) really get a hands on experience on the culture and workings of that specific role (e.g. a law firm or a company).
After spending two years at a leading Indian law firm, you transitioned to international practice. What prompted this shift, and how did you navigate the cultural and professional differences between the Indian and Hong Kong legal environments?
As mentioned earlier, my relocation to Hong Kong was part of God’s plan. When I moved to Hong Kong, my only professional acquaintance in this new jurisdiction was my husband, who is a banker. Basically, I had to start from scratch, reintroducing myself as an Indian disputes lawyer looking for private practice roles. To make things more exciting, shortly after my arrival, the COVID-19 pandemic struck, bringing layoffs and market uncertainties.
Despite these challenges, I reached out to numerous professionals, sent cold messages, and built new connections daily. This journey required humility and grit, as the Hong Kong legal industry is highly competitive. Being a newcomer without Hong Kong qualifications or international law experience, I was rarely a recruiter’s first choice.
Transitioning from a top-tier law firm in India, with an established pedigree, to being completely unrecognized in Hong Kong was a profound experience. However, these initial years in Hong Kong marked my steepest professional growth. I learnt the art of networking and the benefits of a strong follow-up. I knew that positions won’t be created for a junior lawyer such as myself and I needed to keep hunting for the appropriate opening so that when there is one, I get a chance to interview for that role.
I also did not want to wait for the perfect opportunity and I took up an in house role with a leading manufacturing company (Rochdale Spears Group) immediately upon my move to Hong Kong (before transitioning to private practice at Harneys (my current role)). Whilst at Rochdale, I also simultaneously prepared for the Hong Kong qualification exams given my interests always lied in pursuing litigation.
You’re currently focused on cross-border insolvency litigation and restructuring. Having practiced dispute resolution in India as well, how would you compare the Hong Kong legal system with the Indian system? Are there specific procedures or practices from Hong Kong that you believe could be effectively adapted into the Indian context?
While both Hong Kong and India are common law jurisdictions, the practice, procedures and especially case management are fairly distinct. To clarify, whilst I am Hong Kong qualified, I’m currently working at an offshore law firm where we advise clients on BVI, Cayman Islands and Bermuda laws (all systems largely based on UK and common law).
In my experience, litigation in Hong Kong, UK or any of the offshore jurisdictions mentioned above, is more mature and structured.
Firstly, there is an emphasis on early settlement (i.e. out of court resolutions). There are even certain pre action protocols to be followed and pre trial settlement is highly encouraged.
Second, if a matter does go to trial, it won’t last for several decades unlike in India. In fact, the courts will block a week or two for a specific matter to complete the trial (including evidence and final arguments). Adjournments are rare as compared to India (and mostly at the behest of both parties i.e. by consent if they are exploring settlement negotiations for instance)
Having said that, India courts (i.e. higher courts SC/HCs as well as tribunals and lower courts) have a very high workload with judges handling large volumes of cases daily compared with the courts of the other jurisdictions I mentioned earlier. So it’s obviously remarkable how the Indian judges are managing these volumes. However, an intrinsic balance needs to be found, with perhaps higher no. of judicial officers and moving towards a less adversarial approach towards disputes and incentivising pre trial settlement.
Lastly, even alternative dispute mechanisms such as arbitrations are concluded more efficiently, with challenges to the final award considerably lesser as compared to India (where majority of the arbitral awards are challenged in Courts).
Being qualified to practice in both India and Hong Kong, how has this dual qualification enhanced your cross-border legal practice? Could you also share your experience preparing for and clearing the Overseas Lawyers Qualification Examination (OLQE)? What strategies or resources were most helpful to you during the process?
As challenging as it was, I thoroughly enjoyed preparing for the OLQE. To put things in perspective, the pass rate for these exams is as low as 20% so you know the odds are not exactly in your favour.
The exams are highly technical with all questions being completely application based. So you are essentially answering real life legal queries (in a time bound manner). As Indian law school graduates, we are so used to rote learning and exams lacking critical analysis, I was not only preparing for the HK law exams, I was re-learning the study techniques too.
It was a test of disciplined, structured learning and being consistent and completely focused in your preparation leading up to the exams. You also need to keep ample time for revision given the vast breadth of topics that are covered within a single head of an exam. With some luck, and blessing coupled with hard work and finding the right tutors, I was able to clear all heads in my first attempt.
To answer your first question i.e. engaging in different jurisdictions and legal systems, it really allows you to widen your scope of learning, you are not just learning two sets of laws, you are also exploring and servicing different cultures. For me, at Harneys, we deal with several Chinese clients on one hand and common law judicial systems on the other. So that’s balancing a lot of interests at the same time. I think being curious, understanding client’s needs and ensuring efficient service has kept me afloat while working in both jurisdictions
You’ve taken on leadership roles in both diversity initiatives and business development, with BD and networking now being a key part of your responsibilities. Since these skills aren’t typically taught, especially in traditional legal training, how did you cultivate them, and what guidance would you give to legal professionals looking to build confidence in this area?
Yes, I lead the Tone from the Top committee at Women in Law Hong Kong and have been part of WILHK as well as other DEI committees/member groups. I’m also quite actively involved in the BD initiatives at Harneys. Whilst both are distinct and serve differing objectives, it all stems from the art of networking.
As you rightly point out, this is neither taught or even considered as part of your skillset in law school or as junior lawyers. I believe this is a quintessential ability to develop in any profession (not just law).
So how to develop these skills. To me, it happened very organically. I was in a new jurisdiction, completely out of my comfort zone. All regular methods of finding a job had failed (i.e. through recruiters or applications to law firm websites or HR personnel). So, I had to be creative with finding opportunities. I started reaching out to people on LinkedIn (even if I did not know them), asking for 30 mins of their time/ or a coffee chat. At every meeting, I tried to expand the network by asking for introductions to more connections or membership in communities. This really helped build foundations on communication skills and confidence to hold conversations.
The transition to being involved in BD meetings and initiatives at Harneys was easier based on the foundations I built early on. I think it all comes down to being aware of the opportunities available if you can take that first step. It’s important to have a strong legal foundation and technical skills such as writing, analysis and research. However, at the same time, it is equally important to ensure that you’re perceived as a good lawyer, who is capable of being the face of a firm or representing the firm in front of potential clients. As you get elevated (e.g. at partner level), these are the skills that matter more. So it’s always better to build on these from the beginning rather than waiting to be in a leadership position.
As a Hong Kong-qualified lawyer currently advising on various offshore litigation matters (including such as the implementation of schemes/restructuring) in the Cayman Islands, Bermuda, and BVI, how do you navigate the distinct legal nuances of these jurisdictions? Furthermore, how would you compare the commercial and dispute resolution frameworks Hong Kong and India, and what key differences do you observe in their approaches to cross-border transactions?
A very good question indeed and while I marinate in these challenges daily, not something I discuss often haha. The key is compartmentalising. Given the niche I’m in, its very easy to get muddled up with the laws of different jurisdictions. Given I assist with several cross border matters and a single work day may involve drafting pleadings for a Cayman scheme of arrangement court sanction, assisting in a BVI law advice on insolvency laws and end with a client call exploring litigation in Bermuda.
I ensure that I have separate notes and sections (physically in my room as well as digitally on my desk) for each of the jurisdictions and then each of the matters. You have to be extremely organised with filings, matter segmentation etc. And of course, with some time and experience, you just get more confident in dealing with complex issues by breaking them down into simpler soluble pieces and then attending to each of them separately. And as lawyers, the most important thing is to have a mindset of continuous learning.
For students aspiring to build a career in international dispute resolution, what guidance would you offer? Are there any practical tips, skills, or experiences you believe are especially valuable as they prepare to enter this field?
International dispute resolution is a pretty wide term. I’ll answer it this way, to build a career in law (whether in India or globally) requires consistent learning, hard work, resilience, critical thinking and most importantly patience. Unlike other career paths like AI, bankers (which are fast paced and also highly technical), law requires a lot of patience and experience.
