Super Lawyer

Category: Interviews

  • “The SQE not only enhances one’s grasp of Indian law but also equips practitioners with nuanced legal principles that, although rarely argued in Indian courts, are often favourably applied when effectively presented.” – Abhirath Thakur, Solicitor (England and Wales) and Principal Associate at Economic Laws Practice.

    “The SQE not only enhances one’s grasp of Indian law but also equips practitioners with nuanced legal principles that, although rarely argued in Indian courts, are often favourably applied when effectively presented.” – Abhirath Thakur, Solicitor (England and Wales) and Principal Associate at Economic Laws Practice.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    What inspired your decision to pursue law, especially coming from an Army background? Was there a particular experience or influence that sparked your interest in the legal profession and if not how did it develop?

    Being from a Defence family, I grew up observing my father’s unwavering commitment to discipline, integrity, and justice—not just for himself, but for those around him. When I was in Class 12, he was posted in Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, where he was entrusted with handling discipline and vigilance matters, including the oversight of legal cases. I often saw him engage with lawyers and Central Government Standing Counsels, and listening to those discussions sparked my initial interest in the legal field.

    Another significant source of inspiration came from our family legacy. My great-grandfather was a barrister trained in England and was considered one of the most affluent and sought-after lawyers of his time. Stories of his work, often narrated by my father, filled me with pride and deepened my fascination with the legal profession. My father’s own experience in the Defence Forces had shown him the transformative power of law in shaping society. His belief in its impact and his encouragement played a crucial role in motivating me to consider a career in law.

    Once in law school, I made it a point to seek practical exposure early on. I interned at various law firms across both corporate and litigation domains to gain a hands-on understanding of the profession. These experiences were eye-opening and shifted my perception of law from a purely academic subject to a dynamic and impactful vocation. I found particular excitement in applying legal principles to real-life situations and was deeply inspired by watching seasoned advocates present arguments in court.

    This exposure transformed my attitude toward the field. I began to genuinely enjoy my studies and took part in moot court competitions, debates, and academic research with renewed enthusiasm. What started as a reluctant compromise gradually evolved into a meaningful and fulfilling calling.

    Looking back, choosing law has been one of the most rewarding decisions of my life. If given the chance to choose again, I wouldn’t hesitate to take the same path.

    You pursued your LL.M. in International Commercial and Corporate Laws at Queen Mary University of London, one of the leading programs in commercial laws and arbitration. How did that academic experience sharpen your legal reasoning, and how do you integrate that international perspective when handling domestic disputes in India?

    Before pursuing an LL.M., I spent four years working in the dispute resolution team at Wadia Ghandy & Co., Delhi. During my tenure, I handled a diverse range of commercial and corporate matters, albeit from a dispute resolution perspective. Working on high-stake and complex cases made me acutely aware of a gap in my understanding of commercial and corporate law—my knowledge, while broad based, lacked the depth I aspired to achieve. This realization prompted my decision to pursue an LL.M., with the aim of gaining a more nuanced and in-depth understanding of this domain.

    My longstanding interest in commercial and corporate law stems from a deep-rooted passion for commerce and business which further motivated me to pursue an LL.M. where I could experience the intersection of law and business, taught by some of the most respected professors in the field. In addition to enhancing my legal understanding, I was also drawn by the opportunity for international exposure and the chance to engage with a truly global legal perspective.

    Undoubtedly, the LL.M. expanded my intellectual horizons and significantly deepened my understanding of international commercial laws. Exposure to an international legal framework offered a broader context and allowed for a more well-rounded grasp of the subject matter. My coursework included modules such as Mergers (a court-approved process in India), Acquisitions and Takeovers, International Commercial Law, Trial Advocacy, Regulation of Financial Markets, Conflict of Laws, and International Commercial Arbitration, among others. I had the privilege of learning from world-renowned professors like Mr. Stavros Brekoulakis and Ms. Rosa Lastra, both recognized authorities in their respective fields, as well as attending guest lectures delivered by distinguished legal luminaries.

    What particularly stood out to me was the pedagogical approach of the LL.M. program. The teaching was rooted in exploring the “why” behind laws—their purpose, evolution, and the jurisprudential rationale—rather than simply focusing on the “what,” which tends to be the predominant style in Indian legal education. This method fosters greater intellectual flexibility and clarity, which I find immensely valuable, even when working on domestic legal matters, as the foundational legal principles often remain consistent.

    To illustrate, consider the field of international arbitration, which has gained significant prominence in recent years and is now considered a cornerstone for lawyers dealing with cross-border disputes. The procedural frameworks of leading arbitral institutions as well as our own Arbitration Act are grounded in the UNCITRAL Model Law. Being taught by professors with direct experience in shaping and applying these frameworks offers invaluable insight—something that an LL.M. program uniquely provides and therefore applying this knowledge in the arbitrations which I am involved in proves to be highly beneficial.

    With 9 years of post-qualification experience in dispute resolution and arbitration, what originally drew you to this field? What have been the most defining moments or lessons that shaped your professional approach within high-stakes litigation environments?

    During law school, I explored a broad spectrum of internships across both corporate and litigation domains. These included stints under senior counsels, litigation lawyers, and prominent law firms. By the end of my academic journey, I found myself increasingly inclined towards litigation. However, I remained cautious about fully committing, having been advised by several mentors about the profession’s slow initial progression and modest early rewards.

    In pursuit of clarity, I joined ASP Advocates—a full-service law firm led by my mentor, Mr. Abhishek Seth. He graciously offered me a legal position where I engaged in a balanced mix of litigation and corporate transactional work. My time at ASP proved instrumental in shaping my professional outlook. I found myself especially drawn to courtroom proceedings, legal drafting, and the application of legal principles to complex factual scenarios. These experiences sharpened my analytical thinking and compelled me to approach problems creatively and critically. After more than a year at ASP, I was certain that litigation was the path I wanted to pursue.

    With a clearer sense of direction, I joined the Delhi office of Wadia Ghandy & Co., where I was exposed to a more demanding and dynamic litigation environment. I worked on a wide range of matters—from high-stakes disputes to those with relatively lower stakes. Interestingly, I came to appreciate that it is often the smaller matters that truly shape a lawyer’s core skills. While high-stake cases typically involve a team of lawyers—where one’s role may be limited—smaller matters offer greater responsibility, hands-on experience, and opportunities to build courtroom confidence. I strongly believe in regularly taking up such cases, along with engaging in pro bono work, both of which are essential for holistic professional growth.

    That said, the value of working in high-stakes litigation cannot be overstated. At Wadia, I was fortunate to be involved in a landmark constitutional matter referred to a nine-judge bench. The case presented intricate questions of constitutional law and involved collaboration with some of the most respected senior advocates before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. It demanded intense preparation—multiple strategy conferences, long hours of research, and detailed analysis of extensive judicial precedents. The experience, while intellectually demanding, was equally enriching. I learned through observation—how senior counsels structured their arguments, interpreted precedents, and framed issues strategically to serve the client’s interests. Beyond the legal learning, such work cultivates discipline, resilience, and a deep respect for the value of time—all vital qualities for a successful litigator.

    As my tenure at Wadia progressed, I came to appreciate that every matter—regardless of its perceived importance—requires diligence, precision, and intellectual agility. Growth in litigation is rarely linear; it is the product of sustained effort, patience, and humility. The profession teaches you that it is better to take deliberate steps than to chase quick wins. Success lies in consistent performance, staying focused, and not being swayed by external comparisons. Ultimately, perseverance and commitment—not shortcuts—are the true markers of progress in this field.

    Being dual-qualified as a Solicitor in England & Wales and an Advocate in India is a rare accomplishment. What motivated you to pursue this path, and how has it enhanced your ability to handle cross-border disputes or advise international clients?
    Preparing for the Solicitors Qualifying Examination (SQE) significantly deepened my understanding of the law. The SQE not only enhances one’s grasp of Indian law but also equips practitioners with nuanced legal principles that, although rarely argued in Indian courts, are often favourably applied when effectively presented.

    Following the completion of my LL.M., I was driven by a strong desire to further strengthen my legal acumen, especially in the context of local and general laws of England and Wales—such as criminal, property, and civil law—which have profoundly influenced the Indian legal system. These laws, having been extensively borrowed and embedded into our legal framework, are best understood through a comparative lens.

    After conducting thorough research and engaging with qualified Solicitors, I was convinced that studying for the SQE would provide me with the foundational understanding of English law necessary to gain a richer, more structured comprehension of Indian law. While an LL.M. offers a broad, often international, legal perspective, the SQE is grounded in the practical and substantive law of England and Wales, which a Solicitor is expected to advise on across a wide range of practice areas. This distinction made the SQE particularly appealing as a rigorous yet rewarding route to legal excellence.

    My SQE preparation has already had a tangible impact on my practice. At Economic Laws Practice, where I was involved in a variety of criminal and property cases, my enhanced understanding of legal principles has proven invaluable. Moreover, the knowledge gained has played a significant role in navigating a complex arbitration involving mortgage disputes, stamp duty issues, and interest-related legal principles.

    You’ve advised clients across a wide spectrum, from defamation and regulatory enforcement to complex partnership disputes. Can you share an example of a particularly challenging or meaningful case and how you navigated it?

    One matter I fondly recall – which was handled by me entirely independently – involves an engaging dispute in the realm of Intellectual Property Law, where I had the opportunity to defend a business conglomerate which was sued for alleged trademark infringement relating to the name of a restaurant it had established in India. The opposing party, a restaurant chain based in the United States, had engaged one of India’s leading IP law firms to represent them.

    The crux of the dispute revolved around the use of the restaurant’s name. The opposing party not only sought its immediate discontinuation but also demanded an exorbitant amount in damages and compensation. However, once I presented our defense, it became evident that their claims were unfounded. My argument drew upon a range of statutory and common law principles, including the absence of cross-border reputation, lack of trademark advertisement or market penetration in India, the generic and descriptive nature of the name, and the failure to establish continuous use. These factors collectively undermined the credibility of their claims and formed a strong foundation for our defense.

    Rather than escalating the matter further, the opposing party recognized the weakness of their position and initiated settlement discussions. What followed were protracted negotiations under the aegis of the Delhi High Court. In a rather unexpected outcome, the settlement concluded with my client receiving compensation—rather than paying it. In exchange, my client agreed to slightly modify the restaurant’s name, though the establishment eventually closed due to limited footfall.

    As someone qualified in two legal systems, what are the biggest differences you’ve observed in dispute resolution culture between India and the UK? 

    While the Indian and UK legal systems share a common foundation rooted in common law principles, the administration of justice in the two countries differs significantly. In my experience, litigation in the UK is far more streamlined and structured to promote early resolution. Protracted legal battles, which are relatively common in India, are a rarity in the UK.

    UK courts often actively encourage—and in some instances, require—parties to explore settlement options before proceeding to trial. This emphasis on alternative dispute resolution and various pre-action protocols helps to reduce the burden on the judiciary and results in more efficient case management. Even though pre-litigation mediation in India is mandatory for commercial matters, it is not strictly followed before proceeding for litigation on one ground or the other. 

    To put this into perspective, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom hears and decides approximately 80 to 120 cases per year. In contrast, the Supreme Court of India handles nearly 600 matters in a single day. Similarly, the lower courts in the UK typically list only two to three cases for hearing each day, allowing for focused and in-depth deliberation. In India, however, the dockets of lower courts are often overcrowded, with judges expected to handle a substantially higher volume of cases daily.

    What guidance would you offer to young lawyers interested in building a career in dispute resolution and arbitration, particularly those exploring international qualifications or LL.M. programs abroad? What key skills or experiences should they prioritize?

    This question has vexed many students in the past and therefore I will strive to answer this in a clear and concise manner. I firmly believe that pursuing an LL.M. can provide invaluable exposure, especially in fields with an international focus. However, it’s essential to approach this decision with clear and realistic expectations. An LL.M. should not be pursued solely as a pathway to employment abroad, as many students may face a harsh reality—the job market in foreign jurisdictions is often limited and highly competitive. The decision to pursue an LL.M. should be guided by a range of considerations—academic interests, professional goals, financial feasibility, and personal fulfilment. There’s no universal path, and what works for one may not suit another. Therefore, it’s important to evaluate all these factors carefully before taking the plunge.

    An LL.M. can be especially beneficial in fields with a strong international focus such as international arbitration, cross-border commercial litigation, international trade law, transnational mergers and acquisitions, and similar areas. In such domains, the specialized knowledge and global perspective offered by an LL.M. can significantly enhance your career prospects.

    In my experience, gaining some work experience before pursuing an LL.M. is highly advisable. There are two key reasons for this: first, with practical experience, you’re better positioned to understand and appreciate the academic content of the program. Second, if you intend to leverage your LL.M. for international job opportunities, prior work experience may place you in a stronger position. That said, I’m not suggesting waiting too long—after all, the energy, enthusiasm, and flexibility you have at 26 may not quite be the same at 36.

    An LL.M. also offers an excellent platform for building a global professional network. It brings together individuals from diverse jurisdictions, offering the chance to forge meaningful connections and broaden your international legal perspective—both of which are valuable assets in today’s interconnected legal landscape.

    While the LL.M. certainly plays a pivotal role in supplementing legal knowledge and providing a strong academic foundation, it is not a substitute for the essential traits of a successful lawyer—hard work, resilience, and sharp analytical skills. Rather, it serves as a powerful catalyst that enhances these qualities and prepares one for the evolving demands of modern legal practice.

    Get in touch with Abhirath Thakur –

  • “Legal entrepreneurship is about compound growth. Trust builds slowly; reputation takes time.” – Vedant Pujari, Founding Partner of Accures IP Care LLP.

    “Legal entrepreneurship is about compound growth. Trust builds slowly; reputation takes time.” – Vedant Pujari, Founding Partner of Accures IP Care LLP.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    Coming from a commerce background, what initially inspired you to pursue law? Was it a long-standing goal, or did your interest in the legal field evolve over time?

    Like most 18-year-olds, I had little clue of what I wanted to do with my life. The only streams that most people around me suggested were engineering or medicine, but I knew those weren’t for me. Not because I didn’t respect those fields, but they just didn’t click with who I was. I ended up in commerce because I enjoyed business and finance as it felt naturally coming to me. Toward the end of my degree, I started preparing for CA like most commerce students do. But halfway through, I realized I was just going through the motions. It wasn’t exciting me.