As for practical tips, I’d say apart from the basics (i.e. building a strong foundational knowledge in your chosen niche, working on the succinct legal drafting/writing skills (again something not given enough attention to during law school) …
Find a sponsor within your firm and a mentor outside. It is very important to build trust based networks and have someone back you within the organisation who genuinely is invested in your growth and development and a guide outside the firm, you can confide in and get the required support and learning.
Is there a motto or guiding principle you’ve followed throughout your legal career? In addition, how do you see the future of alternative dispute resolution evolving, especially with technological and global shifts in the legal profession? How do you personally stay updated on the latest developments in dispute resolution?
Failure is not fatal, success is not final, it is the courage that counts~!
This profession especially requires a lot of patience and resilience. In my opinion, there is no scope for instant gratification in law. You need to be thorough and keep learning and updating your knowledge base.
As for the impact of technology, we are definitely going to see some transformations. A lot of the tasks will be automated (are already being automated) which is potentially a good change because this may free up a lot of time spent by lawyers on admin/mechanical tasks and compliment the legal industry. As far as I’m concerned, I did attempt to get AI assistance at times, for presentations etc. I personally feel the problem of hallucinations needs to be solved, especially for legal tech AI – we cannot be citing wrong judgments made up by AI. Hopefully this will change soon.
Lastly, I would part by saying the cliché, you have to be curious and keep upskilling yourself (whether it is knowledge or technology). The world is moving and transforming very fast and one needs to keep pace. Having said that, this doesn’t mean you lose out on life, loved ones or your hobbies/interests. Almost every organisation (in law or elsewhere) values these additional extra curricular skills. For me it’s the water, and related outdoor activities like sailing, kayaking, windsurfing. A weekend in the sea and I feel refreshed to take on the work week!
In the early stages of your journey, particularly while transitioning into the world of intellectual property, what were some defining experiences that helped shape your practice in patents? Could you share any formative instances that honed your core skills?
Overall, my journey in the field of Intellectual Property (IP) has been both enriching and transformative. Each organization I have worked with has added a unique dimension to my understanding of IP, helping me grow both technically and strategically. While I have had the opportunity to learn immensely at every stage, there are two experiences that stand out. Not only because of the nature of the work involved, but also because they came at pivotal moments in my career and had a lasting impact on how I approach patent practice today.
The first was my transition into an in-house role at LG Electronics, which marked a significant turning point. Although this was not at the very beginning of my career, it was one of my earliest exposures to working in a large, innovation-driven product company. It was an exciting time as the first iPhone had just launched, reshaping the mobile industry. I was one of the few patent professionals hired outside LG’s IP team in South Korea, which gave me a unique vantage point.
This role gave me critical exposure to the intersection of product design and IP. I worked extensively on handheld devices, touchscreens, and human machine interfaces. I learned to break down products into their technical components and identify key innovation areas. It was here that I began to understand the importance of aligning patent strategy with product roadmaps, ensuring that each patent family supported not just a single product but an entire innovation trajectory.
In addition, I had the opportunity to contribute to emerging areas such as smart TVs and smart home initiatives. This showed me how cohesive, ecosystem-level IP strategy can create stronger value than isolated patents. Collaborating with different business units and cross-functional teams deepened my appreciation for how patents can be leveraged as long-term strategic assets. That early experience of helping shape an IP function within a rapidly evolving tech landscape laid a strong foundation for my future roles.
The second defining chapter came during my time at Nokia USA. As part of Nokia’s patent team, I worked across high impact areas like User Interface (UI) and User Experience (UX), Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR), and digital health. Being immersed in Nokia’s global innovation ecosystem, from Nokia Research Labs and Nokia Bell Labs to academic collaborations across Europe and Asia, broadened my horizons both technically and culturally.
My role encompassed a wide range of responsibilities including invention harvesting, portfolio development, prosecution, and strategic patent portfolio management across key jurisdictions such as the US, Europe, China, Japan, and Korea. I also got exposure to work with Technical Support teams for different patent licensing projects at Nokia. This includes preparing claim charts and evidence of use analyses, contributing directly to licensing and divestment strategies.
This is where I gained a nuanced understanding of how the clarity and scope of a patent can directly influence its commercial value and enforceability. I began to think more holistically, not just about obtaining patents, but about building enforceable, high-quality assets that could withstand scrutiny in licensing and litigation contexts.
Together, these two experiences helped me develop a well-rounded perspective, one that balances deep technical insight, legal precision, and strategic foresight. They taught me to view IP not just as a legal function, but as a business enabler, and that mindset has stayed with me throughout my career.
With over 17 years of in-house patent experience, looking back, what initially inspired you to pursue a degree in law after completing your engineering? Was patent law always an area of interest, or did your passion for it evolve organically over time?
Looking back, my path into patent law was not something I had mapped out early on. It was a journey that evolved gradually, shaped by experiences, exposure, and curiosity. What started as an interest in understanding how technology impacts real-world outcomes slowly matured into a deep, lasting passion for IP and patents.
During my engineering years, I was always intrigued by how innovation could be protected, monetized, and scaled. Through internships and early professional experiences, I began to realize that I was drawn not just to the technical side of things, but to the intersection of technology, business, and strategy. I found myself wanting to explore the broader picture, what happens beyond the invention itself.
That curiosity eventually led me to the field of intellectual property. I was particularly fascinated by how IP brings together technical analysis, strategic thinking, and legal structure. My initial experiences with patent work, mostly through hands-on projects and on-the-job learning, made a strong impression on me. The more I was exposed to the field, the clearer it became that I wanted to move beyond executing individual patent tasks. I was eager to contribute to broader innovation strategies and understand how legal frameworks support long-term business goals.
As I worked across different projects and domains within the IP space, I gained a better appreciation for the breadth of the field. Patent law is vast, and exposure to varied technologies and business contexts helped me understand which aspects resonated with me the most. Over time, it became clear that deepening my legal understanding would allow me to be more effective and more strategic in my role.
This was the turning point that led me to pursue a law degree. It was not about switching careers but about enhancing the one I was already building. Law helped me connect the dots between technology, innovation, and strategic value creation. It gave structure to the insights I had been developing through experience.
You’ve managed patent portfolios across major jurisdictions such as the US, Europe, Japan, China, Korea, and India. What are some of the most nuanced challenges you’ve encountered in aligning with these diverse legal frameworks?
Yes, that’s right, managing patent portfolios across multiple jurisdictions involves navigating various topics and requirements, which can present nuanced challenges when trying to align a global strategy.
One of the few topics to keep in mind is patent eligibility, particularly for software and business methods. Compared to other jurisdictions, the US tends to be more permissive but requires to show specific improvements in computer functionality or technological solutions to overcome eligibility rejections, following the Alice decision. Europe places strong emphasis on the technical contribution of an invention, where a business advantage alone may not be enough to establish patentability.
Technical disclosure requirements also vary significantly, and this can impact claim amendments during prosecution. For example, the European Patent Office (EPO) is very strict about amendments not containing subject matter that extends beyond the content of the application as originally filed. When making amendments, it is important to specify where the support lies in the original application. Although exact wording is not legally required, examiners generally prefer amendments that closely match the original text.
Handling of prior art and grace periods differs across jurisdictions as well. The US offers a one-year grace period after disclosure, whereas Europe generally requires absolute novelty before filing. China and India allow limited grace periods under specific conditions. These differences make the timing of public disclosures and use of nondisclosure agreements important considerations.
Inventive step criteria is another aspect to be mindful of. For example, the EPO primarily assesses inventive step using the problem-solution approach. This involves identifying the closest prior art, establishing the objective technical problem based on the differences, and determining whether the invention would have been obvious to a skilled person.
When it comes to claims, jurisdictions also vary in their preferences and fee structures. For instance, there is often a dislike of excessive independent claims, and claim fees can increase significantly with multiple dependencies or a large number of claims. Careful planning of claim scope and format is therefore necessary to balance broad protection with cost-effectiveness.
Overall, these jurisdictional nuances call for a careful and flexible approach. Understanding local laws, working closely with local patent agents and attorneys, tailoring claim language and prosecution strategies, and managing disclosures thoughtfully are important steps to building a patent portfolio that is both effective and enforceable across different regions.
What inspired your transition from practicing in the Indian IP ecosystem to pursuing an international role, particularly within the U.S. patent system? After nearly a decade of working in India, how did you navigate the shift, both technically and culturally and what were some of the key experiences as you adapted to the U.S. IP landscape?
My move to the US was not a planned career step but was driven by personal reasons. However, during my practice in India, I consistently worked with multinational companies, expatriates, senior leadership, and patent attorneys and agents from the US, Europe, and Korea. I also managed international patent portfolios and was regularly exposed to global patent laws and treaties, which provided a strong foundation for the transition.
Technically, adapting to the US patent system involved gaining a thorough understanding of its examination procedures, claim drafting nuances, and administrative and legal standards. On the cultural side, I embraced the collaborative and fast-paced work environment, learning to navigate diverse communication styles and team dynamics effectively.
Overall, my prior international exposure made the shift smoother and helped me quickly align with the US IP landscape while appreciating the cultural differences that enriched my professional growth.
In your in-house roles, you’ve worked closely with engineers and product development teams to build high-value patent portfolios aligned with business strategy. From this experience, what are some common pitfalls you often see at the early stages of innovation or idea disclosure that, if left unaddressed, can lead to challenges or setbacks during later stages of patent prosecution? How can these be proactively avoided?
A common pitfall at the early stages of innovation or idea disclosure could be insufficient technical details in the Invention Disclosures. Inventors may focus on what a new feature or a use-case is but sometimes fail to fully articulate the know-how and why behind its technical effect. This lack of depth may challenge later patent prosecution. To avoid this, we could implement a structured invention disclosure process where the patent practitioners work with the Engineers at an early phase of patent workflow and provide examples on the level of technical details needed.
Industrial Application or Utility of Inventions. It’s good to work with Inventors to demonstrate a practical application for their inventions. Jurisdictions scrutinize “abstract ideas” or “computer programs per se.” To counter this, disclosures must highlight technical effects and improvements to, for example, existing computing or vehicles, not just a new user experience.
Initial invention disclosures may focus solely on current product features, potentially overlooking future developments or competitive design-arounds. This can result in unduly narrow patent claims. It is therefore advisable to collaborate closely with inventors to explore potential workarounds, alternative technologies, and foreseeable product evolutions to ensure broader and more robust claim coverage.
By proactively addressing these areas, early ideas translate into a robust, high-value patent portfolio that aligns with business strategy.
Looking ahead, how do you foresee the role of an in-house IP professional evolving, especially in the context of generative AI, rapidly emerging technologies, and shifting regulatory environments? What skills, perspectives, or mindsets will be critical for IP professionals to stay ahead?
The role of an in-house IP professional is fundamentally transforming, demanding consistent vigilance across both technical and legal domains due to their rapid evolution. The rise of generative AI exemplifies this shift, raising complex questions from Inventorship, AI governance and evolving standards of subject matter eligibility for AI-related inventions across different jurisdictions. Furthermore, the increasing use of AI tools in patent drafting and analysis requires us to master new proficiencies while mitigating risks like data security and “hallucinations.” Staying current in these areas is crucial, allowing IP professionals to move beyond traditional counsel to provide proactive, forward-looking strategic guidance that anticipates both technological breakthroughs and their unique legal ramifications.
For patent professionals, this shift demands a deep understanding of these technologies, the ability to ask the right questions to the inventors so as to use the details to draft patent applications and create a patent portfolio that is robust, strategically aligned, and resilient to future developments (future-proof patent applications). Simultaneously, the use of AI in media and content generation is raising complex questions in copyright law, including issues around authorship, fair use, and derivative works. Navigating these emerging challenges requires both legal adaptability and technical insight.
For students and young professionals exploring a transition from engineering to law and ultimately into the IP and patent domain, what advice would you offer? Could you suggest a potential roadmap or strategies to help them stay relevant and future-ready in this interdisciplinary space?
For students and young professionals moving from engineering to patent law, the first step is to maintain your strong technical knowledge. As an engineer or STEM graduate, you have a solid foundation. Try to stay current with the latest technological trends within your specific field. Understanding the core technology is crucial, as patent law focuses on protecting innovations you thoroughly comprehend.
Next, develop your legal knowledge. Immerse yourself in legal manuals, textbooks, and case studies. You must become comfortable with legal language, statutes, and court rulings. This new legal expertise will combine with your technical background, creating a unique and powerful skill set vital for the interdisciplinary world of intellectual property. This allows you to understand the interplay between technology and legal strategy.
Finally, sharpen your writing skills. Much of your work will involve writing patent applications and legal arguments. Master both technical writing, for accurate invention descriptions, and legal writing, for clear application of the law. Also, cultivate essential soft skills like analytical thinking, perseverance, and attention to detail. These qualities are vital for success and will give you a distinct edge in this rewarding field.
Balancing a demanding career with personal well-being is no small feat. How do you maintain that equilibrium? Are there personal practices, habits, or philosophies that help you stay grounded and balanced in both your personal and professional life?
Balancing a demanding global IP role with personal well-being is vital. My approach starts with prioritizing well-being as a non-negotiable. This means regular self-care activities that recharge me. Exercise, mindfulness, hobbies, and time in nature are essential. I schedule short breaks daily to rest. Taking proper vacations allows me to truly disconnect from work. Maintaining
Effective time management helps me find that crucial balance. I plan my schedule carefully to allocate time for both professional responsibilities and personal commitments. This structured approach allows me to manage the high demands of my role without constant “on-call” pressure, creating a clear distinction between work and personal life.
A strong support network is also critical. I cultivate relationships with colleagues, mentors, friends, and family. Their guidance, emotional support, and practical help are invaluable in navigating challenges. This network provides a crucial sense of community and perspective. My personal philosophy centers on finding purpose and meaning in my work, which boosts job satisfaction. I embrace continuous learning and growth to stay adaptable.
What inspired you to pursue a career in law? Was there a particular moment, influence, or personal experience that drew you to the legal profession?
Since the time I learned to read and write, I have been a voracious reader. This passion led me to a deep interest in literature, history & political science. Everything I could lay my hands on, from William Shakespeare to Edgar Allen Poe to George Orwell and William Wordsworth to Arthur Conan Doyle, Oscar Wilde & of course Haruki Murakami. I was fascinated by how stories shape society and I was certain that I would either end up as a journalist chasing and breaking news stories or a writer churning out books and articles.
My family of lawyers, journalists and politicians encouraged me to develop my writing skills by reading. Contrary to popular belief, being a second generation lawyer is not always easy. In fact, like in my case, the bar was already set high by the rest of my family, and I knew that nothing less than excellence would be acceptable should I decide to join the legal practice and forge a career in law. However, my first choice was to be a journalist.
But one day during the Diwali/Winter break in my final year of studying for my Bachelor’s degree in Arts as I had made no plans to spend time in recreation with my friends, I decided to attend a cross-examination being conducted by my Advocate aunt when I watched her meticulously extract the truth with surgical precision from a witness on the stand with. The next day I requested my father, who had a flourishing legal practice in civil disputes and trial courts, if I could intern with him for a week. He agreed on the condition that I had to work even harder and put in more hours that week than the rest of the interns and not look at the clock. The first day I sat with him while he painstakingly drafted and re-draft a legal notice meticulously with the skill of what I could barely fathom. We must have spent close to 16 hours that first day, and much to my surprise, I was back again the next day where we spent another 16 hours, and I kept my word, I was the first to arrive and the last to leave. At the end of that week, I made up my mind to pursue a career in law.