    The real turning point was completely random. I was at the canteen at ILS Law College, Pune, chatting with a friend who was studying law. He started talking about constitutional law, contracts, torts and at that point something clicked. The way he described these subjects made me realize law could be the perfect blend of intellectual challenge and real-world impact I was looking for.

    I applied to ILS that same year. Best decision I ever made. What I love about this journey is that my commerce background wasn’t wasted, in fact it actually gives me an edge. When I’m advising startups or corporations today, I understand both the legal framework and the business reality. Law isn’t just rules on paper; it’s a tool to make business happen. My advice to young people feeling lost? Don’t panic if you don’t have it all figured out. Stay curious, take calculated risks, and trust that the dots will connect eventually.

    You began your legal journey with a prestigious law firm in Delhi. What drew you specifically to intellectual property law, and what early experiences deepened your interest and shaped your expertise in this domain?

    I have to credit Prof. Neelima Bhadbade at ILS Law College, Pune for planting the IP seed. Back then, intellectual property was still relatively niche in India, not like today where many are aware of it. She made it fascinating by connecting Indian law with international cases and showing us how IP actually worked in the real world.

    Getting campus recruited by an IP firm in Delhi was lucky timing. This Firm then was a small team of 7-8 people, which meant I couldn’t hide in a corner doing research all day. I was thrown into the deep end patent filings, trademark disputes, copyright issues and other wide spectrum of IP practice. My mentor back then, one of the founding partners thankfully gave me real responsibility early on. Scary at the time, but invaluable in hindsight. My personal rule was simple: “never say no to any assignment”. I’d stay late figuring things out, reading cases, calling up senior colleagues with questions. Resources weren’t as easily available as they are now, we had to dig for everything. But that struggle taught me to really understand the fundamentals.

    The breakthrough for me was learning to translate complex legal concepts into practical business advice. That’s what clients actually appreciate, not a lecture on case law, but clear guidance on what they should do next. That skill of making law accessible and actionable has been crucial throughout my career.

    What keeps me passionate about IP after two decades? The field never stops evolving. From AI-generated content to digital piracy to blockchain, there’s always a new challenge that requires you to think differently.

    After beginning in a law firm environment, you transitioned into a corporate role. What motivated this change, and what key differences did you observe in terms of the challenges, culture, and expectations in both settings?

    This transition wasn’t something I planned. It happened organically. After several years at the firm, the leadership decided to launch an IP outsourcing company to offer specialized services like patent searches, docketing, and portfolio management. They asked me to lead the IP products division, and I thought, “Why not? This could be interesting.”

    The culture shock was immediate and eye-opening. At the law firm, everything revolved around legal excellence. We asked questions like could your argument hold up in court? Would the IP office accept your position? Quality was paramount, even if it took longer. In the corporate environment, it was all about scalable processes, efficiency metrics, and standardized deliverables. Instead of crafting legal strategy, I was building repeatable workflows.

    The work rhythm was completely different too. Law firms operate on client urgency and if something’s critical, you work until it’s done. The corporate side was much more structured: 9 to 6 schedules, shift patterns for international clients, strict turnaround times. Frankly, I found it limiting. As a lawyer, I thrive on diving deep into complex problems, which doesn’t always fit neat time slots. What I missed most was the direct client relationship. In a law firm, we were solving strategic problems with general counsels and business leaders.

    Having said that, this stint was brief but valuable. It clarified what I really wanted from my career. I realized I am energized by intellectual complexity, client relationships, and strategic problem solving, client facing and all of which led me back to traditional legal practice. 

    Sometimes you need to step outside your comfort zone to appreciate what you have.

    What inspired you to establish your own legal practice, and how did you navigate the challenges of entrepreneurship in the legal field? Were there any pivotal moments that helped solidify your decision?

    The decision wasn’t a lightning bolt moment, in fact it evolved over time. After years in firms and that corporate stint, I kept asking myself: “What if I built a practice the way I think it should be done?” The pivotal moment came when I realized if I didn’t try now, I might never get another chance. 

    Let me be blunt about what entrepreneurship in law really looks like:

    Entrepreneurship is lonely. You can have great mentors and supportive family, but at 2 AM when you’re stressing about payroll or a difficult client, it’s just you. Nobody shares your failures, and the tough decisions are yours alone. Accept this reality upfront.

    Think long-term or don’t bother. If you expect quick wins, you’ll be disappointed. Building a respected practice takes years. I tell lawyers considering this path: if you can’t commit to a 10 to 15 year horizon, stay in your firm job. Legal entrepreneurship is about compound growth. Trust builds slowly; reputation takes time.

    Client relationships are everything. In a big firm, you inherit institutional relationships. As a founder, every client relationship starts from zero. I treated every matter, no matter how small, as if it were my biggest client. That approach led to repeat business and referrals.

    Vision with flexibility. I was clear about wanting to create an IP practice that truly served business needs, not just legal technicalities. But I had to adapt constantly because of the client’s changing requirements, the evolution of the legal landscape and market dynamics shift.

    Resilience isn’t optional. There will be lean months, difficult clients, and moments when you question everything. What got me through was believing deeply in what I was building and never compromising on quality.

    My advice to aspiring legal entrepreneurs is “don’t rush it”. Master your craft first, understand the business of law, and build relationships. Then, when you’re ready, jump with both clarity and courage.

    You’ve advised a wide range of clients, from startups and creative agencies to pharmaceutical companies and academic institutions. How do you adapt your IP strategies to meet the unique needs and growth stages of such varied industries?

    After 20 years of practice, I’ve learned that one-size-fits-all IP strategies don’t work. My approach is what I call “protection with purpose” – every IP decision must align with the client’s specific business goals.

    Startups and creative agencies need agility and smart prioritization. They’re usually cash constrained but need to show IP value to investors. I help them identify their crown jewels i.e. what IP assets will matter most for funding, partnerships, or market differentiation. We might focus on key trademarks, core provisional patents, or critical copyrights first, building the foundation they can expand later.

    On the other hand, pharmaceutical companies require sophisticated, multi layered strategies. We’re managing global patent portfolios, complex licensing deals, regulatory considerations. Here, it’s about creating patent thickets around key products such that it covers the compound, formulation, manufacturing process, methods of use. The goal is sustainable competitive advantage across multiple markets.

    Academic institutions have unique challenges – they want to commercialize research but maintain an open academic culture. The strategy focuses on identifying commercializable innovations early, filing strategic patents that don’t hinder further research, and creating licensing frameworks that benefit both the institution and industry partners.

    The key is spending time upfront understanding each client’s business model, competitive landscape, and growth trajectory. I’m not just filing patents or trademarks – I’m helping build strategic moats around their most valuable assets. What remains constant across all clients is the principle that IP should enable business, not complicate it. Whether I’m talking to a first-time entrepreneur or a Fortune 500 general counsel, the conversation starts with understanding what they’re trying to achieve.

    In your experience, what are the most common misconceptions businesses have about intellectual property protection? How do you guide them toward a more accurate understanding?

    After two decades of client conversations, I see the same misconceptions repeatedly. Here are the big ones:

    IP is only for big companies – Wrong. Some of the most valuable IP I’ve worked on came from small startups. Your trademark or patent could be your most important business asset, regardless of company size.

    One filing protects me everywhere – IP rights are territorial. A US patent doesn’t protect you in India. A trademark registered in India doesn’t automatically work in Singapore. Global protection requires global strategy.

    Once filed, I’m protected forever – IP requires active management. Patents expire, trademarks need renewal, portfolios need monitoring. I’ve seen valuable rights lost simply because nobody was paying attention to deadlines.

    My company name gives me trademark rights – Company registration and trademark rights are separate. You can register “XYZ Private Limited” but that doesn’t give you exclusive rights to use “XYZ” as a brand.

    How do I fix these misconceptions? Education and real examples. I show them competitors who got it right and ones who didn’t. I explain IP not as abstract legal concepts but as business tools. How a well-crafted patent portfolio helped one client raise Series A funding, or how trademark vigilance saved another from expensive rebranding.

    The conversation always comes back to business strategy. IP isn’t just legal housekeeping, it’s competitive advantage, asset value, and risk management rolled into one.

    How do you foresee IP law evolving over the next five years, especially considering emerging technologies, shifting regulatory landscapes, and global geopolitical dynamics?

    IP law is entering one of the most dynamic periods in its history. As we look ahead to the next five years, I believe several major forces will reshape how businesses think about and manage their IP and how lawyers will need to adapt their counsel to serve clients effectively.

    The rise of emerging technologies particularly AI and blockchain is challenging traditional IP frameworks. Questions such as who owns AI-generated content, or how blockchain can be used for IP rights management and enforcement are already pressing issues. I foresee regulatory bodies around the world moving to update and harmonise IP laws to address these new realities, though this evolution will be gradual and will require active dialogue between industry, policymakers, and the legal community. 

    We are also witnessing a shift toward a more strategic and data-driven approach to IP management. Businesses increasingly see IP not just as a legal shield but as a core business asset i.e. the one that supports valuation, drives licensing revenue, and enhances market position. In this context, IP lawyers must evolve from being pure legal technicians to becoming strategic advisors who can help clients align IP strategy with business goals. This is where my mantra of “protection with purpose” will be even more relevant going forward.

    Geopolitical dynamics and regulatory fragmentation will continue to pose challenges for global IP strategy. With shifting alliances, evolving trade agreements, and varying national approaches to data protection and IP enforcement, businesses will need tailored, jurisdiction-specific advice. I also expect greater emphasis on IP enforcement and brand protection in digital environments, as e-commerce continues to grow, and cross-border infringement becomes more sophisticated.

    In short, the future of IP law will be more complex, fast paced, and integrated with business strategy than ever before. As lawyers, we must be prepared to continuously learn, collaborate across disciplines, and help clients navigate this evolving landscape with foresight and purpose.

    My advice to clients: don’t wait for perfect regulatory clarity. The companies that adapt quickly to these changes will have sustainable advantages. Those that wait will be playing catch-up.

    Managing a demanding legal practice can be intense. How do you maintain a healthy work-life balance, and is there a personal philosophy or motto that has consistently guided you throughout your professional journey?

    Let me be honest, work life balance in legal practice isn’t about perfect equilibrium every day. It’s about sustainable intensity over decades.

    There are times when the practice demands everything like a major litigation heating up, international deals with tight deadlines or crisis management for key clients. During these periods, I’m all in. But I’ve learned to be equally intentional about recovery periods. When things are quieter, I actively recharge, usually with cycling, hitting the gym, watching mindless TV, or just sitting quietly doing nothing.

    Building a strong team was crucial for long-term sustainability. Early in my practice, I tried to handle everything myself. That’s a recipe for burnout. Learning to delegate and trust others was one of my biggest growth areas. A well-functioning team isn’t just good for business, it’s what allows you to have a life outside the office.

    My personal motto has evolved over the years, but what guides me now is “Do your best, let go of the rest, and expect less.” In a profession where perfectionism is expected, this mindset keeps me sane. I focus on delivering excellence where it truly matters, accept that I’m human and will make mistakes, and maintain perspective about what really counts in life. Law is what I do, not who I am.

    Physical and mental health aren’t luxuries, they’re business necessities. You can’t serve clients well if you’re constantly stressed or burned out. I’ve made peace with the fact that some periods will be all-consuming, but I actively protect time for renewal.

    What advice would you offer to young lawyers who aspire to work on IP law? Were there any specific habits, values, or resources that played a significant role in shaping your professional growth in this field?

    For young lawyers aspiring to build a career in intellectual property law, my foremost advice is this – develop both depth and breadth. IP is a wonderfully multidisciplinary field, it sits at the intersection of law, technology, business and creativity. IP law is constantly evolving whether through landmark judgments, international treaties or emerging technologies like AI. Develop a habit of reading widely not just case law, but also industry reports, scientific advancements and business news. Always act with professionalism and respect for confidentiality. Develop a mindset of “protection with purpose”, understand why each IP asset matters to the client’s business, and align your advice accordingly.

    Lastly, invest time in building mentorship relationships and learning from peers and seniors. In my own journey, I gained immensely from working under exceptional mentors who challenged me and gave me opportunities to grow. 

    After 20 years in IP practice, here’s what I wish someone had told me when I started:

    1. Develop both depth and breadth: Master core IP law principles but also understand the business and innovation contexts you’ll be advising.

    2. Adopt a mindset of continuous learning: Stay ahead of evolving IP law, emerging technologies (AI, blockchain), and global IP trends.

    3. Build strong values early: Always practice with integrity and diligence

    4. Embrace every opportunity to learn: Take on diverse assignments, large and small, and see every task as a learning opportunity.

    5. Learn from inspiring seniors and build trust-based networks. These relationships will shape your growth.

    Get in touch with Vedant Pujari –

  • “I have always had an inquisitive nature and a strong desire to view situations from multiple perspectives. These qualities naturally drew me toward a career in law.” – Shashi Priyadarshini, Lead Attorney (Commercial Counsel) at WNS.

    “I have always had an inquisitive nature and a strong desire to view situations from multiple perspectives. These qualities naturally drew me toward a career in law.” – Shashi Priyadarshini, Lead Attorney (Commercial Counsel) at WNS.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    What initially drew you to a career in law, and how did your time at Chanakya National Law University, Patna, equip you to meet the practical challenges of contract management and corporate legal practice?

    My interest in law was sparked during my early school days. I have always had an inquisitive nature and a strong desire to view situations from multiple perspectives and ensure fairness in every interaction. These qualities naturally drew me toward a career in law. My legal education at Chanakya National Law University has provided me with a strong foundation in various laws and regulations, including a solid understanding of contracts. It has also equipped me with practical knowledge essential for working as a lawyer.

    In your early years, you worked extensively on contract review and litigation. What were the most significant lessons from that experience, and how did it shape your approach to legal analysis and risk assessment?

    Working on contract review and litigation has taught me several significant lessons. One of the most important is the need to approach legal negotiations not only from a legal perspective but also with a commercial mindset—thinking like a business lawyer. Contracts often contain complex legal clauses that can lead to prolonged negotiations. However, it is essential to remember that the ultimate goal is to close a commercial deal. Therefore, as lawyers, it is crucial to collaborate closely with business and commercial teams, assess legal and commercial risks effectively, and help facilitate a balanced, workable agreement. 