Thus, Law wasn’t a detour, it was a logical conclusion of my evolution from being just a writer to being one who writes to ensure that justice is available to everyone in need of it.
What motivated you to pursue your master of laws degree (LL.M.) from Queen Mary University of London? What aspects of the program & institution aligned with your academic and professional goals? What are your key takeaways & experiences from your time there ?
If the degree of Bachelor of Laws was the foundation for my legal practice , my Masters in Law at Queen Mary, University of London was what built the edifice from which I could have a world view of international legal trends at and the ever widening scope that law provides to ensure a more equitable world. Out there I wasn’t analysing just the law in theory, but society and the way we function in relation to the law which gave me tools to further my learning.
Most of India’s statutes have either been drafted while we were a colony of the British or are based on laws in the U.K. In that sense Queen Mary offered me a historical mirror coupled with a modern lens, which made it ideal for my practice in Corporate & Commercial law. I chose Queen Mary because its LL.M. was famous for being both rigorous in theory and incredibly practical. It felt less like a classroom and more akin to partaking in real world legal scenarios. Three factors converged to create the perfect storm: In fact, prior to my LL.M. degree I had already been advising startups on Transactions, Litigation Avoidance advisory and Pre-Litigation when I realized that understanding international commercial law wasn’t optional anymore, it was the only means of raising India to the highest international standards. Second, London’s position as a global financial hub meant access to case studies that textbooks simply cannot replicate. Third, QMUL’s University’s faculty included practitioners who wrote the rulebooks on disputes and dispute avoidance.
My Master’s Degree in law laid an emphasis on comparative legal systems which proved invaluable to me now in my legal practice. Part of socialising and networking would regularly involve heated debates with faculty and peers which were our own version of the Oxford Union debates where we dissected existential legal conundrums faced in transactional agreements under Indian, English, American (Delaware), and Singapore laws. These were followed by a round of Hors d’oeuvres and drinks for which the lawyers who had failed to win the crowd would have to pay for it. The program’s real value wasn’t in the lecture halls but in the conversations that followed afterward. Late-night debates at the pub about whether certain aspects of media law really needed new legal frameworks, weekend trips with peers, faculty and chance encounters with renowned QCs & KCs.
These sessions taught me that Law isn’t just about a set of rules, it’s the art of predicting human behavior within social constraints. That became my mantra. Even my dissertation became the foundation for later advising several startups on their transactional and regulatory strategies. My London experience taught me that legal advice without commercial context is akin holding G.P.S. hardware with no connection to satellites and software, technically sophisticated, but practically useless. London offered something Mumbai could not at that time, proximity to the birthplace of commercial law and traditions that govern global transactions even today. London taught me two things: how to use the law with surgical precision and how to survive in a multi-cultural metro much akin to my own home city of Mumbai, with the only difference being that it wasn’t ‘Home’.
Queen Mary wasn’t just a campus; it was a court room without borders. I chose it for its emphasis on comparative commercial laws and of course, being in London, the commercial capital of the world was the icing on the cake. Every lecture was an eye opener to the world’s legal machinery and watching it in motion. We didn’t just study corporate and commercial law but we debated it with both present and future public policy influencers. It provided me with the opportunity to interact with vanguards and scholars of law and economic policy in our classrooms and campus. Of course, having such as alumni consists of stalwarts including India’s former RBI Governor Mr. Urjit Patel, Economist Pranoy Roy & Davidson Nicol, the former Under Secretary General of the United Nations makes it stand out even more.
Legal expertise without cultural fluency is like using complicated words with no proper context in an unrecognisable language. The LL.M. taught me to be multi-lingual in legal traditions essential for any lawyer serious about Start-up advisory in our globalized world.
In the early stages of your legal career, what experiences or matters significantly enhanced your understanding of the Law? Are there any pivotal moments that helped shape your professional trajectory?
If law school is your boot camp, then your initial few years of practice are akin to active combat duty. My father who was my mentor when I joined the profession has a saying: “Every mistake you make costs someone else money, time, or opportunity, so be extremely alert you may make new mistakes, but never repeat the old ones which you must use as a means of from your old ones which you must use as a means of enhancing your knowledge.”. Those words transformed how I approach every Start-up advisory engagement.
Every lawyer has that one case or a few early on in their career that serve as their trial by fire. Mine involved a tech Start-up whose founders had structured their equity like a Rom-Com love triangle, complicated, dramatic & destined for disaster. As we worked towards reconstituting the documentation, one thing was clear to me, ‘Startup Law’ (as people have labelled it) isn’t about preventing problems, it’s about creating efficient solutions for smart people who often make predictable mistakes. That client taught me three things: First, documentation matters, but context matters more. Second, the best legal advice often sounds like business advice. Third, sometimes the best service you can provide to a client is talking them out of their own cleverness.
Another pivotal moment came during my first due diligence exercise for a Series A round. Thirty hours into document review, I discovered a licensing agreement that could torpedo the entire deal. The lead investor later told me that I didn’t just save them money, I saved them from becoming a cautionary tale. My (Late) Grand-mother, who was a highly respected and loved State Legislator once told me: Good lawyers know the law; great lawyers understand the story behind the enactment of that law. That’s when I realized that due diligence isn’t treasure hunting; it’s about defusing land mines. These experiences of multiple successful people shaped my philosophy: Be the lawyer who prevents a crisis, not one who profits from it.
One of my first major transactions involved a then small scale e-commerce startup with revenue in different jurisdictions and compliance documentation in none of them. It was like being asked to perform surgery with a plastic knife. We spent several weeks creating the legal infrastructure for them which in fact should have existed from day one. One of its founders later said, ‘We thought that legal documentation was trivial until we realized it was life support.’
You advise & litigate for several major government bodies as a Senior Panel Counsel for the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI)/GST Intelligence & Central Board of Indirect Taxes (CBIC) as well as Standing Counsel for the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), & Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Board (MHADA) AND being a legal advisor to several Start-Ups in the tech & media space on the other how has working across such diverse institutions influenced your legal approach? What have been some of the most challenging matters among them?
My experiences with government agencies and statutory bodies taught me to navigate bureaucracy not as an obstacle, but as a playing field where real business gets done. This perspective proves invaluable when guiding startups through regulatory approval processes. Of course, I have been blessed and privileged to have had the opportunity to work with some of the most intelligent, upright & hard-working officers right from the grass-roots level Inspectors & Superintendents to Legal Advisors/Officers from right at the top up to (Chief/Joint/Deputy) Commissioners, A.D.G., Deputy & Joint Directors, so I have to give them credit where it’s due. If I have to sit and name them all that in itself would be a fairly long list.
Diversity proves invaluable for Start-up advisory work. When advising media houses or fintech companies, It’s not just about understanding MCA, RBI, SEBI, SWA regulations, It’s about deciphering the Regulatory and counter party mindset, the concerns that keep regulators awake at night, and how policy gets translated into practice.
That lesson now translates directly into how I work with startups and media houses. I cannot count the number of times boot strapped founders have met me and said “We don’t need the paperwork, it’s fine, we trust each other” only to reappear a few months later realising that when disputes arise trust flies out of the window. My early career showed me that cross-checking every consent form, every signature, every assumption can mean the difference between smooth sailing and sinking fast.
Despite my LL.M. specialisation I never restricted myself to one particular area of practice, which is why I now am able to decipher matters ranging from Income Tax disputes, Customs act & GST related Writs, Appeals, Bail & Anticipatory Bail dealing with Tax Evasion, NDPS cases, Housing disputes & other laws. Working across government bodies is like playing five-dimensional chess with tax intelligence, urban planning, housing rights, anti-evasion laws being the pieces on the chess board. Each brief requires switching mental gear and watching details with varied legal lenses. I’ve argued tax evasion by breakfast and housing and society related issues in the second half.