    Transitioning into in-house legal roles at the Taj Group and Brinks India marked a shift in your career path. How did these roles differ from your earlier legal service positions, and what changes did you notice in terms of responsibilities and expectations?

    My earlier roles were more focused on outsourcing, where I worked alongside legal counsels, but without being directly invested in the company. This experience allowed me to collaborate with in-house lawyers and interact with Fortune 500 companies, but it involved relatively lower levels of risk assessment. In contrast, in-house roles are far more complex and come with higher risks. As an in-house lawyer, it is essential to approach cases from the company’s perspective, thoroughly understanding its business operations, and then making informed, commercial decisions that align with the company’s goals and risk appetite.

    You’ve handled complex contracts involving Intellectual Property, especially in technology and AI domains. What are the key contractual safeguards you prioritize during negotiations to protect IP assets?

    Protecting intellectual property (IP) involves safeguarding both the customer’s and the company’s rights. This includes ensuring the protection of the customer’s IP, any pre-existing IP, and the company’s rights against potential third-party IP breaches. It is also crucial to protect the customer from liabilities arising from modifications under the indemnity clause. IP breach liabilities should never be left open-ended—it’s important to negotiate and include a super cap on such breaches. Additionally, contracts must include precise language to clearly define IP rights and obligations, ensuring the legal interests of the company are thoroughly protected.

    In your experience managing the contract lifecycle and engaging in vendor negotiations, particularly in global settings, how have you handled situations where contractual obligations conflicted with local legal regulations?

    It is essential to ensure compliance with all applicable local laws and regulations when entering into commercial agreements. As a commercial legal counsel, one must not only address the legal obligations arising from customer contracts but also ensure that similar obligations and compliance requirements are appropriately flowed down to any third-party vendors involved in the service delivery.

    For example, when your company provides services to a customer and relies on a third-party vendor to deliver part of those services, it is critical to ensure that:

    1. All legal rights and obligations are clearly defined and back-to-back between the customer contract and the vendor agreement.
    2. The third-party vendor is fully compliant with the local laws and regulations applicable to the services they are performing.
    3. All necessary legal, regulatory, and contractual compliance requirements are properly captured in the vendor agreement to avoid any downstream risks or liabilities.

    This approach mitigates legal and operational risks and ensures a seamless and legally sound service delivery framework. 

    In your current role as Lead Attorney for the America region, where compliance requirements can vary widely across U.S. states and other jurisdictions, how do you ensure your legal guidance remains locally compliant while upholding global consistency in standards and practices?

    As a lead attorney operating in U.S. jurisdictions, it is critical to have a thorough understanding of the applicable federal, state, and local laws and industry-specific regulations. This legal insight ensures that contracts are drafted in a way that aligns with regulatory requirements, mitigates risk, and protects the interests of the company. Tailoring contracts to reflect relevant legal obligations also supports enforceability and compliance throughout the lifecycle of the agreement. 

    Reflecting on your diverse legal journey, what advice would you give to young legal professionals aspiring to move into in-house roles? Which subjects or skills should they prioritize, and how can they position themselves effectively early in their careers?

    Advice for Young Legal Professionals:

    1. Understand the Law and Contractual Framework:
      Develop a strong foundation in legal principles and contractual positions. Know the legal implications of various clauses and how they align with applicable laws.
    2. Understand the Business and Commercial Context:
      Go beyond legal text—grasp the company’s business model, commercial goals, and industry dynamics. Legal advice is only effective when grounded in business reality.
    3. Apply the “5Ws and How” Approach:
      Ask: What is being contracted? Why is it necessary? Where is it applicable? Who are the parties involved? When is it effective? How will it be executed? This approach helps in thorough contract analysis and effective negotiation, especially from an in-house counsel’s perspective.
    4. Collaborate with Business Teams:
      Engage with internal stakeholders to understand their objectives. Review the contract from a commercial standpoint, not just a legal one, to ensure it serves the broader business strategy.
    5. Be Agile and Prepared for Last-Minute Changes:
      Flexibility is key. Legal work often involves addressing urgent issues or last-minute gaps—adaptability ensures timely and practical solutions.
    6. Conduct Risk Analysis Based on Business Appetite:
      Assess legal and commercial risks pragmatically. Identify “must-haves” versus “nice-to-haves,” and evaluate which contractual risks are acceptable based on your company’s risk appetite.

    Outside of your professional legal work, what personal interests or activities do you pursue? How have these helped you maintain mental balance, resilience, and long-term effectiveness in such a demanding field?

    Outside of work, I’m a proud dog mom to two wonderful dogs whose unconditional love brings me immense joy and comfort. In my free time, I enjoy painting, traveling, and cooking—activities that allow me to express creativity, explore new cultures, and unwind.

    Get in touch with Shashi Priyadarshini –

  • “Every case has its challenges, but the ones that stay with you are those that reveal both the human side of crime and the imperfections of our system.” – Piyush Singhal, Managing Partner at JS Law Chambers.

    “Every case has its challenges, but the ones that stay with you are those that reveal both the human side of crime and the imperfections of our system.” – Piyush Singhal, Managing Partner at JS Law Chambers.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    What was your experience like pursuing the B.S.L., LL.B. program at Symbiosis Law School, Pune University? What inspired you to choose law as a career path?

    I was part of the 2000-2005 batch at Symbiosis Law School, Pune. At the time, that was the only campus of Symbiosis and it was affiliated to Pune University. Coming from the heartlands of Uttar Pradesh, where I studied across various districts, transitioning to a cosmopolitan campus was a cultural shift. School life in U.P. was more traditional and structured, but at Symbiosis, I experienced diversity, freedom of thought, and a broader outlook on the law and society.

    I was never inclined toward science or mathematics, which were often the only options given to students back then. I wasn’t great at either. Fortunately, coming from a legal background, law was always present in my environment. It lingered in my mind and triggered a serious interest soon after school. I appeared for the entrance exam and secured admission into Symbiosis, and from that moment onward, I knew I had found my calling. The depth of civil and criminal law captivated me from the very beginning — corporate culture was never my cup of tea. I always wanted to be a courtroom lawyer, and that conviction only grew stronger during my law school years.

    In the early stages of your career, you served as State Counsel for Uttar Pradesh at the Supreme Court of India. How did that experience shape your legal perspective, and what impact did it have on your professional growth?

    I’ll be honest — nepotism does exist in our profession. But having said that, the opportunity to serve as State Counsel for Uttar Pradesh at the Supreme Court early in my career was a transformative phase. I was entrusted with drafting Criminal SLPs, Article 32 petitions, Reviews, and more. But it wasn’t just about the legal work, it was mainly the environment that shaped me.

    Being in court every day, watching legendary lawyers argue, listening to courtroom banter… it was mesmerizing. That exposure taught me courtroom craft like nothing else. It is often said that a lawyer must be crystal clear on the facts, because the judges already know the law. That wisdom stayed with me. The court isn’t impressed by ornamental arguments; it respects clarity and preparation.

    What inspired you to establish your own independent practice? Could you share some of the initial challenges you faced and how you navigated through them?

    I started my independent practice quite early, opening a one-room office on the second floor of a building in Lajpat Nagar. It wasn’t easy. I had to knock on different doors, asking for work. Gradually, I got empaneled with banks and insurance companies. Alongside, I took on private civil and criminal matters and even matters related to IPR.

    I never said no to any work — whether it was registering a marriage or conducting due diligence for agricultural, residential, or commercial properties. That consistency and “go-getter” attitude paid off. Word of mouth remains the best marketing strategy, and that helped me earn the trust of top professionals in MNCs.

    Having the bank and insurance panels helped extend my practice pan-India. I proactively offered pan-India services and built a network of trusted lawyers across the country. It wasn’t easy. Far from it! It was, in fact, full of unexpected challenges, but persistence paid off. Today, I can proudly say that I run a reliable pan-India litigation practice serving multiple clients nationwide.

    You’ve represented the Delhi Police in numerous cases involving fundamental rights and constitutional matters. Is there a particular case that stands out as especially challenging or impactful?

    Every case has its challenges. But the ones that stay with you are those that show you both the human side of crime and the imperfections of our system. I remember one particular case: a brutal murder on a public road using large knives and swords. There were eyewitnesses, there were recoveries, and I was representing the victim.

    There was strong evidence, but the accused were powerful. Witnesses were threatened, some were even bought off. I remember walking into the courtroom flanked by over a hundred men glaring at me. We had to move multiple applications to secure protection for the witnesses. Some still turned hostile. Working closely with the police, I saw firsthand how their hard work can be undone by manipulation and intimidation. That case deeply affected me — it showed me both the resilience and the vulnerability of our justice system.

    When handling high-stakes criminal matters, how do you balance the legal complexities with the emotional and human elements that often accompany such cases?

    In high-stakes criminal matters, it’s never just about law books and precedents. There are real people, real emotions, and very often, deep trauma involved. I’ve seen crimes born out of vengeance, impulse, and even false allegations. Whether I’m representing the victim or the accused, I try to understand the ‘why’ — in legal parlance, the “motive” — the story behind the act. It helps me build my case, because crimes are rarely black and white.

    One must be both empathetic and analytical while handling criminal cases. That balance helps in framing a stronger legal strategy and also in dealing with clients and especially their families, who are often emotionally shattered.

    In your experience handling matters under Labour & Employment Laws, what are the most common issues establishments face, and how can these be addressed proactively in the early stages?

    Being associated with MNCs and institutional clients, I frequently deal with labour and employment contract issues. The most common problems arise due to ambiguous employment agreements, non-compliance with termination procedures, misclassification of employees, and disputes over wages or bonuses.

    To avoid these issues, companies must ensure their employment contracts are drafted with legal precision, HR policies are clear and compliant, and they follow due process during hiring, termination, or disciplinary actions. Early legal intervention and internal audits can prevent most of these problems. A stitch in time truly saves nine in labour law.

    What are the key considerations and recent developments in bail jurisprudence that legal practitioners should be mindful of when representing clients before the Supreme Court, various High Courts, and district courts in Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, and Haryana?

    “Bail is the rule, jail is the exception”: this principle from State of Rajasthan v. Balchand (1977 AIR 2447) is often quoted but rarely followed in spirit. Bail today is a discretionary and often inconsistent domain. Two identical fact situations can yield two very different bail outcomes.

    Judgments like Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar have helped reduce unnecessary arrests, especially in offences punishable with less than 7 years. But we still lack uniformity. Courts are supposed to consider whether the accused will tamper with evidence, flee, or pressurize witnesses. But over time, “gravity of offence” has taken disproportionate weight, which was never meant to be a primary criterion.

    I’ve seen false cases filed to settle personal scores, even invoking POCSO where minors are tutored to speak against relatives in matrimonial disputes. Allegations under 376 IPC or Section 354 are sometimes misused in civil or employment-related vendettas. Of course, not every case is false; but the potential for misuse is real. Legal practitioners must push for more consistency and emphasize the fundamental principles of liberty and fairness.

    What advice would you offer to young professionals aspiring to build a career in litigation? Are there any particular habits, resources, or practices that have helped you stay current and sharp in this fast-evolving field?

    • Use AI and digital tools wisely. They’re helpful, but they’re no substitute for deep legal understanding. Read every word in your draft. Don’t blindly trust technology or florid language from thesauruses or ChatGPT. Courts appreciate clarity and precision, not jargon or verbosity. Big, long drafts may work in corporate circles, but they don’t impress judges.
    • Precision wins cases. Read regularly — judgments, legal updates, articles — and never stop refining your drafting and argumentation. Litigation is a responsibility. Be present. Be prepared.

    Looking ahead, what is your vision for the future of your legal practice and your personal journey within the profession? How do you maintain focus and mindfulness in pursuit of that vision?

    Advocacy has become more than just a profession for me. It is my lifestyle, my identity. I cannot imagine a day without the rhythm of courtrooms, case files, and client interactions. It’s what keeps me grounded, challenged, and constantly evolving. My vision is to continue offering honest, effective legal solutions, build on the pan-India practice I’ve established, and serve every client with the same commitment, till my last breath. There is no looking back.

    Law runs in my blood; we are a family of lawyers. My father, a retired High Court Judge, has been my lifelong mentor. His insights, clarity of thought, and sense of balance in legal reasoning continue to guide me. Whenever I’m stuck, I know exactly where to turn. My wife is an in-house counsel, my mother (though not practicing) has a deep understanding of law, and not a day goes by in our house without spirited legal debates. Sometimes it’s lively, sometimes it’s noisy, but it’s always engaging. Along with the love and care that bind us, law is also the force that connects and energizes us.

    Focus and mindfulness for me come from consistency and determination. The determination to read every document carefully, to understand every client personally, and to never compromise on precision. I believe in showing up — fully present and fully prepared — every single day. That’s what shapes long-term success.

    I’ve also been fortunate to have worked under some of the finest seniors, whose mentorship helped me in understanding not just the letter of law, but also the unwritten code of ethics and decorum in the courtroom. Their teachings stay with me even today.

    As the profession evolves with technology and new challenges, I remain rooted in traditional advocacy values: clarity, credibility, and compassion. That’s the compass I follow on this lifelong journey.

    Get in touch with Piyush Singhal –

  • Choosing Law, Living Justice: A Woman’s Stand for Change in Indian Courts – Niyati Sharma, Founder of NS Solicitors.

    Choosing Law, Living Justice: A Woman’s Stand for Change in Indian Courts – Niyati Sharma, Founder of NS Solicitors.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    Let’s understand why and how you chose to pursue a career in law while you had already completed your Bachelor’s in English from Delhi University?

    It’s a very interesting question though. I never thought of becoming a lawyer, but I had this idea in my mind that I wanted to do something which has a larger public interest.
    It was my father who wanted me to become a lawyer. I was a UPSC aspirant and I used to say, this time I’m sure that I’ll clear UPSC. And he used to say that you will become a very good lawyer.
    So it was his inspiration and the journey when I entered into law. And when I did my first internship, it was at the Delhi Commission for Women.
    I had goosebumps when I went there for the first time. And for the first week, I could not sleep. I used to say to my mom that I never thought that women are in such a bad condition. What I was seeing was a nine-month pregnant lady saying that her husband pushed her back, threw her out of the house, and beat her so much that she ran away. Another female was raped by ten men. She had married one, and he just captured her in her home, and she was being raped daily by ten people.
    She said that she had just run out of that place. So that sort of complaint was coming from very basic people who never knew what law was, who never knew what resort they had or where they could go and complain. And when I saw that this power a lawyer has, this knowledge a lawyer has, any female lawyer or a male lawyer can deliver this justice or help in taking that path, this internship changed my outlook. And this was the reason that I decided I will not go for judiciary, I will not go for UPSC, but I will go for litigation.

    During the very early stages of your legal career, what kind of experiences do you see have shaped your thoughts in relation to the kind of practice that you want to take forward because you are doing something very unusual? Why? Because your points towards bringing in that social justice in society are very different. And I really would request you to bring in those aspects which were so inspiring for me. And I really don’t want to push anything, but I just want to understand how you came to that thought process because it’s not easy for anyone to just give up something so big and plan something to do for society that easily.

    So basically, I had a plain paper when I entered into litigation. No one from my family, no one from my in-laws, no background from lawyers or litigants to the nearest or the far more relatives I could see. I had never experienced or listened to any lawyer or their experience. I just did law and I came as a practitioner.
    But as soon as I came, I realized that this is the only field which is gender neutral. Gender neutral in the sense that the hard work a male has to do, the same a female has to do.
    You have to earn your client on your own. You have to work on your own. Suppose I say today that I want to practice in the field of IPR or I want to practice in the corporate field, but I want to be in litigation. That means I should have my own clients. But then I’m getting divorce cases, I’m getting property disputes, depending on the social exposure that I have or the client base or the people who know me as now becoming a lawyer. So the first and foremost thing I realized after becoming a lawyer is that you cannot choose your profession, the profession chooses you.
    That means the field you can’t choose, the field will choose you. Otherwise, in a job in various law firms, you can apply for a job in which you are interested. But becoming a proper advocate, practicing independently as a litigant, you have to wait for your clients. Then, when I say it is a gender neutral process, a client comes to you, a client doesn’t bother if you are not feeling well, you are married, you have shifted to a new place, you have kids, you don’t have kids, you’re pregnant, you’re not pregnant. Doesn’t matter.
    For them, they need the delivery of their work. Doesn’t matter whether you’ve eaten or not. And the same things apply to a male. They don’t bother if there’s some mishap in the family, if they’re struggling with something, or if they don’t have people to come. Whatever the problem a male faces, the same problem and even more a female has to face. So I understood that I can’t cry like a crybaby. I have to make sure that I have my own setup.
    I have my own work culture. I have to set my own standards, and I have to start working the way every second person in this profession is working. Every colleague is working with the same passion that I am working with. What difference do I have to offer to my clients? I should trust them.
    I should be loyal to their work. I should be readily available to them. These are very important points. It’s very unfortunate that I’m saying this, but clients come to me with this problem that their lawyer is not picking up the call. It is very shocking because taking a case means taking the whole life of an individual. So this moral social obligation that we as lawyers have, ethics also, we know what our ethics say. But fortunately or unfortunately, whatever the circumstances are, I can’t comment on that.
    But these are three to four very essential things as a lawyer irrespective of whether you are a male or a female, you have to face.
    But when I went to the court, I saw that actually the condition, the infrastructure is very poor.
    I strived in the chamber for almost four or five years. I worked from the chamber, and what I realized was that there were no basic amenities, no washroom facilities. If a female is pregnant, then she might have some medical condition if she’s using those washrooms on a daily basis. And when it comes to hygiene, it was very bad. And with respect to females, there’s another factor of hygiene. It was very bad. And with respect to females there’s another factor of regular day-to-day monthly hygiene and basic facilities and amenities, but all of them were lacking.
    I realized that one of my colleagues, she started practicing with me. She got married, she was blessed with a baby girl, and then she was nowhere to be seen in the court. I asked her, why aren’t you coming?
    So she said that my baby is too small, and coming to court means you have to start by 9 in the morning, and you don’t know whether you will be reaching back by 8 or 9 or 10. The time is not limited. And I can’t leave work. There is no facility in the court where I could come with the baby and use a creche facility, leave her, do my work, and go back. And this is not about the Honorable Supreme Court or Honorable Delhi High Court. The basic infrastructure at the district court level, where most of the females are working and being independent lawyers, they get cases, independent cases, that means they have their own client base. So they have to first start with district court only. Nobody will give you a direct SLP of the Supreme Court.
    So they have to struggle for that. And with the gap of the maternity time period, their family also says that you can’t take the child, what are you earning? It doesn’t make sense because those first five years are pretty hard for every lawyer, either male or female. And when we see that there are females of 20 to 25 years, 30 years of age groups from 20 to 30 years, and then you see females from roughly around 40 and above because in those 10 years, most of the females are engaged in their household activities.
    So for that, I observed that in order to sustain in this field, every female has to find a way out. First, it’s better to establish yourself, and it’s very important that as a female you have a better family who understands you, after marriage and before marriage, who understands your work, respects it, and helps cater to those four to five years of growing up and understands your development and growth.
    So the challenges of being a female lawyer are very interesting, and it’s very deep. And I enjoy those challenges. And then I see myself that I have actually come out of it, so I feel that it’s worth living.

    My next question would be, how do you see all these kind of challenging impacts help you either get better perspective towards law or help you get clients or help you do the networking, because all of these things at the end of the day end up either having a better network which will bring in a long term of change or have better clients who may or may not bring in that particular change.

    So how do you see your practice moving towards a specific area of such sorts which actually points out such important things that are not there. That is basic infrastructure, just to practice. So how do you see yourself in times to come?

    See, what future to predict I don’t know, but what I can say is it has made me a better human being in that perspective because being a lawyer, being from a well off family, or a family who promotes females to get educated and also in my next family where I am married. They also promote females to be educated, to go out and to have work.

    She’s struggling that there are no washrooms in the capital of Delhi in the main courts where almost five to ten lakh people are coming on a daily basis. And again, I’m not talking about Honorable Delhi Court and Honorable Supreme Court. They have very good facilities.

    But when we come to district court, I can’t say what Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Punjab, Haryana district courts are to offer to the lawyers. But when I see that there’s no creche facility, no washroom facility.

    I can feel that a female who’s not empowered, who’s not having that support from the family, who is not educated, now they have to face daily life problems.

    Their husband might die and they might end up in domestic violence disputes with their in-laws.

    Or they have husbands who are not supportive. Or the family, they got married and she has to run off and she might be facing some other issues from the family or a girl who has taken a step out and she got married but it doesn’t work the way she had thought. And now she wants to explore legal remedies.

    So, since India has so much population, and the population has so much thought process and every individual is different, I feel that this experience which I had in my past five, six years, it not only evolved me as a person but also gave me a thought process that how much a female or a male or a person on daily basis is struggling every day going out and earning for the family and then facing legal issues, what all they have to experience. So when I look down on myself for the next five to ten years, I see that I have to make sure that those people who are actually loyal to their work, who are actually loyal to the system, who actually look at justice as God. They get what law has provided in its books, and it should not be just a book, it should be a delivery system. And we being the representative, we should deliver it to those people.

    So, my journey as a whole has started from district court and then High Court and then Supreme Court. If I had gotten a golden plate, I would have started from Supreme and I could have not seen what cross examination is. I could have never seen what evidence is, what are the documents that need to be added in the file, what all evidence I need, and what is the written statement that I have to file.

    Or what are the basic ingredients that plaint should have. This is what I have learned from my clients. They have told me that, you know, this document needs to be added because it has this relevance. But when I look into SLPs what I see is down paper trail. Oh, in district court, this paper was not there. Now our case is weak.

    So a well learned, educated lawyer should come to district court, they should practice there, and then they should proceed to Honorable High Court, to Honorable Supreme Court, and this should be the step. But nowadays, the generation is that as soon as they do law, they feel that we are lawyers of suits and we just have to jump into some lavish kind of practice. We will get some fame. I don’t know what they think of it.

    Actually, they should come to district court and they should understand what a life of a lawyer and clients are.

    How does the court function? Very interestingly, I would say, I was in the Rouse Avenue Court. We had one argument in the CBI matter and one of the senior advocates from Maharashtra was there, and I was addressing readers of some work and I said I’ll ask Alhmad. So the senior advocate said, who’s Alhmad? So I said that there is this person who looks into the court’s day to day activity. So he said, but in Maharashtra we don’t call him Alhmad. So how does the court practices vary from state to state?

    Even I would not know. I go to a new place, what a reader is called, and when we go to Ghaziabad court, a reader is called Babu.

    But being an independent practitioner, I should be aware of all these practices. Even if my clerk would come to me and say that, you know, this much is the cost, I should know that I have gone through all these things. I know how much it may cost. So a lawyer should be the clerk first, then should be an intern, and then should be a litigant.

    And this is what I have learned through my journey till now.

    Let’s move on and understand certain challenges that you may have encountered while you were dealing with sexual harassment complaints or administrative inquiries during your representation of plans or universities per se, especially University of Delhi.

    How have you strategized that and how have you overcome those kinds of challenges?

    So I’m not specifically talking about any university per se, but we have to understand the importance of the POSH act. Unfortunately, most of the people are not understanding what POSH act is about and why the POSH act was born.

    So in that case, what happens is females are using it, first of all, and also misusing it. So in every sort of institution, administration, these are first and foremost important things that we make sure to understand the genuineness of the case. Secondly, the males are offensive in that case, what they say is, we’re also harassed, this is what I face in most of the training sessions. What the male’s outlook is with respect to the POSH act. We are also being harassed. There are fake female complaints. There are administrative issues with respect to promotions and with respect to work culture, with respect to the hours that they have to work and they do not feel like working.

    They file a complaint under ICC, so even males are not understanding where that line is being crossed and it becomes a case of POSH act.

    Third and the foremost thing is the ICC committee itself, they’re not even aware what is procedure first of all, they feel they are not even comfortable with the environment that, if a complaint has come how it should be dealt with. Either they panic. What I have observed in most of the corporate companies, what they do is without getting into investigation, they suspend the accused or the respondent. And this is a very dangerous situation. Just in order to prevent your name, your company’s name, you suspended a person without getting to know what has actually happened, without even investigating.

    So what’s important is the awareness. Training of POSH is a very fundamental and important aspect that is ignored by most of the institutions until and unless there are complaints which have come. Then they will recommend their final finding that POSH sessions are recommended.

    But it is not similar to any gender committee. It’s not similar to any disciplinary committee. It has its legal liability. It has its legal obligation that has to be complied and the birth of the POSH is because of Bhavari Devi case and Nirbhaya rape case.

    That is to be understood. It cannot be compared with a male harassment or disciplinary committee harassment. It’s very different perspective and it evolves around that definition of sexual harassment only and those points only determine the complaint. So these are the challenges which I have faced while dealing specifically with the POSH act and the complaints before ICC most of the time.

    I would now like to ask you about establishing your law firm at such an early stage. You have made NS Solicitors and after working for such a short span of time, you have built a name for yourself. What do you see or what plans do you have as a mission and vision for your firm, along with the kind of causes that you are fighting for, or you are bringing in those topics, which are absolutely required.

    So how do you plan to take forward your law firm, along with the passion that you have for social causes?

    One thing which I feel as a lawyer is that a law firm is mandatory for me.

    All the juniors, all the associates associated with me, I feel that they should be independent and their independence is not in association with me. Whenever associates or an intern come to me, first and foremost I say you are not here as a permanent member.

    You have created your own practice. How can I help you? You have to take my help. You have to go out in public. You have to create your own face. This is how I started. This is how my seniors helped me, and this is how I should help you. This is my obligation that you are being associated with me.

    And I should make sure that you have your own life ahead. So the concept of a law firm for me is that all the associates with me, I am associate and they are also associates. I never call myself a founder. I never call myself head of the team. If I am working on a case, I make sure one associate with me is working so both are equal at the stage. I never named my law firm as Niyati Sharma and Associates because not all of us are associated with my name. If they as a lawyer are dealing with their client, they have my office, they have their law firm name, and they can have their card made, they can use their file which has NS Solicitors, and they have their own name on their card.

    They’ve got their name on their file. They feel independent, they don’t need infrastructure, they don’t need money for that. So, the idea of a law firm is only for that. Another reason for the law firm is that I have different sects of corporate, civil, criminal, and we all have the head of all the sects and specifically with the IPR. So, I had one of my associates who started his practice from a very early stage. But he was not sure where he had to go and how he could explore cases, how he could get more cases.

    So for him specifically, we highlighted a few aspects that were he’s coming from, where his family belongs to, what sort of work he’s into. So what we used to do is, I used to give them Saturday off and they have Sunday off. So on Saturday, they had to go to their gatherings.

    They had to meet people and then distribute their cards and tell them that I have my office at this place and if you have any issues with respect to your work, you can let me know. It took him six months. And those regular practices like going on weekends, going to some meetings, some family gatherings, social gatherings.

    What I have seen usually is nine to eight associates working, no Saturday or only Sunday off, and it’s a packed job. But whenever my associates touch wood as of now, if they ask for a leave, I make sure they have to inform me beforehand. So, we designed their work in such a manner that it took him six months and one year or so, and gradually his first case came.

    And, whenever a first case comes, we make sure we have a cake cutting ceremony or we distribute sweets for our associates. And then randomly another case came, and then another case came. Now that the associate has his own office in Delhi, but he is again associated with us till now.

    So, this is how I feel. I do not want to restrict any newcomer. They have their own life. They have their own family. They have their own perspective of looking into society and why should that perspective be limited to my office only.

    So I’ll have 10 offices, then it would not be only my single office. So, this is the way I function my law firm, and today I’m proud to say that I have associates and juniors from all over India. From Kolkata, from Nagaland, from Haryana, from Delhi. Those who can obviously travel to Delhi and want to work.

    I am open to every sort of work culture just because of the reason that everyone should get equal opportunity and they should get that scope of practicing in Delhi. And they should not be held back that I don’t have anyone, I do not have anyone in Delhi, where should I go. So this is how I want my law firm to be. Today also, when I see interns, I make sure that not specifically Delhi, I have students from different, different parts of states. If they’re applying to me through email, I very proudly welcome that. Just because of the reason that they’re doing so much hard work that they’re finding out the advocates online, and then they’re applying. They’re not coming through their father’s call or through their uncle’s call or through someone. So this is how an experienced advocate who has seen all the journeys should treat youngsters.