Working with multiple statutory bodies is like being a legal anthropologist and a linguist, each institution has its own culture, priorities and rules, both written and unwritten. My empanelments read like a tour of some of India’s most fascinating legal statutes including The Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income & Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, Finance Act & Income Tax Act under the CBDT, the Goods & Services Act, Customs Act & Narcotics & Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act under the CBIC & DRI and the Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Act, to name just a few.
Each case has been fascinating and just like fingerprints no two cases are alike but one of my most fascinating as well as challenging one has been a Writ Petition filed by one of the world’s largest manufacturers of automobiles having it’s parent company based in Germany who had sought to quash & set aside a $1.4 billion Show Cause Notice issued by the Office of the Commissioner of Customs based on investigations by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence for wilful tax evasion misclassifying imported car parts to avail lower import duties. In that case, I was led by the Learned Additional Solicitor General (ASG) of the Government of India who used to regularly fly down from New Delhi to argue the case. It was like solving a Rubik’s cube while being blindfolded where every move in one dimension affects others. That case taught me that regulatory strategy isn’t merely about simple compliance or the lack thereof with statutory provisions which may appear uncomplicated but a complex choreographed play involving multiple issues which ought to be viewed from multiple angles to get a holistic picture and arrive at what requires to be followed in practice.
Another case involved the challenge to an incorrect and manipulated technical opinion given by a multi-national consultancy firm to a multi-national South Korea based conglomerate who imported electronic equipment worth billions of dollars under a wrong entry based on the aforesaid technical opinion.
Yet another case involved a challenge to a pivotal aspect of tax administration which involved the transfer of a group of cases from one Assessing Officer (AO) to another and was crucial in ensuring the smooth functioning between two different state jurisdictions of the tax administration where the Assessee raised objections to the change in jurisdiction.
The diversity proves invaluable for startup advisory work. When advising Start-ups and individual entrepreneurs, I don’t just have to understand and simplify regulations I have to understand the regulatory mindset, the concerns that keep regulators awake at night, and understand how policy has to get translated into practice.
My government litigation experience taught me to navigate bureaucracy not as an obstacle, but as a playing field where real business gets done. This perspective proves invaluable when guiding Start-ups through regulatory approval processes. It has helped me to represent my private clients in their attempt to bridge the gap between legal theory and public policy reality.
Each role brought with it unique challenges, serving on regulatory panels involves balancing innovation with protection, investigating financial irregularities requires detective skills which they don’t teach you in law school, and where policy advisory work demands thinking beyond individual cases to systemic implications.
Yet another challenging matter pertained to a multi-agency investigation into a scandal involving small individual investors on the one hand and a group of companies, whose interests ranged from real estate development to cattle rearing to broadcasting services. Over three years, multiple stakeholders, and countless sleepless nights later, we crafted a resolution that protected investors while preserving innovation incentives. The experience taught me that public service isn’t about serving the law, it’s about serving justice through the law.
The experience of working with government bodies and statutory bodies transformed my startup advisory practice. I don’t just help companies comply with regulations; I help them understand the ‘why’ behind the rules. When founders grasp regulatory intent, they can work smoothly within set boundaries rather than riding rough shod over the set perimeters. These roles have made me lawyer, policy analyst & virtual entrepreneur. When advising CBIC on procedural lapses or individual entrepreneur clients, I often have to translate complex regulations into implementable steps. That cross-sectoral experience honed both my legal acumen and empathy to various causes.
You’ve actively participated in pro bono matters & causes varying from human rights to animal welfare, including filing public interest issues before the hon’ble Bombay High Court. What drives you to take up such socially significant and often challenging cases? In your view, what role should pro bono work play in a lawyer’s practice? You’re also a legal advisor to Sanctuary Foundation and Fur-rida’s Animal and Rehabilitation Trust, NGOs dedicated to Animal Welfare & rehabilitation in Mumbai, how do you balance both out?
Pro bono work, for me, began as a calling of my conscience. As a lawyer when you only litigate on behalf of those who can afford it, you are not helping the cause of justice but only helping those who are already privileged. Pro bono work always reminds me why I became a lawyer: not to rake in the money, but to actively work towards changing our world for the better, using the opportunity to advocate for a better, fairer and more equitable society. Billed clients feed the body. Pro bono work feeds the soul.
But here, before I even begin to think of taking any personal credit I must mention that it was the elders in my family for instilling whose values instilled in me makes me give back to society. My Late grandfather, an industrialist paved the way by social and charitable work. My Late grandmother was a Mumbai City Legislator and later Maharashtra State Legislator from the 1990s to the early 2000s. My Late uncle, also a businessman, sacrificed his business interests to champion the causes of the common man and was well known as a vociferous advocate of causes who many felt were lost causes. Just the three of them were responsible for providing basic sanitation and piped water connections to lakhs of residents of informal settlements in underserved parts of (South) Mumbai and also later went on to build study centres and gymnasiums for the poorer class of citizens who could not afford these “luxuries” throughout (South) Mumbai.
I grew up watching my father put in the same dedication and hard work into his pro bono clients that he would into his millionaire clients and once (while I was very young) I asked him why he did this, he simply said, If I don’t, then who will? … and that rational question just stuck with me. My mother gave up a very promising career as a journalist to teach journalism, creative writing and conduct writing boot camps. My brother, now a high-profile Surgeon still spends days working pro bono and organising medical camps in rural Maharashtra where there is little to no expert medical facilities. Another uncle is a senior journalist who has covered some of the most ground breaking issues of the time, not stories about luxury but the ones that no one else dared to cover because he felt that someone had to take up such matters. Another aunt gave up her job as a Banker to teach children.
When the Covid-19 pandemic hit India people had to take recourse to the Covid vaccine as it appeared to be the only defence against it. However, some unscrupulous elements took advantage of the rush for the vaccine and started administering mere saline water and passing it off as the Covid Vaccine. When my aunt, and I heard of it we couldn’t ignore it. The idea that thousands of people were tricked into believing that they were being given the vaccine when in reality they were not, shook both of us. Our PIL on this issue wasn’t just about a legal remedy, it was about restoring public faith in the ability of the law in dealing with such unscrupulous elements.
What continues to drive me is the belief that law must serve those who can least afford it. If startups look to me for guidance on shareholder rights, ordinary citizens need me for something far more basic: the right to life and health. In my view, pro bono isn’t charity, it’s oxygen for the soul. It reminds us why we became lawyers in the first place. As William Scott Downey had aptly put it, Law Without Justice is a Wound Without a Cure.
Pro bono litigation is not mere work without purpose in monetary terms, it’s about priceless work for those who cannot afford to pay to get good legal representation. I believe every lawyer who has crossed 10 or more years of practice must dedicate a part of their practice to Pro Bono Litigation. Otherwise, we risk becoming mere paper pushers and money making soulless machines instead of custodians of real justice.
Once I found myself in the thick of a case involving a teenage boy who died after being detained and allegedly tortured by the police whilst in their custody. The boy, barely 17 years old from Mumbai’s Dharavi slum district, was accused of stealing a mobile phone. After being released from “routine police detention” in July 2018, he complained to his parents and siblings of his torture by the police while in their custody. Soon after his release, he developed a fever, and his condition deteriorated rapidly, and he tragically passed away within a week. The post-mortem report mentioned pneumonia as the cause of his death. To everyone but his family, the case was as good as closed. The family’s grief was not just raw, it was distrustful of the very system that swore to protect them and it was absolutely justified in refusing to take their child’s body for his last rites for nearly two years until the High Court ordered a second post-mortem. For those two years, the body lay unclaimed in a morgue, almost frozen in time. But the law did not forget him and nor did I.
I wasn’t new to litigation then, but here I learned something every statute book misses: law isn’t just about sections and precedents; it’s about instilling trust in those for whom laws are enacted. The Hon’ble High Court’s order was a pivotal moment it showed me about the compassion and kindness of judges and it showed me that you don’t need to have the loudest voice to tilt the scales of justice in favour of the helpless and restore faith in the judiciary. It also sharpened my skills in due diligence because when you’re digging through contradictory medical reports and hospital records, you learn how to scrutinize details like an auditor hunting for hidden liabilities.