    Such a positive and noble gesture that you are imparting on so many people. It is already bringing in a lot of change and I feel like it’ll be bringing in a lot more change if everyone whosoever is associated with you, expands their services and their purpose. It’ll be very influential for social causes as well as the practice itself.

    So, do you think in doing all of this, has social media contributed in any way, bringing in these kinds of changes, bringing in your awareness aspect in front of the society? And how has that helped you establish even more authority and authenticity in your practice?

    Let me say that social media and online practices have evolved a lot. When I started there was no social media. Post Covid, there was actually the beginning of online virtual hearing. And I do remember that when I was in the early phase of my pregnancy, I had an abortion though. During that time, I was running to court and I was sweating and I was out of breath.

    And I felt that I might have to end my practice here because I can’t come for another few months in such a conducive environment where I have to run and reach the court. I have to park my car and have to run, move fast and my items are about to reach, this is how lawyers are working, you know, very fast, super fast, but then gradually after 2021, by the end of 2021. There was a transformation to virtual hearing.

    And this empowered mostly females who are having maternity issues, who are having health issues, who are having their young ones, and they cannot travel that often that a male advocate can. Obviously, they can go to their office for a few hours and then come back home but they have virtual hearing. If the child is not feeling well, if their husband is not feeling well, if someone in the family is not feeling well, they can take that time, which is involved in traveling and through virtual hearing, they can do that. So the litigation has empowered females a lot via virtual hearing.

    Specifically, those females who are around the age of 25 to 40, they can establish their litigation. They can have their family. They can have their clients. Even a female in one room setup at their home can establish her litigation with a virtual hearing setup. She need not go to the chamber, she need not go to office, she need not join another person’s office just because she does not have her own setup.

    So, the virtual hearing has increased the participation of women. So. I have this data which says that only 15% of the females used to practice when there was no virtual hearing, but after virtual hearing, the participation of females has increased a lot. Now, a female doesn’t take a break of even six months. So virtual hearing has evolved so much that it has empowered the females.

    When it comes to social media, we see that there are so many reels that advocates are making these days, so when I say that while I was starting my practice, I had one case in a month. And another 29 days, I had nothing to do. I used to call people or talk with my friends, or I used to think of it. Now I don’t have time. But when I see those youngsters who have just done their law or are into practice, they started developing their social media to that level. Now they have thousands, lakhs of followers.

    And gradually they’ll get work from that space. So, now the client base is not just limited to your near and dear ones. The client base has now changed to social media also.

    You get a lot of work from social media and this has empowered those who might not have a circle where they might get a case, but they have that idea where they can deal with artificial intelligence, they can deal with space law, they can deal with environmental law, they can deal with sports law, which is not a common practice when it comes to civil or the criminal sort of work.

    So, social media, I guess this is the way it has impacted.

    So while you were talking about all these burning issues, I would say, they bring in a lot of food for thought, especially for young lawyers who are starting not only their career, but their lives as well. What is your take on maternity leaves or rather parental leave or paternity leave? How do you see that will bring in more workforce back if one gets ample amount of leave after having a baby?

    So this issue was raised by one of the advocates, before the Honorable High Court of Delhi. And it was observed thereby that advocate is a professional-based service and therefore there is no need for maternity leaves. But I would like to add to that, that it’s not just the professional-based services, rather for a female who’s an independent advocate, who is appearing before the court and having a good amount of attendance. The bar should take that criteria in that if you are having supposedly 20 appearances in a year and you have to take maternity leave. So the bar should give a stipend of let’s say 5 thousand, 10 thousand, so that she can take care of herself and her baby during those six months when she’s off from her work. Even the family won’t say that you are not getting anything, being a lawyer.

    If you would’ve got a government job, it would’ve been a better position, what are you getting from being a lawyer? So in that case, a small support from the bar will help the females to get out of the six months phase, and then gradually she can start the practice. But when as a female we see that we do not have any support, even if taking leaves, then the gap from going out of career and the line of going out of career starts.

    So I think maternity for females is an important aspect, which I think the bar should take that decision just like they had helped in COVID providing stipend to those young advocates who were not doing that good and required some basic stipend. Similarly, those females who are not from that well-off family or they need support to establish their career, they can have this six months stipend. A specific amount should be decided and they should have an attendance prior to practicing or they should have an attendance continuously so that they are eligible for the maternity leaves or the parental leave, let’s say.

    You mentioned the bar’s role during COVID, how do you see bar associations, both state and national, contributing to the lives of lawyers in India, especially in promoting gender equality? Given the lack of basic amenities like toilets and maternity support, what role should the bar play, and how does this compare to international bar practices?

    So I think now the bar has also become a very strong, opinionated platform where the lawyers and the youngsters are getting into.

    Let me tell you, with respect to the Delhi High Court elections, this time there were more recorded voters than ever before. So the participation of advocates is increasing. Similarly, the youngsters are coming into the bar elections. So now the perspective of the bar has changed a lot and the bar has a very important role to play with respect to the basic amenities, the facilities, the outlook, the perspective of lawyers, and what are the challenges the lawyers are facing. It is the bar that takes it up. So, when it comes to the international community how they make sure that the facilities are there,

    The perspectives are there. I must tell you, it is the first time that female reservation in the bar came up this time. So the role of the bar has evolved because there were no females, so there were no requirements, there was no urge. So we are at a revolutionary stage with respect to the bar also.

    The representation of females has increased. The candidates you may see there are so many females now coming up. In campaigning, there are so many females involved. So now the bar has an important role to play with respect to the basic amenities, the facilities. And now the bar is coming online through social media and telling that these are all the things we have done in the court.

    So very interestingly, I’ve seen the president of Delhi High Court or the elected bars of Saket Court, let’s say Dwarka Court. Now they are coming up with what they have done.

    Just on the first day of their bar being elected, they come and say that these are the things that we have done. They’re now accountable to lawyers through the social platform also. So that is the reason I’m saying that only the bar can take this issue ahead with respect to maternity and paternity leaves.

    Since we have already discussed all these things, all the advice that you have given, we would request you to impart some more wisdom and give some golden nuggets for the aspiring law students who want to build such a kind of social impactful legal career as you are making.

    Particularly in the kind of fields that you are interested in that is gender justice, legal policy, public interest litigation, and other social causes which will bring in long-term change.

    I would like to say to my young fellows who are now entering into the field or will enter into the field very soon.

    I have always seen a few female advocates and a few female judges who had all the things in their life, all the comforts, all the facilities, but they dedicated their life to social work. I might point out a few judges whom I really admire Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma, she has published so many books.

    She actually works for the justice of the females. She has worked from Delhi courts to Delhi High Court, and she’s now continuously working for the females. Justice Bela Trivedi, she has worked so much for the cause of females. So I would like to say that first, you have to empower yourself. If you feel that you want to contribute to society,

    The first and foremost thing is to make sure that you have your hold on your profession, and through your profession, you have to deliver into society. And this is how all the successful males and females in this field are working. And secondly, you have to target your career and divide it in three-year spans. First three years, you should have a target, next three years, you should have a target. First three years, you should have a target that people should know you. After people should know you, after three years, those people should get back to you. You have to make sure that if there is an advocate, your name should come to their mind.

    And then comes the golden phase next three years and you will not know how, after 10 years, you are into those top 10 lawyers. But you have to make sure as a litigant, it’s not a piece of cake that you are entering with lavish gowns, flowing and photographs. This is a very beautiful way to display your profession, but your objective should be clear, your target should be clear that first three days all my people should know that I’m an advocate. You should not expect anything else more than that. And once you’re an advocate and people are coming back to you, then you’re a lawyer. You have established yourself in your field. So this is my message to all the young generation. See what all successful people have done, learn from their mistakes, and then decide how you will be taking your five years ahead.

    And one thing more as an advocate, when I started, people used to say it’ll take you five years to establish. I used to say they’re very slow people. They don’t know how to establish themselves. But when I came into this field, I understood why they used to say five years. It is not that you won’t get work till five years. You will get work.

    The pace of the work will be very slow. You’ll have to go through a lot of patience and then things will fall into place.

    Get in touch with Niyati Sharma –

  • “To transition into media and technology law, one should start by building a strong foundation in contract and intellectual property law, especially copyright and licensing.” – Diwakar Abhishek, Legal Counsel at Swastik Productions Private Limited, Mumbai.

    “To transition into media and technology law, one should start by building a strong foundation in contract and intellectual property law, especially copyright and licensing.” – Diwakar Abhishek, Legal Counsel at Swastik Productions Private Limited, Mumbai.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    What initially drew you to the legal profession, and how did your academic journey shape your early interest in media, entertainment, and technology laws?

    To be honest, I initially became a lawyer almost by elimination! Like many in my region, engineering was presented as the ‘obvious’ path. While I knew it wasn’t for me, law wasn’t a generational profession in my family, which led to some initial resistance. However, I was eventually drawn to the legal field’s potential to shape society and advocate for others.

    My early interest in criminal law was more out of curiosity for the drama, but it was the MCU and similar movies that unexpectedly sparked my fascination with IPR. I was intrigued by how these films showcased the immense value of creative works, the complex web of ownership and licensing, and how legal frameworks protect and enable the entire entertainment industry. It was a whole new world! 

    Did I pursue it right in the beginning – the answer is NO! My first job was purely out of need and financial constraints, I grabbed the job that demonstrated security, and paid fine. Then the second and the third; none gave me ample satisfaction.

    Even though this interest in IPR grew within me sub-consciously but persistently, for almost a decade, it took me some time to really gather courage to pursue it. The world of media and entertainment law seemed very specialized and competitive, and I wasn’t sure how to break in. Interviewing with studios and specialized law firms in media practices resulted in disappointment. 

    The pandemic of 2020, in a way, provided the space to seriously reflect and take that leap, when I jumped from the ship, in unchartered waters (for myself). I took the time to build a solid foundation in media law while continuing to explore opportunities. 

    Looking back, I’m grateful for that journey. The initial resistance from my family has turned into immense support, and I’ve found a truly rewarding path in a dynamic field. Learning from all previous jobs has equipped me to face challenges. For any young lawyer unsure of their path, I’d say embrace the unexpected, explore your passions, and don’t be afraid to carve out your own niche. Your unique background and interests can become your greatest strengths.

    Looking back at your first role, how did your experience in legal project management and forensic investigations lay the foundation for your future work in corporate and media law?

    My initial role in digital forensics, or e-Discovery, might seem far removed from media law, but it provided an invaluable foundation. This role involved analyzing the communications of top-level executives (like CEOs and CFOs) at major global companies. Reading their emails, strategic plans, risk assessments, and discussions gave me a unique understanding of how business decisions are made at the highest level. I saw firsthand how legal considerations intertwined with financial projections, market analysis, and strategic goals. You get to see how the executives of fortune 500 companies across the world think. Their communications with their lawyers, their external lawyers, business considerations, thought process; they were open before me. When you are reading through the emails, financial projections, opinions, risk assessment, business proposals, and the discussions of these CXOs day-in and day-out, at around 1000 documents per day, the information, although enormous, starts building up, stacking in a meaningful manner.

    Simultaneously, I had the opportunity to work with some of the world’s leading legal minds, who possessed inspiring business acumen. I learned how to manage client expectations, innovate in real-time to expedite processes, and build efficiency to handle large volumes while maintaining high quality.

    These experiences taught me how to assess risks and rewards, a skill that’s crucial in any legal field, including media law. For instance, when evaluating a content licensing agreement or advising on a new production, I draw on my understanding of the business realities to provide informed and balanced counsel. I am able to give the risk assessment which is a balance between risks and rewards for each deal or opportunity. This background has shaped how I approach legal challenges, combining legal expertise with a practical understanding of business objectives. That experience helps me even today in interpreting contracts not just for what they say, but what they might mean commercially.

    Your work at Sodexo involved legal operations across the APAC region, what challenges did you face managing cross-border legal compliance, and how did this prepare you for later in-house counsel roles?

    Sodexo was my first in-house role, a significant shift from working with external clients and a deep dive into Indian law. Initially, I found it quite challenging. For example, understanding the specific needs and expectations of “internal clients”; colleagues in departments like sales, operations, and HR who needed legal support, was new. Also, I had to quickly learn the ropes of a completely new industry and adapt to the company’s work culture. There was a lot to learn in a short time!

    Fortunately, I had patient mentors and a very supportive boss, without whom I may have struggled. I was given increasing responsibilities, starting with contracts management for Indian operations, then litigation, and eventually overseeing legal matters for Southeast Asia and the Middle East.

    While the role didn’t involve managing cross-border compliance in the way that some multinational companies do, it did require me to handle legal issues with an international dimension. For instance, when supporting a project in Hong Kong, I had to immerse myself in Hong Kong law, compare it to Indian law, and ensure our contracts were sound in that jurisdiction. This involved careful analysis and collaboration with local counsel. For example, navigating labour laws while drafting service-level agreements with large FMCG clients taught me about balancing scalability and compliance.

    Looking back, my time at Sodexo was pivotal. It taught me how to be a business partner, not just a legal advisor. I learned to communicate legal advice effectively to non-legal colleagues, manage diverse stakeholders, and develop practical solutions in a fast-paced environment. These are essential skills for any in-house counsel, and the experience I gained at Sodexo truly prepared me for the challenges and opportunities I’ve encountered in my subsequent roles.

    Having transitioned into media law with ALTT and later Screenwriters Association, what were the most significant legal or contractual differences you encountered between tech-sector law and entertainment law?

    When I left Sodexo to pursue media and entertainment law, I started small – drafting contracts for screenwriters and gradually working with artists, producers, and even international clients on content compliance and music rights. The early work didn’t pay much, but it helped me build trust and credibility; some of those clients still reach out today. Breaking into the industry wasn’t easy, and I’m grateful to Balaji Telefilms for giving me my first in-house opportunity, which soon led to heading legal operations at ALTT.

    The shift from service industries to a content-driven company was massive. Earlier, I was reviewing contracts post-signing; now I was involved from ideation to release: across film, TV, and digital platforms. The core legal principles stayed the same (like contracts and labour laws), but the subject matter completely changed, from food regulations to copyright, talent agreements, and licensing.

    My tech background, especially in digital forensics, gave me an edge in content rights, data governance, and cross-border compliance. At the Screenwriters Association, I focused on protecting creators, negotiating fair contracts, and educating them on their rights. While each role was different, the constant has been using law as a tool to empower, protect, and enable creative work. The shift taught me that while legal fundamentals remain the same, the ‘language’ of law differs dramatically across industries, and learning to speak both fluently is what makes a good media lawyer.

    In your current role leading the legal department at Swastik Productions, how do you approach providing strategic legal counsel on content production, syndication, and partnerships, and what are the key intellectual property considerations that typically arise when structuring such deals in the entertainment industry?

    In my current role at Swastik Productions, legal strategy is never one-size-fits-all; each production, syndication, or partnership comes with its own set of challenges.

    Content Production: I tailor my approach based on the medium:

    • TV deals often mean limited IP ownership for us, so I focus on securing strong commercial terms and airtight contracts.
    • Films require deeper negotiations around IP, creative control, and distribution rights; I handle these with a mix of legal detail and business sense.
    • Digital content needs special attention to rights, copyright risks, and compliance with evolving digital laws.

    Syndication: Whether we’re licensing content in or out, rights clarity is key. I ensure we secure or retain the right scope, minimize exposure, and structure deals for long-term value, thanks to my prior experience managing complex licensing agreements.

    Partnerships: Strategic alliances need a 360° legal view, requiring balancing IP rights, revenue models, creative inputs, and risk-sharing. Each deal is structured with both business goals and legal safeguards in mind.

    IP at the Core: Across the board, IP is central:

    • Ownership and assignment must be clear.
    • Licensing scopes (use, geography, duration) must be precise.
    • Third-party rights must be cleared, my digital forensics background helps here.
    • Moral rights and creative decision rights, often overlooked, matter deeply in creative collaborations.

    At the heart of it, my job is to enable great storytelling while protecting Swastik’s interests. The diversity of work keeps it exciting, no two deals are the same.

    Having led IP litigation and compliance operations across UK and US jurisdictions, how did you navigate the complexities of cross-border intellectual property enforcement, and what were some of the key challenges or learnings from handling high-stakes cases internationally?

    While I haven’t directly led litigation in foreign jurisdictions, I’ve played a crucial managerial and support role in several high-stakes IP matters, particularly during my time with legal process outsourcing and consulting firms where I collaborated on UK and US cases. My involvement ranged from overseeing document review teams to coordinating closely with external counsels and in-house legal departments of multinational clients.

    In cross-border IP enforcement, especially in the context of mergers and acquisitions or global patent disputes, the challenge is often less about the black-letter law and more about synchronizing legal strategy across jurisdictions, each with its own procedural idiosyncrasies. For example, reconciling discovery expectations in the US with data protection constraints under the UK or EU regimes required a deep understanding of not just the laws, but also cultural and operational nuances.

    A major learning for me was the importance of structured communication, translating legal and technical complexity into actionable advice for internal business teams while keeping litigation timelines and compliance risk under control. I also became adept at coordinating across time zones and legal systems, often acting as a bridge between the litigation counsel and the business decision-makers.

    The most impactful aspect of this work was realizing that successful enforcement is as much about procedural discipline and strategic foresight as it is about substantive rights. Managing document trails, understanding patent families, aligning with antitrust concerns in cross-border deals, all required a careful orchestration of legal, commercial, and compliance objectives.

    In sum, while I wasn’t the lead litigator, I contributed meaningfully by ensuring the right intelligence, compliance safeguards, and documentation flowed to the right hands at the right time. These experiences have given me both a global perspective and a strong operational grasp of how IP enforcement plays out in practice across borders. This foundation makes me confident in navigating global rights and data governance frameworks as the media landscape continues to globalize.

    What advice would you offer to law students or early-career professionals who aspire to transition into media and technology law, and what skills or experiences should they actively pursue?

    I would like to reiterate, there is no “one glove to fit all hands!” The media and entertainment industry is nuanced, and comes with its own struggles. To transition into media and technology law, law students and early-career professionals should start by building a strong foundation in contract and intellectual property law, especially copyright and licensing. Staying updated on evolving tech regulations like data privacy and cybersecurity is equally important. Developing a basic fluency in emerging technologies such as AI or blockchain can give you a distinct advantage. 

    Key soft skills like negotiation, discretion, and commercial awareness are essential in this space. Understanding how entertainment and tech businesses generate revenue will help you navigate legal challenges better. 

    Pursuing specialized certifications such as CopyrightX or NPTEL or from organizations such as Law Sikho are helpful to offer a competitive edge. 

    Gaining hands-on experience through internships with production houses, OTT platforms, or digital rights organizations is highly valuable. Working with law firms that service media clients or freelancing for creators helps build practical knowledge and a portfolio. 

    Networking with professionals at media and tech law events and maintaining an active LinkedIn presence helps in staying visible and informed. Lastly, be open to non-traditional roles within content, IP, or compliance teams as stepping stones into the field.

    Outside of your legal career, how do you unwind and relax, and in what ways do these personal interests contribute to maintaining balance, focus, and resilience in such a demanding profession?

    Outside of my legal work, I unwind through short motorcycle rides that help clear my mind and give me a fresh perspective. Riding requires focus and adaptability, which mirrors the multitasking I often do in my professional life. I also enjoy reading fiction, it allows me to step into different worlds and sharpens my storytelling, something I find useful when drafting arguments or simplifying complex ideas. Most of my downtime is spent with my wife and our two dogs, whose companionship is a constant source of comfort and balance. I keep a very small circle of close friends, and those rare conversations keep me grounded. While the legal profession demands attention over weekends too, I make the most of any free moment to recharge. I’ve learned to juggle tasks efficiently, and I believe my passion for riding and stories plays a part in that. They teach me presence, rhythm, and timing, the qualities I bring into my legal work too. These personal interests may be simple, but they help me stay focused and resilient. Even a brief ride or a good book can do wonders in keeping the mind relaxed and sharp.

    Get in touch with Diwakar Abhishek –

  • “Young advocates must remember, like Karna, your journey may be tough, but your courage can become your legacy.” – Rashmi M Rao, Advocate at High Court of Karnataka.

    “Young advocates must remember, like Karna, your journey may be tough, but your courage can become your legacy.” – Rashmi M Rao, Advocate at High Court of Karnataka.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    Can you tell us about your journey into the legal profession? What inspired you to become an advocate?

    Unlike some, I didn’t grow up knowing I wanted to be an advocate. Initially, I didn’t see myself pursuing law. At the time, my interests lay elsewhere, and I hadn’t fully explored what a career in law could offer. But as I was exposed to legal studies/work/clerkship especially being with my father who is a retired District Judge and working with Hon’ble Justice Mrs. B V Nagarathna (now judge of the Apex Court), I began to appreciate the depth, challenge, and impact of the field. Over time, that curiosity grew into a genuine passion. Now, I’m not only confident that this is the right path for me, but I also find a real sense of purpose and satisfaction in it.

    Also, my father, Mr. M Ramesh Rao, who served as a District Judge (now retired), has been a significant inspiration in my journey towards becoming an advocate. Growing up, I witnessed his deep commitment to justice, integrity, and the rule of law. His principled approach to decision-making and his respect for the legal system left a lasting impression on me. It made me realize the powerful role that legal professionals can play in upholding justice, which ultimately motivated me to pursue a career in advocacy. His dedication to justice and ethical standards inspired me to contribute meaningfully to the legal field in my own capacity.

    In the initial phases of your career were there any mentorship experiences that played  a key role in your development as a legal  professional?

    I was fortunate to work with Sri. C.V. Kumar and Smt Bhushani Kumar Advocates from Bengaluru and Sri. K L Patil, Advocate from Dharwad, where I gained hands – on experience in litigation and client handling.  Also, their valuable mentorship experience helped me develop my  legal research and courtroom preparation skills.

    During my Clerkship under Hon’ble Justice B.V. Nagarathna was a transformative experience, through which I gained significant insights both ethically and professionally. I had the privilege of closely observing her judicial acumen, and commitment to justice. Her dedication and approach to the law have made a lasting impact on me. 

    Also I consider Hon’ble Justice Santosh Hegde as my role model. His exemplary career in the judiciary and his efforts in fighting corruption reflects values that I strive to uphold. 

    Law can be a very challenging field. Have you ever faced ethical dilemmas in your legal practice and if yes, how did you handle them? How do you maintain impartiality and professionalism when dealing with controversial and emotionally charged cases?

    While I haven’t encountered a major ethical dilemma personally, I understand the importance of addressing them head-on. My approach would be to first consult the relevant rules of professional conduct, seek advice from more experienced colleagues if needed, and always prioritize honesty, fairness, and the law.

    One such instance, I once worked on a matter where a client asked me to withhold certain facts from disclosure that I believed were material. This created a conflict between the duty of confidentiality and the duty of candor to the court. When they insisted, I withdrew from representation in accordance with ethical requirements.

    I understand that dealing with controversial or emotionally charged situations requires a high degree of sensitivity and professionalism. I approach these cases by actively listening to all perspectives, focusing on facts rather than personal opinions and ensuring that all parties feel heard and respected.

    Can you share what drove your decision to start your own legal practice and what were some of the biggest hurdles you encountered, and how did you manage them?

    Since the year 2021, with God’s grace, I started my independent practice with my colleague/friend Akshata Sharma. Starting my own legal practice was driven by a strong desire for independence, professional growth, and the ability to serve clients on my own terms. I wanted to create a practice that reflected my values, personalized service, transparency, and client trust.

    Honestly, I couldn’t have done it alone. I was fortunate to have a few close friends namely Vivek Kumar Pandey, Akshata Sharma, Meghana Muddurangappa and Smt.Padmaja Tadapatri  (who holds a place in my life just like my mother does), and others from different professional backgrounds, who supported me through the process. Whether it was helping me set up the office, referring clients, or simply being a sounding board for ideas and doubts, their encouragement made a big difference.

    Of course, the journey wasn’t without challenges. There were times I doubted myself, especially when things were slow. But those moments taught me persistence, adaptability, and the importance of building strong professional relationships. Overall, it was a transformative experience that strengthened me to build not just practice but also confidence, adaptability and a strong professional network. 

    What advice would you give to young aspiring advocates who wish to excel in the legal field as you and what resources would you suggest to them?

    If I could give advice to young advocates, it would be to stay passionate and persistent. Advocacy is not always easy. Change can be slow and obstacles are inevitable, but keeping your passion alive will motivate you to keep going. Listening carefully to the people or communities you advocate for is crucial, as it ensures your work truly reflects their needs. I also believe that building a strong network and continuously learning about the issues and effective strategies strengthens your impact. Ultimately, every small step you take contributes to meaningful change, so stay encouraged and committed.

    Youngsters in the legal profession should develop a ‘Never give up’ attitude, as perseverance is key to success in a challenging field that demands resilience, continuous learning and the ability to thrive under pressure. Setbacks, rejections and long hours are part of the journey, but those who stay committed, adapt and push through adversity, ultimately carve a meaningful and impactful career in law. 

    Also, at this outset, I would like to narrate an impactful example of Ekalavya and Karna from the Mahabharata in the context of young advocates struggling to enter legal practice. The story of Ekalavya from the Mahabharata deeply resonates with the journey of many young advocates today. Ekalavya was denied formal training by Guru Dronacharya, yet he didn’t give up. He created a statue of his guru and practiced with unwavering discipline in solitude. His dedication was so intense that he became an archer of extraordinary skill, purely through self-effort and inner discipline.

    Similarly, many young advocates struggle to find mentors, chambers, or opportunities when they start. But like Ekalavya, those who stay committed—who read case law, attend court regularly even when they don’t have a brief, and keep learning by observing and self-study can build themselves into formidable professionals. The path is difficult, but if the focus and discipline are strong, success follows, just like it did for Ekalavya, even if recognition was delayed.

    Likewise, the character of Karna from Mahabharata is also a powerful way to inspire them.  Karna, born with great potential, but denied recognition because of his social identity. He was a warrior without a recognized lineage, constantly judged for his birth rather than his abilities. Much like Karna, many young advocates today may face barriers like lack of family background in law, absence of elite connections or starting from smaller towns or tier-2 colleges. But the story of Karna teaches us that your origin does not define your destiny. In the face of rejection, injustice and inner conflict, one can rise through resilience, discipline and unshakable belief in one’s abilities. Young advocates must remember, like Karna, your journey may be tough, but your courage can become your legacy. 

    What common misconceptions do people often have about the legal profession? Additionally, can you share a particularly challenging case that you’ve dealt with and how was your experience navigating the same?

    One common misconception is that lawyers spend most of their time in dramatic courtroom battles, like on TV. In reality, a lot of legal work is behind the scenes, researching case law, drafting documents, negotiating settlements. I actually find that appealing because it emphasizes strategy and careful thought, which is what drew me to the profession in the first place.

    To resolve the issue of litigation one should adopt STAR (Situation, Task, Action, Result) method.  In one case, a client approached me with a boundary dispute with a neighbouring property owner. The issue was escalating quickly. Both parties were considering legal action over a small strip of land affecting fencing and access.

    My task was to find a solution that avoided costly litigation. I reviewed the land titles, easement history, and surveyed documents. I then facilitated a joint meeting with both parties and their surveyors. I explained the legal standing clearly, but more importantly, I listened to both sides to identify practical needs.

    I proposed a boundary adjustment agreement that allowed shared access through a revised easement and minor land transfer, which satisfied both sides. I also had the agreement recorded formally to prevent future disputes.

    As a result, both parties avoided litigation, saved significant legal fees, and maintained a cordial neighbour relationship. The client was extremely satisfied and referred others to me afterwards.

    Since you are serving as a High Court Government Pleader in the State of Karnataka, what is your understanding of the role of a government pleader/advocate? Kindly share your work experience as an advocate for the High Court Legal Services Committee?