Taking on that case was not about earning any fees as it was completely pro bono, it was the weight of my conscience which guided me to do so. That case became my personal reminder that law is not always swift, but it is relentless. Sometimes you carry files that weigh more than law books they weigh with grief, suspicion, and silence.
Another matter that shaped my formative years was one that involved a medical negligence case where a woman contracted Hepatitis C after a hysterectomy at a famous South Bombay hospital. A team of surgeons and doctors, one operating theatre, and a chain of negligence right from the top, it was a puzzle of medical protocol and accountability. For a young lawyer, it was baptism by fire. I spent nights reading medical manuals, learning how a surgery should be conducted, and finding out with what went wrong. What it taught me is that the devil truly hides in the documentation.
Pro bono cases also tend to surprise you and throw you into the deep end, no fees, minimal support, high legal stakes for those involved. But they also teach you to think creatively and advocate fiercely. They’re a bootcamp for both skill and conscience. Pro bono work teaches you humility: you are not always the smartest person in the room, sometimes you are the only person standing between injustice and justice.
Animal welfare law in India is like a crossword puzzle with half its clues missing. As advisor to Stranctuary Foundation and Fur-rida’s Animal Rehabilitation Trust, I have actively helped them get set up as well as look into internal policy and legal fine print. I’ve worked on matters involving animal cruelty, harassment from societies against members from using elevators or accessing common areas with their pets. These cases taught me that education is as vital as litigation. Sometimes, the law needs a lawyer often it needs an earnest storyteller. “Until one has loved an animal, a part of one’s soul remains unawakened.” – Anatole France
Pro bono work should be mandatory in every lawyer’s practice, not as a penance for making money, but as a training for making better decisions. Every PIL or Pro Bono Writ I advise on makes me a sharper commercial lawyer because it reminds me that law exists to serve, not the other way around. Plus, there’s practical value: Pro bono cases often involve cutting-edge legal questions that commercial clients pay premium rates to explore. It’s continuing education coupled with social service. My pro bono work began with the simple realization of the advice of my (Late) grandmother who told me: Corporate law pays your bills, but public service will reward you with a clear conscience and a good night’s sleep. When you spend your days crafting shareholder agreements and due diligence reports, you can lose sight of law’s fundamental purpose of protecting the vulnerable and ensuring fairness. Pro bono work keeps me honest.
Every time I review a startup’s employment policies, I remember the domestic workers whose rights I’ve advocated for. Every time I structure a complex transaction, I’m informed by cases where transparency could have prevented injustice. It’s enlightened self-interest: Better lawyers emerge from engaging with law’s moral dimensions, not just its commercial applications.
And oddly, these cases have made me sharper in my commercial practice. Start-ups come to me with messy equity structures, hidden liabilities, and co-founder disputes. I approach those files with the same rigor I did in the case of the boy’s family who allegedly died as a result of custodial interrogation, digging until the truth emerges from a metaphorical mountain of dirt and stones which seek to hide it. Pro bono makes your professional muscle stronger, because when you stand against the State or against a famous hospital with unlimited resources and a legal team the size of a small army for free, a mere shareholder squabble doesn’t scare you.
Why take up pro bono cases? Because the power of the law is meaningless unless it reaches those who most need it. The directing of a second post-mortem after a teen’s death or holding doctors accountable for medical negligence are milestones for society and for any lawyer involved in pursuing such cases.
Looking ahead, what is your vision for the future of your legal practice? How do you see your personal journey evolving within the legal field? In a profession that is both demanding and dynamic, how do you maintain focus, purpose, and mindfulness?
My future vision is to promote people to start building a hybrid practice where commercial matters fuel a strong public interest wing and not just something which has purely commercial motivation. Think of it as the Robin Hood model: charge the rich, fight for the voiceless.
The future belongs to lawyers who can speak three languages fluently: Law, business, and technology. I’m building a practice that serves as a bridge between these worlds, helping founders navigate not just current regulations but anticipate future ones.
As for purpose: I want my legacy to be measured not in my tangible assets, but in barriers removed, regulatory hurdles that no longer impede innovation because I found simple solutions, and compliance frameworks that enable rather than constrain entrepreneurial ambition. My goal isn’t to be the most famous lawyer or the richest one, it’s to be the one clients trust with their most important decisions because they know I’ll give them efficient solutions within the parameters of the law and not just some short sighted temporary balm for any problems that they could encounter.
The legal profession needs fewer disruptors and more steady ships. Staying focused requires principled pragmatism. When faced with ethical dilemmas, I ask not ‘What’s legally permissible?’ but ‘What would I want my family & friends to be told about me as a lawyer and a human?’ This compass has never steered me wrong. I see myself evolving into policy advisory roles, where law meets legislation. I mentor young lawyers and young law students, and I hope to use this to build a legal aid network where all of us endeavour to focus just 30% of our time and resources towards pro bono legal aid in india focussing on individual cases and causes ranging from human rights, prevention of domestic violence and animal welfare cases.
My five-year vision: Become the first and last go-to legal strategist for Tech & Media Entrepreneurs and Start-ups tackling challenges such as: Intellectual Property Protection, Transfer & Monetization, Data Privacy & Compliance, Fund-raising & Investor relations, Content Liability & Platform Responsibility, Technology Contracts & Partnerships, Regulatory & Policy Navigation and the biggest & most common one being: Dispute Prevention & Legal Crisis Management. These companies don’t need traditional lawyers; they need legal pioneers who can craft frameworks for technologies that don’t yet have regulatory precedents. Maintaining focus requires what I call ‘productive paranoia’ constantly asking ‘What could go wrong?’ not from anxiety, but from genuine curiosity. Mindfulness comes from remembering that every legal document I draft affects real people’s lives and dreams.
My endgame? To be feared by crooks, respected to be fair by counter-parties and of course, followed by puppies, especially the ones that have no place to call home.
Focus and mindfulness? I journal, I used to learn Salsa & Bachata, popular latin american dances, I also took up MMA and found that to be a great stress-buster, I spend time taking care of my dogs as well as feeding a few community dogs. I take breaks from the screen. “The law is a jealous mistress, but she respects a loyal one.”
I have one rule which most of my clients are already aware of: if it’s urgent I’ll be drafting and doing research even if it’s 3am or a holiday, but if it doesn’t need urgent redressal I stop working by 9 pm. Balance isn’t a luxury, it’s how I keep the fire burning without burning out.
Based on your extensive experience across sectors, what advice would you offer to young lawyers just starting out in the profession? Are there any particular resources or habits you would recommend to help them build a strong foundation?
Your law degree is just a learner’s license. The real exam begins in court. Try and read at least one interesting case law a day or at the very least. Argue (respectfully) with your peers. Your opponents and counter-parties are not your enemies. In litigation, your opponent is your adversary, but only inside the courtroom, they are your peers, your colleagues, your juniors and seniors outside the courtroom, treat them all with the same respect once your matter is over that you would want them to treat you with.
Even if you’re being appointed just for an adjournment, read the entire case, carefully, make sure if given the opportunity by the court, you answer correctly and confidently, most judges asking you about your case are providing you with an opportunity, they know they may lose time with a young lawyer, but they are trying to help you and not put you in a spot.
Your counter-parties are not your adversaries, you have a common goal, mutual co-operation and trust go a long way here, far longer than brow beating or one-upmanship. Write even when no one’s reading. Don’t confuse over-confidence with Confidence. But humility is better. Young lawyers often worry about the wrong things.
Here’s what actually matters: Master the fundamentals before chasing specializations. You can’t advise on complex M&A structures if you don’t understand basic contract principles. It’s like trying to compose symphonies before learning scales.
Your first five years will feel like everyone’s speaking Latin while you’re struggling with the alphabets, that’s okay, read and re-read. The lawyers who succeed aren’t the smartest ones, they’re the ones who can admit ignorance, ask better questions, and turn feedback into improvement rather than taking it personally. Clients hire lawyers to solve problems, not to demonstrate legal knowledge. Be solution-oriented, not statute-oriented.