    My understanding is that a Government Pleader/ Advocate represents the Government in legal matters, particularly in Courts and Tribunals. Their primary role is to ensure that the Government’s position is presented clearly, accurately, and ethically. This includes drafting legal opinions, appearing in court, providing legal advice to Government departments, and ensuring that the rule of law is upheld in all actions taken by the Government.

    A Government Advocate also has a broader duty to the public interest. Unlike private advocates, who serve individual clients, a Government advocate must balance the legal position of the State with fairness, justice, and constitutional values. Integrity, impartiality, and accountability are essential in this role.

    I believe this position requires not only strong legal knowledge and advocacy skills but also a deep commitment to public service and ethical responsibility.

    I was empanelled as an advocate with the High Court Legal Services Committee  in the year 2020, for 5 years, during which I provided free legal assistance to marginalized individuals who could not afford representation. My primary responsibilities included drafting petitions, appearing before the High Court, and conducting legal counseling sessions.

    I handled a diverse range of cases including criminal appeals, writ petitions for enforcement of fundamental rights, and bail matters. One significant experience was assisting a wrongly accused individual in securing bail after months of unlawful detention—a case that reaffirmed my belief in access to justice.

    This role also involved working closely with jail authorities, NGOs, and court staff, which helped me develop strong interpersonal and procedural coordination skills. Despite time and resource constraints, I ensured every case was handled with diligence and empathy.

    I was also appointed as an Amicus curiae by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in various Criminal Appeals. 

    Overall, the experience deepened my understanding of public interest litigation and reinforced my commitment to pro-bono service, which I believe is integral to the profession.

    Can you share your experience as an advocate for the Juvenile Justice Board appointed by CCL (Centre for Child and Law)  and matters relating to iprobono? 

    During my time as an advocate with the Juvenile Justice Board and iProbono, I had the opportunity to work closely on cases involving children in conflict with the law, as well as those in need of care and protection.

    At the Juvenile Justice Board, my role involved representing minors, ensuring that their rights under the Juvenile Justice Act were upheld, and advocating for rehabilitation over punishment. I often worked on drafting legal submissions, liaising with child welfare committees, and counselling children and their families.

    Through iProbono, I worked on pro bono cases focused on child protection, particularly representing children in need of care and protection. I collaborated with multidisciplinary teams, including psychologists and social workers, to ensure a child-sensitive approach in legal proceedings.

    These experiences not only deepened my understanding of child rights law and restorative justice principles but also strengthened my ability to communicate empathetically, work under pressure, and navigate complex legal frameworks with a focus on vulnerable populations.

    I believe these experiences have made me a more compassionate and strategic legal professional, especially equipped to work in roles that intersect law and social justice.

    What practical steps or habits  have you found effective for managing stress and maintaining well being amidst the high demands of legal and consultancy work?

    Legal and consultancy work can be fast-paced and mentally taxing. So I have found it essential to be pro- active about managing stress and well-being. One of the most effective habits for me is time-blocking and prioritizing tasks using a simple system like the Eisenhower Matrix. It helps me focus on what’s urgent VS important and rescues the feeling of being overwhelmed. 

    One principle that guides my work is rooted in the Bhagavad Gita: ‘Karmanye vadhikaraste ma phaleshu kadachana,’ which means, ‘You have the right to perform your duty, but not to the fruits of your actions.’  I try to follow this mindset at work — giving my full effort, staying committed, and letting the results follow. As an advocate, I believe in putting my complete effort into representing my clients with integrity and diligence, without getting attached to the outcome. The results, whether favourable or not, are often influenced by many factors beyond our control. What matters is that I uphold the law and my ethical responsibility.

    Get in touch with Rashmi M Rao –

  • “Over the years, my vision for legal practice has matured from simply building a career to creating a meaningful and principled practice.” – Manas P Hameed, Advocate at Supreme Court of India & High Court of Kerala.

    “Over the years, my vision for legal practice has matured from simply building a career to creating a meaningful and principled practice.” – Manas P Hameed, Advocate at Supreme Court of India & High Court of Kerala.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    After transitioning from the Kerala High Court to the Supreme Court of India, what differences have you observed in terms of legal strategy, advocacy, and the overall courtroom environment?

    First of all, a big thumbs up to LawSikho and SuperLawyer for reaching out to young lawyers, interviewing them, and sharing their experiences with the wider legal community. It’s an encouraging initiative that inspires and guides many who are just starting out in the profession. I trust that this exchange of experiences among lawyers is carried out within the bounds of professional ethics, and serves to strengthen the legal fraternity.

    Coming to the question, in terms of legal strategy and advocacy, I have not observed any significant difference from the High Court. The manner in which we draft a petition or present a case before the court is almost the same. These are the basics. They apply uniformly across all courts. The only difference I observed was the time available during the admission stage in the Supreme Court. You typically get only one to three minutes to argue the matter, and within that short span, you must convince the court that the case warrants admission and the issuance of notice to the parties. If you have a strong case on merits, are well-prepared, and present it with due respect to the court and the opposing side, the court will hear you regardless of your experience or age in the profession.

    You’ve taken up several pro bono matters, including a notable case involving life-saving treatment for an infant. What drives your commitment to such causes, and how do you balance them alongside a demanding practice?

    I won’t claim to have taken up several pro bono matters, but yes, I have handled a few because I believe it is not just the duty of a lawyer, but also a moral responsibility as a human being to help those in need, to the extent we can. One such case that I will always be proud of as a lawyer was about securing life-saving treatment for an infant. The child was only five months old. Her parents had already lost two daughters to a rare genetic disorder called Spinal Muscular Atrophy. Naturally, they were terrified that their third daughter might meet the same fate. Through the intervention of some social activists, they reached out to me. To save the child, they needed Rs.18 crores, an amount far beyond their reach. I filed a writ petition seeking financial assistance from the State, arguing that the right to life is a fundamental right under the Constitution, and it is the duty of the State to ensure that this right is not violated. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nagaresh passed an interim order directing that the child be provided with complete free treatment, based on a statement made by Government Pleader Ms. Parvathy Kottol, who was handling the case at that time. The State extended full support to the family. What stood out to me in this experience was how, in such extreme situations, Judges and Government Pleaders are also willing to go beyond their regular roles to ensure justice is served.

    With experience spanning Constitutional, Administrative, and Criminal Law, how do you tailor your approach to building cases in each of these distinct domains, and what strategies help you stay current across them?

    At this point in time, I don’t believe it’s possible for me to plan and settle into a specific area of law. The areas of law one ends up working in often depend on the offices one has assisted, or the nature of the cases you get. Moreover, legal subjects often overlap, say, a criminal case may give rise to constitutional questions.

    While I was a junior at Nagaraj Associates, I had the opportunity to assist in a wide range of matters across various fields. In my personal view, at this stage of practice, a lawyer should be open to working across all kinds of matters, be it civil, criminal, constitutional, arbitration, or any other area of law.

    Your PIL led to significant changes in Telegram’s content moderation policies. Could you share about it?

    No, the platform did not change any policy on its own. The PIL was filed specifically to curb child pornography on this particular platform. When the court issued notice to the State Government, the State supported the Petitioner and even stated that the platform was a “safe haven for criminals.” Later on, the Central Government issued the new IT Rules, which included the appointment of a Nodal Officer for all digital platforms to address such complaints. The court then relegated the Petitioner to approach the Nodal Officer under these rules. As per my understanding, the platform no longer retains such objectionable content. It is now being removed immediately upon detection or complaint. 

    Having handled a wide range of cases across different legal domains, could you share one of the most complex or challenging cases you’ve worked on and how you navigated its intricacies?

    One case that stands out was that of a minor boy who aspired to study at Jawahar Navodaya School. His admission was rejected on the ground that he had not studied in a rural area, as required by the rules. We challenged these rules. In the second round of litigation, after the Single Bench dismissed the case, I filed a writ appeal. At that time, I had just two years of experience in the profession. I studied the case to the best of my ability and appeared before the Division Bench led by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jayasankaran Nambiar. However, during the admission hearing, the questions posed by the Bench made me feel as though I didn’t even know the basics despite all the time and effort I had invested in preparation. The court granted me one more week to prepare. When I returned the following week, I argued the matter with all the relevant case laws. Yet, each argument was carefully questioned and, one after the other, rejected by the court. Despite that, when the final judgment was delivered, the court directed the school to grant admission to the student, with a specific note that the relief granted would not be treated as a precedent. What made the experience unforgettable was that the Hon’ble Judges recorded in the judgment how I had presented the arguments in court. After pronouncing the judgment, they smiled at me and said, “We are granting this relief only because of your hard work on this case.” That moment was a huge relief, not just for the child, but also for me as a young lawyer. It gave me immense confidence to continue in the profession. 

    In one of your cases, the court emphasized that a guilty plea should not automatically result in a lenient sentence. How do you perceive the judiciary’s evolving stance on sentencing and plea bargaining in the Indian legal system?

    There is a growing trend where, when charges are framed and read over to the accused, they admit guilt on the spot, believing that the matter will end with the payment of a small fine. In one such case, the Petitioner had suffered a head injury from an attack, yet the accused was let off with just a petty fine. This was challenged, and the court took serious note of the same, issuing a strong warning to the trial court against exonerating accused persons in serious cases merely on payment of fines. While plea bargaining is an accepted legal practice, in my personal opinion, it should not become a means for the accused to escape the real punishment prescribed by law for serious offences.

    As someone who has independently argued cases before the Supreme Court and contributed to reported judgments, what guidance would you offer to young lawyers aiming to build a strong practice?

    As anyone would say, hard work and stepping out of your comfort zone are the only ways to grow. In my case, I decided to move to Delhi after five years of practice at the High Court even though I had a handful of cases there. Some well-wishers asked me, “Why would you leave a steady practice to become a briefless lawyer in a new place?” Honestly, I wasn’t sure if my decision was right. Coming from Kerala, where we enjoy clean air, good food, water, and a clean environment, the shift was tough. I initially found accommodation in a very poor locality, and the weather, food, and overall conditions in Delhi weakened me both physically and mentally. At one point, I even questioned if I had made a mistake. But within two months, I started receiving briefs in the Supreme Court from senior colleagues at the High Court. That’s when I realised that the hard work I had put in back home was beginning to pay off in a new form. So yes, in my experience, hard work remains the only way to build a strong and lasting practice. One guiding principle I always carry with me is a piece of advice from my senior, Mr. Adv. Nagaraj Narayanan, once gave me: “Never ever suppress any facts from the court, even if they go against you.” That integrity is something I strive to uphold in every case I handle.

    What initially inspired you to pursue a career in law, and how has your vision for your legal practice evolved over the years? What are your aspirations going forward?

    It was my father who first inspired me to pursue law as a profession. I remain ever    grateful to him for his constant support. Today, my wife, Ipsita Ojal, who is also a lawyer, stands beside me, making her own sacrifices by joining me in Delhi to support my journey. Over the years, my vision for legal practice has matured from simply building a career to creating a meaningful and principled practice. I aspire to continue growing in this profession, staying true to the values that brought me here, and to keep practising with the same commitment and integrity that I began with.

    I believe more young lawyers should actively come to the Supreme Court. It’s one of the most effective ways to make litigation at the apex court more accessible and affordable for litigants, especially those from underprivileged backgrounds. Until we have separate regional benches established across the country, the presence of committed and capable young lawyers at the Supreme Court in Delhi is essential to bridge the gap.

    Balancing the demands of a legal career with personal life can be challenging. How do you manage this balance, and what are your preferred ways to unwind or recharge outside of work?

    For me, the answer is simple. My family. Amid the pressures of legal practice, spending time with my loved ones helps me stay grounded and recharged. Their presence gives me both strength and perspective, and it’s through those quiet moments with family that I find balance.

    Get in touch with Manas P Hameed –

  • “Today’s legal landscape demands not only legal knowledge but also a deep understanding of business. Focus on sharpening your research, writing, and communication skills, while thinking both commercially and practically.” – Gaurav Gupta, Founder and Managing Partner at Bridge Counsels.

    “Today’s legal landscape demands not only legal knowledge but also a deep understanding of business. Focus on sharpening your research, writing, and communication skills, while thinking both commercially and practically.” – Gaurav Gupta, Founder and Managing Partner at Bridge Counsels.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    You’ve had an impressive journey-from top-tier law firms to leading legal roles in global MNCs. How has your professional experience shaped your approach to legal advisory today?

    Thanks. My career, as a corporate and commercial lawyer, has spanned over twenty years across law firm and in-house roles, and each stage has played a significant part in guiding my approach to proactive and business-centric legal support. 

    I started my professional journey in 2004 at AZB & Partners (“AZB”), New Delhi. I was involved in complex transactional work, including advising on matters pertaining to FDI, joint ventures, M&A, software licensing, and general corporate advisory. In 2010, while in AZB, I had an opportunity to do a secondment with Boeing International Corporation India Private Limited for a year, where I got my first exposure to an in-house legal environment. It was a transformative phase that helped me understand how legal advice fits within broader business objectives, something not always visible from a pure law firm perspective.

    This early insight laid the foundation for what became the most defining part of my career at Bentley Systems India Private Limited, a USA- based software MNC (“Bentley Systems”). At Bentley Systems, I served as Legal Counsel for almost twelve and a half years, across Asia South, and later expanded my remit across the South-East Asia region. 

    My primary responsibilities included managing a wide spectrum of responsibilities, including contract management and negotiation, software licensing, regulatory compliance, employment law matters, corporate leasing, contractual and commercial risk identification, and mitigation. This role further refined my ability to deliver practical, business-focused legal solutions across borders and industry contexts in an in-house legal environment. This role further deepened my appreciation for the unique challenges that businesses face. 

    Over time, I came to see how legal support, when truly embedded in the business, could shift from being a reactive function to a proactive enabler of growth, innovation, and risk resilience. not just in navigating legal risks I began to see how legal issues were rarely isolated as they were often intertwined with operational realities, commercial strategy, and internal culture. This further broadened my understanding of how legal support must evolve- not just to protect the business, but also to empower it.

    What inspired you to start Bridge Counsels? 

    Working in both top-tier law firms and as in-house counsel gave me a deep insight into how legal services function at both ends of the spectrum. On one hand, I experienced the deep technical expertise and structured advisory of law firms while on the other hand, I saw the need for legal support to be responsive, integrated, and aligned with business realities, especially in fast-moving environments. 

    What stood out to me over the years was a significant gap in the market, particularly among startups, MSMEs, and even in growth-stage companies, which often lacked access to quality legal advice because they didn’t have the scale or budget to maintain a full-fledged in-house legal team. Yet their need for ongoing, dedicated legal support was no less critical. 

    I firmly believe that founders should invest their time and energy in the growth of their respective business and leave the legal, commercial and corporate matters to experienced experts. This realization led me to launch Bridge Counsels which is designed to provide Fractional General Counsel (“Fractional GC”) as a service 

    My focus at Bridge Counsels is to serve as a legal partner offering structured, proactive, and business-focused legal support tailored to each client’s scale and stage of growth. Therefore, at Bridge Counsels, my aim is to bridge the gap between the high-touch, strategic insight of an in-house legal team and the flexibility of an external counsel. The name Bridge Counsels reflects this philosophy, bridging business needs with legal clarity. 

    How do you define the role of a Fractional general counsel, and how does this model differ from having an in-house legal team or relying solely on traditional law firms?

    The role of a Fractional GC is to provide continuous and strategic legal engagement to businesses as their de facto Head of Legal or General Counsel, delivering end-to-end legal support on a flexible, outsourced basis. This setup would help businesses, especially startups or growing companies, to get expert legal support without hiring a full-time employee. 

    A Fractional GC can offer companies, often startups or small businesses or foreign multinational companies proposing to enter India, the opportunity to work with experienced former in-house lawyers without incurring the cost of a full-time general counsel, helping them manage their daily legal needs and make informed strategic decisions. 

    Unlike in-house counsel who works full-time for a single company, Fractional GCs can support multiple clients while acting as trusted, long-term advisors. They are more integrated into the company’s daily operations, unlike traditional law firms, often participating in strategic planning and internal meetings. This model suits businesses that want consistent legal guidance tailored to their evolving needs, without the need to form a full legal department. 

    A Fractional GC not only provides strategic legal support but also acts as a bridge between the company and external legal service providers such as law firms, consultants, and specialists. They help control legal costs, identify the right external resources, and manage them efficiently. At its core, their role is to protect the company’s interests, ensure consistency in legal strategy, and make sure that external advisors align with the business’s goals and risk appetite.

    What type of companies would benefit most from hiring a Fractional GC, and at what stage in their journey is it most impactful to bring one on board?

    As stated above, startups and emerging enterprises typically benefit the most from hiring a Fractional GC. A Fractional GC can step into an early-stage business and provide high-level commercial advice to the board, especially when there is no established in-house legal leadership. They support key areas, including contracts, employment, data privacy, intellectual property, real estate transactions and regulatory compliance. 

    The most impactful time to bring in a Fractional GC is during key growth phases. This includes raising funds, expanding the team, entering new markets, or forming significant partnerships. At these stages, decisions carry a higher legal risk, and it becomes crucial to have someone who understands the business and can provide strategic guidance. 

    While a Fractional GC is often associated with small and medium-sized enterprises, this model is not limited to early-stage companies. Businesses at any stage of growth can benefit from this flexible legal support. Large-scale enterprises may also use a Fractional GC for urgent, short-term projects that need experienced oversight. Fractional GC can efficiently handle routine legal tasks such as drafting and reviewing contracts, updating internal policies, managing compliance calendars, supporting HR and employment matters, coordinating with external counsel, and maintaining legal templates. This allows lean in-house teams to focus on strategic priorities while ensuring day-to-day legal operations run smoothly and compliantly.

    As you build bridges, what are the kinds of responsibilities and deliverables you envision handling as a Fractional GC on a recurring basis? How are you preparing to meet those needs from day one?

    As a Fractional GC, I am expected to handle a range of responsibilities that align legal strategy with business goals. This includes managing risk proactively before it becomes an issue, supporting contract negotiations, ensuring regulatory compliance, and helping with corporate governance. I also aim to develop legal frameworks that support growth, guide internal teams, and collaborate closely with leadership to make informed, legally sound decisions that move the company forward.

    I would prepare myself by deeply understanding the company’s industry, operations, and goals. My primary goal is to be agile, responsive, and business-minded, delivering practical legal advice that aligns with long-term strategy.

    As you engage with fast-scaling startups and growth-stage businesses, how do you plan to help them navigate legal risks and regulatory compliance, especially when they operate across sectors or jurisdictions?

    When working with fast-growing startups or businesses across sectors, my focus is on offering practical legal guidance that aligns with their pace and growth. I begin by understanding the business model and key regulatory touchpoints, whether in contracts, data privacy, employment, or fundraising. From there, I help build simple, workable systems such as basic compliance processes or policy inputs that support sound decision-making. The aim is to be a steady legal partner, offering clarity and foresight as companies scale and navigate legal challenges. Confidence, knowing they are protected and compliant at every step.

    In a Fractional GC model where you’re not embedded full-time, how do you plan to ensure deep alignment, continuity, and confidentiality with leadership teams? 

    That’s a great question and one I take very seriously. My aim would always be to stay closely connected with founders or businesses through regular interactions and be available when needed. The goal is to be seen not as an outsider, but as a trusted legal partner who understands the business and supports it with consistency and confidentiality.

    Startups often move fast. Can a Fractional GC really make a difference during key moments like fundraising, investor negotiations, or M&A? Could you share an example 

    In India, startups often face complex legal challenges during key growth phases such as raising funds, expanding teams, entering new jurisdictions, or finalizing strategic partnerships. These challenges include navigating investor negotiations, managing ESOPs, ensuring regulatory compliance, and reviewing commercial contracts. A Fractional GC brings senior legal oversight without the cost of a full-time hire, making it ideal not just for early-stage companies but also for growing businesses that need structured legal support without expanding their in-house teams. Established enterprises also use Fractional GCs services for short-term or high-stakes projects requiring experienced legal direction.

    What should founders or CXOs look for when choosing a Fractional GC beyond just credentials? What soft skills and instincts make a real difference?

    Beyond credentials, founders should look for a Fractional GC who’s practical, business-minded, and easy to talk to, someone who can offer clear advice without legal jargon. They should have the judgment to say “no” when it matters, to protect the company’s interests. Identifying legal risks early, communicating them to leadership, and striking the right balance between legal protection and business growth are key. A good GC doesn’t slow things down; they help you grow smartly and safely.

    You’ve also built internship and mentorship opportunities at Bridge Counsels. What role do young lawyers and law students play in your model and what advice would you offer them as they enter the evolving legal profession?

    In the Fractional GC model, young lawyers and law students support senior counsel across multiple clients by assisting with contract drafting, compliance research, and legal operations. They gain exposure to varied industries and fast-paced legal issues, learning how to align legal advice with business strategy. Unlike traditional roles with narrowly defined tasks, this model provides a broader, more strategic perspective on how law drives growth. They actively contribute rather than merely observe and build the skills to become future legal advisors with strong commercial judgment and cross-sector experience. It’s a dynamic environment that prepares them to think like trusted advisors rather than technical legal executors. They aren’t passive participants as they engage meaningfully while developing the capabilities needed to grow into future in-house leaders or strategic legal partners.

    As you enter the evolving legal profession, my advice is to stay curious and open to learning. Today’s legal landscape demands not only strong legal knowledge but also a deep understanding of business. Focus on sharpening your research, writing, and communication skills while also learning to think commercially and practically. Always ask questions, take initiative, and seek feedback. Don’t aim to know the law; strive to understand how it applies to real-world decisions. Most importantly, be adaptable, because those who grow with change will be the ones who lead it.

    Get in touch with Gaurav Gupta –

  • “I believe the future will require lawyers who understand code, technologists who understand rights, and courts who can bridge both worlds.” – Nikhil Chawla, Founding Partner, Nikhil Chawla and Associates.

    “I believe the future will require lawyers who understand code, technologists who understand rights, and courts who can bridge both worlds.” – Nikhil Chawla, Founding Partner, Nikhil Chawla and Associates.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    After completing your Bachelor’s in Technology in Electronics and Communication, you decided to pursue a career in law. What inspired this shift, and how has your technical background contributed to your legal career?

    While I was doing my undergraduate studies in Electronics and Communication Engineering, I developed a strong appreciation for structured problem-solving and analytical thinking. A pivotal moment came when I worked on a project involving video capturing and recognition technology for identifying letters and numbers on car plates. After dedicating significant time and effort to develop this innovation, I discovered that a subsequent batch had replicated my idea for their project. This sparked a deep curiosity in me on how I could protect my work and ensure exclusive rights over something I had created.

    This realization led me to explore the legal frameworks that govern innovation and ownership. While I thoroughly enjoyed the technical challenges of engineering, I found myself increasingly drawn to the interplay between technology, commerce, and human interaction—how ideas are protected, commercialized, and integrated into society. This marked the beginning of my journey into the field of law and specially, intellectual property law. I decided to pursue law, with a clear objective to practice IP law once I graduate.

    When I began my legal journey, I recognized a clear gap in the market—clients, much like myself in my engineering days, were increasingly seeking nuanced, technology-driven solutions to complex intellectual property challenges, particularly around ownership and innovation. In that moment, I knew I had found my calling.

    How did your L.L.M. at Boston University School of Law shape your perspective on Intellectual Property law, and how have the skills and experiences gained there influenced your approach to high-stakes International and domestic IP litigation and advisory?

    My LL.M. at Boston University School of Law was a transformative experience that significantly shaped my approach to Intellectual Property law. Beyond the rigorous academic curriculum, one of the most valuable takeaways was learning how to move beyond theoretical understanding and apply legal principles in a practical and commercial context. I had taken classes on trial court advocacy, legal writing, and related practical modules, the insights from which continue to guide my approach to legal practice even today.

    Having students from all over the world, not only helped me build lasting professional relationships which I continue to maintain to this day, but also fostered a global legal mindset that has helped me while advising or litigating matters involving international stakeholders.

    I strongly encourage those looking to specialize in a particular field of law to pursue a Master’s degree, as it offers both depth of knowledge and invaluable exposure to diverse legal perspectives.

    Having worked with various prominent IP law firms, what motivated you to transition to establishing your own practice, what were the hurdles that you faced while founding Nikhil Chawla and Associates?

    When I founded Nikhil Chawla and Associates, like with any new venture, the initial phase came with its share of challenges—building a client base, establishing credibility, and navigating the uncertainty that comes with stepping out independently. There were days where I found myself questioning my decision of starting on my own.

    During this time, I had the opportunity to interact with several senior advocates. One piece of advice from Swathi Sukumar, Senior Advocate, particularly stayed with me—she said, “you just have to show up at the office every day, the work will eventually come.” That simple yet profound advice became a guiding principle for me in the early days, reinforcing the importance of persistence, presence, and consistency in building a practice.

    6 months of feeling doubtful about everything and no sign of progress is the entry price that you have to pay before things start to move in the right direction. Having said that, with relentless hard work and unwavering dedication, you will find yourself moving in the right direction—without it, you risk getting lost in the vast sea of lawyers around you.

    As a dual-qualified lawyer and an AI enthusiast and Certified Information Privacy Professional, how do you see the intersection of AI, data protection, and privacy laws evolving in the near future?

    The intersection of AI, data protection, and privacy law has become, if not already, the most consequential area of legal and regulatory evolution in the modern era.

    With the enactment of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, India has taken a foundational step toward codifying privacy rights and data protection obligations. However, the law still leaves several gaps when it comes to regulating AI-specific concerns such as algorithmic transparency, automated decision-making, and the right to explanation. In parallel, India is also formulating its National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence and has published ethical AI guidelines through NITI Aayog. These developments signal the government’s intent to promote responsible AI while safeguarding individual rights.

    All of us are already aware that AI has become omnipresent and part of our everyday lives. However, its widespread adoption also raises critical legal and ethical questions ranging from informed consent, purpose limitation, and data minimization to algorithmic accountability. In parallel, concerns around bias, discrimination, and automated profiling are becoming more pronounced. These issues are steadily making their way to the forefront of legal discourse, and our legal systems will soon be called upon to adjudicate upon this, drawing a clear Lakshman Rekha between what is permissible and what is not.

    Going forward, professionals with a grounding in both law and technology will be key to shaping this transition, ensuring that innovation does not come at the cost of civil liberties. I believe the future will require lawyers who understand code, technologists who understand rights, and courts who can bridge both worlds.

    Could you share your experience while representing a leading music label in a high-profile copyright infringement dispute against an internationally renowned hip-hop artist. How did you prepare for such a case and what were the key outcomes?

     When I started my private practice, the first case I was entrusted with involved handling a dispute against the renowned hip hop/rap artist Bohemia. I was representing a music company that had entered into an exclusive artist agreement with Bohemia, which he breached by collaborating with other parties in violation of the agreement’s terms.

    During our preparation for this case, we knew that seeking specific enforcement of personal service obligations was not permissible under the Specific Relief Act. However, we were able to identify a negative covenant in the agreement that prohibited him from collaborating with third-party labels during the term of the agreement. We also found legal precedents supporting the enforcement of such negative covenants in agreements involving personal qualifications.

    As a result, on the very first day, we secured an ad interim order restraining Bohemia from working with any third-party labels for the remainder of the agreement’s term. This interim injunction ultimately paved the way for an early settlement.

    After the settlement, Bohemia even released a track referencing the litigation. The success in the Bohemia matter opened the door for me to handle other high-profile media and entertainment disputes, including cases involving prominent artists such as Badshah and Satinder Sartaaj.

    What advice would you offer to young professionals aspiring to follow in your footsteps and build successful careers in intellectual property, technology law, and commercial litigation?

    Law is a profession that demands dedication and discipline, it is meant for those who truly love the law. Without that passion, it’s difficult to sustain the commitment the profession requires.

    Talking from my own experience, when I had started my legal career, I sometimes relied on shortcuts instead of diligently reading statutes and studying case law. Over time, I came to realize that true success in this profession requires depth, being thorough with the law and cultivating a strong understanding of legal principles. Unfortunately, I see many young professionals today falling into the same trap. What we truly need are students and professionals committed to rigorous legal study and a genuine passion for the craft of law.

    It is important to be working with a good mentor, someone who can guide, challenge, and shape you. Equally important is being at the right firm/advocate, where the work culture, values, and opportunities align with your long-term goals.

    Get in touch with Nikhil Chawla –