Stop thinking like a student who merely asks for answers and start thinking like a strategist who helps clients navigate ambiguous situations. Law school teaches you what the law says; practice teaches you what the law means.
In start-up advisory, I’ve learned that founders and investors speak different languages, even when using the same words. ‘Aggressive timeline’ means ‘next week’ to founders and ‘next quarter’ to VCs. A founder once wanted to structure their Series A with several different classes of shares: one for each team member’s ‘unique contribution.’ We simplified to three classes and closed the round in half the time. Then there was the time that Start Up wanted to grant equity to advisors before clarifying their intellectual property ownership. We sorted IP first, advisory agreements second. One recent challenging due diligence involved a company with operations in four countries, three legal entities, and legal documentation that looked like abstract art.
Good legal advice feels expensive until you need it, then it feels cheap. My approach is preventive medicine for businesses, identifying potential complications before they become complications. Whether it’s crafting founder agreements that anticipate future disputes, structuring employee equity plans that scale with growth, or creating compliance frameworks that evolve with regulation, the goal is always the same: Build legal infrastructure that enables business success rather than constraining it. Benjamin Franklin said, ‘An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.’ In startup law, an hour of careful drafting can prevent months and sometimes years of expensive litigation. Don’t aim to be the smartest/richest lawyer. Aim to be the one your client calls first when they need a solution.
Four Non-Negotiable Principles:
Understand not just legal implications but business consequences.
Sometimes the best legal advice is telling clients what they don’t want to hear.
Your career will be defined not by the cases you win, but by the problems you prevent and the trust you build. Be the lawyer people call not just when they’re in trouble, but when they want to avoid trouble altogether.
The moment you think you know everything is the moment you become dangerous to yourself, as well as your clients.
Essential Habits:
Read everything thrice, once for content, once for implications, and once again for good measure.
Make time for one pro bono brief, at least once a month.
When you aren’t reading, attend court like an obsession: watch, make notes, learn.
Kindness, not money, makes the world go round. Be Kind… Always, especially when you would not benefit. Be kind to those less fortunate than you, how you treat a clerk or a peon is a lot more telling of your character than how you behave in front of a Judge or a Senior Advocate. Be kind to people, be kind to animals.
You don’t have to be the biggest fish in the court-room or the negotiation table, remember piranhas bite more sharply (but remember, above all, Kindness)
Your journey from a remote village in India to a senior legal role in a century-old American multinational is incredibly inspiring. What early experiences or turning points played a pivotal role in developing your interest in Law in the first place?
Growing up in a remote village in Assam, access to resources was limited, but the values instilled in me, resilience, curiosity, and a strong sense of justice, were profound. I vividly remember witnessing everyday challenges faced by people in my community, often due to a lack of awareness of their rights or access to legal support. These early observations sparked a deep interest in the mechanisms of justice and how the law could serve as a tool for empowerment.
A pivotal moment came during my school years when I had the opportunity to assist a local teacher who was helping villagers draft and understand basic legal documents. That experience, though informal, was transformative. It opened my eyes to how meaningful an impact legal knowledge could have when applied with empathy and purpose.
Later, during my university studies, I was drawn not just to the theory of law, but also to its application in real-world, cross-border business scenarios. This interest deepened as I began to understand the role legal professionals play in shaping not only individual outcomes but also the trajectory of entire organizations.
Each step of the way, from the modest beginnings in my village to engaging with multinational teams across continents, has been driven by a belief that the law, when practiced with integrity and foresight, can be a powerful enabler of growth, fairness, and progress.
Spanning over 15 years across industries like pharmaceuticals, IT, and manufacturing, your career reflects both depth and versatility. What foundational lessons from your early roles continue to guide your practice today?
One of the most enduring lessons from my early roles is the importance of listening deeply and understanding the business context before offering legal advice. Early in my career, I realized that being technically sound in law is essential but not sufficient. To be truly effective, a legal professional must align legal strategy with business objectives and operational realities. This perspective has consistently guided my approach across industries.
Another foundational lesson is the value of clarity and simplicity in communication. Whether I was supporting a pharmaceutical company on regulatory compliance or helping an IT firm scale its contract operations, I learned that demystifying legal complexity for non-legal stakeholders builds trust and accelerates decision-making. The ability to translate legal language into practical guidance is something I continue to emphasize and foster in the teams I lead.
Lastly, adaptability has been a constant companion. Working across different geographies and regulatory frameworks, from India to the Americas, taught me to stay agile, culturally sensitive, and open to learning. The legal landscapes may differ, but the need for sound judgment, ethical integrity, and strategic foresight remains universal.
These early principles, business empathy, clear communication, and adaptability, have become the cornerstones of my practice and continue to shape how I engage with stakeholders, lead teams, and deliver value in complex, evolving environments.
At The Hershey Company, you’ve played a key role in ensuring compliance with corporate governance, legal obligations, and regulatory standards across regions including APAC and Europe. Could you share one of the most challenging situations you’ve encountered in this journey, and how you effectively navigate it?
Thank you for the question. While I must respect the confidentiality obligations inherent to my current role and cannot discuss specific internal situations, I can share that navigating complex compliance challenges across diverse jurisdictions requires a combination of proactive stakeholder engagement, cross-functional collaboration, and adaptability to evolving regulations.
In my experience, the key to effectively managing such challenges lies in fostering open communication with local experts, aligning legal strategies with business goals, and maintaining a flexible yet rigorous approach to compliance. This mindset has consistently enabled successful navigation of complex regulatory environments without compromising confidentiality.
With extensive experience in negotiating high-value contracts, what common pitfalls have you observed in commercial negotiations and how can legal teams proactively avoid them in high-pressure environments?
One of the most common pitfalls I have observed in high-value commercial negotiations is focusing too heavily on legal minutiae without fully understanding the commercial drivers and deal dynamics. While it’s crucial to safeguard the company’s legal interests, an overly rigid approach can alienate the counterparty or delay progress, especially in high-pressure environments where timing and agility are critical.
Another frequent misstep is insufficient alignment between the legal team and internal business stakeholders before negotiations begin. When legal teams are brought in late or are not fully briefed on the business objectives and risk tolerance, negotiations can become reactive rather than strategic, leading to missed opportunities or poorly structured outcomes.
To proactively avoid these pitfalls, I emphasize the following approaches:
Early and continuous collaboration: Involving legal professionals at the outset of the deal cycle fosters a proactive, strategic approach rather than a reactive one. By gaining a deep understanding of the underlying business rationale, legal teams can craft solutions that not only mitigate risks but also actively facilitate and enable the successful execution of the deal.
Scenario planning and fallback positions: In high-stakes negotiations, pressure can lead to rushed decisions. By preparing fallback positions and pre-approved negotiation levers in advance, legal teams can respond quickly without compromising on key risk parameters.
Clear internal alignment on priorities: Before entering negotiations, I ensure that all internal stakeholders, from finance to operations, are aligned on what is negotiable and what is not. This clarity helps present a united front and prevents conflicting messages during the negotiation process.
Balancing firmness with flexibility: Successful negotiations often require finding creative middle ground. Legal teams that are solution-oriented, commercially aware, and culturally attuned are far better positioned to achieve outcomes that are both compliant and commercially viable.
Ultimately, effective negotiation is about understanding both the legal and human elements of the deal. By staying calm under pressure, communicating clearly, and staying focused on the end goal, legal teams can not only protect the business but also enhance its reputation as a trusted and pragmatic partner.
Legal technology and process optimization are central to your work. What do you see as the biggest opportunities and challenges for legal departments embracing automation and AI in contract lifecycle management?
The rise of automation and AI in contract lifecycle management presents an exciting opportunity for legal departments to transform from being reactive support functions to strategic enablers of business efficiency and growth. When implemented thoughtfully, legal technology can drastically reduce cycle times, improve compliance, and deliver actionable insights from contract data, turning legal operations into a source of competitive advantage.
With AI-powered analytics, legal teams can extract trends from thousands of contracts, identifying risks, renegotiation triggers, or compliance gaps proactively. Automation also enables standardization and scalability, especially for high-volume, low-risk agreements, freeing up legal talent to focus on complex, strategic matters.
However, the challenges are equally significant. One major hurdle is change management. Legal functions have traditionally been risk-averse, and shifting mindsets toward embracing technology can be slow. Without clear alignment between legal, IT, procurement, and business teams, implementation can become fragmented, resulting in poor adoption and underutilized platforms.
Another challenge is balancing automation with judgment. AI can streamline workflows, but legal decision-making still requires human insight, especially in nuanced or high-stakes scenarios. Ensuring that automation enhances, rather than replaces, critical thinking is key.
To navigate this journey successfully, I believe legal departments should focus on three core principles:
Start with process clarity and optimize before automating.
Select tools that integrate seamlessly into existing ecosystems and workflows.
Invest in capability building, ensuring teams are trained not just on how to use technology, but how to extract its full strategic value.
Ultimately, the goal is not just to automate for efficiency but to elevate the role of legal as a proactive, tech-enabled partner in the business ecosystem.
You’ve led teams and collaborated across functions globally. What leadership principles have stayed with you, especially when working with diverse legal and business stakeholders?
Leading and collaborating across diverse legal and business teams, often spread across different geographies, cultures, and regulatory environments, has taught me that effective leadership is grounded in empathy, clarity, and trust.
One principle that has consistently guided me is the importance of active listening and cultural sensitivity. In global environments, legal and business perspectives can vary significantly depending on local norms, risk perceptions, and market dynamics. Taking the time to understand those perspectives, before offering solutions, builds credibility and strengthens collaboration.
I also believe in leading with clarity of purpose. Whether I’m guiding a legal team or partnering with cross-functional stakeholders, I strive to clearly communicate goals, expectations, and the rationale behind key decisions. In complex projects, especially those involving regulatory or commercial risk, clarity helps align efforts and fosters collective ownership.
Another key principle is empowerment through trust. I have found that giving people the space to take ownership while being available as a sounding board, creates stronger, more resilient teams. It is especially important when managing legal functions across time zones, where micromanagement is not only ineffective but also unsustainable.
Finally, I try to lead by example, particularly when it comes to integrity and accountability. In legal roles, your credibility often precedes you. Being consistent, dependable, and fair, even under pressure, helps build long-term trust across both legal and business communities.
In essence, leadership in a global legal context isn’t just about directing, it is about connecting, aligning diverse perspectives toward common objectives, and doing so with authenticity, respect, and strategic foresight.
Your early exposure to litigation and dispute resolution must have provided valuable perspective. How did you decide to transition to an international practice and how did you navigate the complexities involved with it?
My early exposure to litigation and dispute resolution gave me a solid ground in the fundamentals of legal analysis, advocacy, and risk assessment. Working on contentious matters in the Indian legal system taught me to think critically, anticipate challenges, and understand the nuances of courtroom dynamics, all of which are invaluable skills, even outside the litigation context.
However, over time, I became increasingly drawn to the preventive and strategic side of legal practice, particularly how legal frameworks could be leveraged to support business growth, mitigate risk before it materializes, and enable long-term value creation. I saw international practice as a natural evolution of this interest. It offered the opportunity to work across jurisdictions, partner closely with business leaders, and help organizations navigate regulatory complexity on a global scale.
The transition wasn’t without challenges. Moving from a litigation-focused role to an in-house, cross-border environment required me to reorient my mindset from issue resolution to issue prevention, and from adversarial negotiation to collaborative problem-solving. I invested significant time in understanding international legal systems, both common law and civil law traditions, as well as gaining fluency in business operations and corporate governance.
One of the most effective ways I navigated this shift was by embracing continuous learning and remaining adaptable. I took on roles that expanded my exposure to multinational operations, built relationships with colleagues across functions and cultures, and sought mentors who had successfully made similar transitions.
In hindsight, my litigation experience gave me a strong foundation in legal rigor and risk management, while my move into international practice allowed me to broaden my impact, helping businesses not just survive legal hurdles, but thrive through strategic legal support.
Having worked across both common and civil law systems, what key differences do you notice in legal operations, and how do you keep up with the ever changing dimensions of legal compliances across jurisdictions?
Working across both common and civil law systems has deepened my appreciation for the diversity in legal reasoning, procedural approaches, and the role of precedent in shaping legal outcomes. In common law systems, there is a strong reliance on case law and judicial interpretation, which demands a nuanced understanding of precedent and how it evolves over time. In contrast, civil law systems are more codified and statute-driven, requiring a close reading of the legislative framework and its administrative interpretations.
From an operational standpoint, these differences manifest in contract drafting styles, dispute resolution mechanisms, and compliance expectations. For instance, civil law jurisdictions may favor more concise contracts that rely on statutory provisions, whereas common law jurisdictions often require more detailed, self-contained agreements. Similarly, the pace and approach to regulatory enforcement can vary widely. What is standard in one jurisdiction may be seen as intrusive or inadequate in another.
To manage these complexities, I take a proactive, layered approach to legal compliance:
Local Expertise: I collaborate closely with local counsel and regional experts to stay aligned with jurisdiction-specific interpretations and enforcement trends. This ensures that our global strategies are grounded in local realities.
Knowledge Sharing and Internal Training: I prioritize creating internal awareness through cross-functional training, compliance toolkits, and internal policy updates, making sure legal and business teams are equipped to operate responsibly across borders.
Regulatory Monitoring and Strategic Technology Use: I leverage legal tech solutions and regulatory intelligence platforms to track evolving legal landscapes, particularly in areas like data privacy, ESG, and trade compliance, where change is rapid and multidimensional.
Harmonization with Flexibility: Wherever possible, I advocate for harmonized global processes that can be tailored for local adaptation. This allows for consistency in core legal and compliance principles while respecting jurisdictional nuances.
Ultimately, navigating these varied legal systems requires not only technical knowledge, but also cultural sensitivity, open communication, and a commitment to continuous learning. It is this blend of structure and adaptability that allows legal operations to remain effective and compliant in a constantly shifting global environment.
What advice would you offer to young legal professionals particularly those from non-metropolitan backgrounds aspiring to make a mark globally? And how do you personally stay ahead in this ever-evolving legal ecosystem?
To young legal professionals, particularly those from non-metropolitan or modest backgrounds, I want to say that your origin does not define your destination. What matters most is your willingness to learn, your resilience in the face of challenges, and your ability to adapt. I come from a remote village in Assam, and I understand firsthand the barriers, both visible and invisible, that can make global aspirations seem out of reach. But those very roots can also be your greatest strength. They teach you humility, grit, and the power of persistence.
My advice is to focus on building a strong foundation in both legal knowledge and practical skills. Be curious, ask questions, and don’t shy away from stepping outside your comfort zone. Seek mentors, even if informally, and be open to feedback. Language, geography, or access may feel like limitations initially, but with consistency, self-discipline, and digital access to global knowledge, those gaps can be closed.
Also, understand that legal excellence today goes beyond black-letter law. Develop a commercial mindset, be tech-aware, and build cultural fluency. In a globalized legal ecosystem, your ability to collaborate across time zones, cultures, and functions is just as critical as your ability to interpret a statute.
As for how I stay ahead in this evolving field, it is a combination of continuous learning, strategic networking, and hands-on collaboration. I make it a point to stay informed through industry publications, legal tech forums, and cross-functional discussions. I also learn immensely from mentoring others which offers fresh perspectives and keeps me grounded.
In essence, global success in law is no longer reserved for the privileged few. With the right mindset, a commitment to growth, and the courage to take that first step, no matter how small, you can carve your own path.
