Super Lawyer

Category: Interviews

  • Fueling the Future of Innovation Through IP Awareness and Advocacy – Nilanshu Shekhar, Founding Partner at KAnalysis

    Fueling the Future of Innovation Through IP Awareness and Advocacy – Nilanshu Shekhar, Founding Partner at KAnalysis

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

    Let me begin by asking you about your decision to do law after having an engineering degree or academic foundation in biotechnology and industrial microbiology. What was your inspiration in bringing intellectual property into your life, and how have you taken this approach to excel in the IP domain and make it a passion?

    As it happens with everybody, the shift to intellectual property from an engineering background, or in my case, the shift from biotechnology and industrial microbiology to IP, was not planned. It happened organically, and I began my career as a patent engineer in my first organization where I was introduced to the world of IP.

    That exposure was an eye-opener for me because I realized IP was the perfect intersection of science, law, strategy, and, more importantly, business. It allowed me to stay close to innovation while also influencing how innovations are protected and commercialized. So that is something that brought me towards IP, and the interest has kept me going to date. Over time, this technical-to-legal transition has shaped my entire approach to how I view IP.

    I don’t look at innovations in isolation. I view them as a larger part of the innovation journey because it’s all incremental and doesn’t happen as a eureka moment. That mindset continues to influence how I advise my clients even today. Whether it’s a startup or a multinational trying to scale its IP, I try to see the bigger picture of what the innovation would mean to them, how it aligns with their business goals, how to strategically protect it because IP, in isolation from business, is of no use.

    That’s how my journey towards IP keeps me motivated and going strong.

    Thank you so much for bringing in this aspect of the intersection of two fields, which are absolutely niche. Way back in 2007 itself, you started KAnalysis, and right now, you have made it a thriving IP law firm. What were some of the key challenges during those early years when you started your journey with a modest three-member team and navigated it through building a firm of this size and reputation, with a mission of making an IP hub in India? How have you done it?

    Well, it has happened gradually, I would say. When we started in 2007, we were working out of a single basement with very limited resources and zero clients. So, the initial challenge was how to show your credibility. Why would anybody trust a young firm or someone who has just started?

    We focused on quality, our responsiveness, and trust, because trust is something that takes you far. Even during our initial phase, we were doing the IP work. Wherever we were trained, we were not good at starting or setting up a business, managing cash flows, or getting clients, or getting an introduction to a client. We could execute a project, we could write a patent, we could search for prior art, or we could do a lot of things, but how to convince somebody to trust you?

    So those were tough initial days, as it happens with everybody. But the real challenge started as we grew. When you try to scale, the biggest challenge is that you should not dilute your core values. Consistency and patience are key. Over time, we have invested in people, set up robust processes, and, being from an engineering background, we could incorporate and adapt technology at various levels.

    People, process, and technology, I would say, are the three pillars we have not compromised on till now. The culture is that we will not compromise on these, however big we grow, because growth at the cost of culture and quality will not last long. Over the years, it has been almost 18 years. We have built slowly and steadily, investing in people, processes, and technology.

    That’s what I claim to be my biggest challenge now. As the team grows now, we are over a hundred people. The majority of my team is in India, but a few members are spread across the globe. The second-largest team is in the US, and we have small offices spread across the globe to take care of various jurisdictions.

    Every step has a new challenge, and as we grow, the challenges keep changing, but you have to adapt and survive.

    You have been resilient, and you have prospered through that. Keeping all that and working towards IP rights for more than 18 years now, what was the role of your engineering background in shaping the strategies that you particularly saw were different from regular lawyers? Obviously, there was a different understanding that came from having an engineering background plus a legal understanding. How have you seen that particular combination help you and your team grow and strategize at the same time?

    Yes, I have a different take on this. Whatever course or degree or exercise you take, it shapes your mind to think in a particular way. That’s what engineering does.

    Engineering doesn’t teach you anything specific. It trains your mind in a particular direction, to think a certain way, to solve issues or problems with a different bent of mind. Engineering teaches you to deconstruct a problem, break down the system into fundamental parts, look at each part individually, and then see their function and assimilate them.

    Law, on the other hand, teaches you to analyze. Law teaches you to connect those individual parts in a logical and legal framework. So, having training in both aspects helps you see the final picture without missing the finer details. That’s what the combination of engineering and law helps you achieve.

    Initially, I was more involved in patent prosecution. Over time, I was exposed to IP litigation, which has added a third dimension to my thinking. When you are prosecuting patents, your basic idea is to get a patent. When you go into litigation, you realize the basic idea is how to get a patent that is enforceable.

    It teaches you what holds in court and what falls apart. This practical insight sharpens my instincts in the entire scheme of things. Now I try to look for the best claim scope or how to draft better claims. As a litigator, I have realized that my ability to draft and interpret claims has also improved.

    Claims should be broad enough, assertable, and defendable even under attack. All those things shape your thinking. Every day is a learning process. Every case teaches you something. So whether I’m guiding someone, I’m not just focused on getting the examination and obtaining a patent, but also on how much I can contribute to obtaining an enforceable patent. My goal is to create IP that is not just strong on paper.

    It should withstand scrutiny. It should attract investors. It should survive litigation, both offensive and defensive, and it should support the business in market entry. Starting and setting up my business also helps me understand the key challenges any company faces with regard to IP protection.

    You don’t go all out and spend all your money on IP. Business is also important. It’s a combination and a learning that has helped me consult clients. I don’t work with clients as just a service provider or as a lawyer. I work hand in glove, even suggesting who they should go to for a merger or whom they should not partner with. I regularly undertake those kinds of activities.

    That’s why I like working with early-stage startups or small tech companies, because there you can be very closely invested. Over time, I’ve seen most of my clients trust me because we make them understand that IP isn’t just about legal protection. It’s a business asset.

    So technical understanding, legal foresight, and business acumen that’s why we have been successful as KAnalysis, I would say. I’ve seen my clients from their first provisional patent to securing multimillion-dollar funding. Those have been brilliant experiences.

    We would also love to understand that particular monetization process and the multimillion-dollar deals that you have done for IP monetization especially.

    But before that, we would love to ask you about your pro bono work also, where you have invested a lot of your time in initiatives like the IP Help Desk for startups and the IP workshops that you keep on doing. What actually fuels your dedication to promoting IP awareness and educating academicians and entrepreneurial communities related to this? Because you do it pro bono and you are also involved in a lot of deals which are for monetization. So how do you find the balance between these two, and how do you find time to do that?

    That’s interesting! I’ll tell you a very humorous anecdote. When I joined IP, it was very difficult to convince my dad what I was doing. And he is a professor. So that is the level of IP awareness in India. It took me a long while because India has no dearth of innovation, but IP awareness and awareness around IP rights remain uneven. Startups, academic institutions, and big companies have their setup because they have realized it the hard way.

    They have been sued or they want to protect, so they have mechanisms. But startups and academia lack IP awareness. Over the years, I have been working and managing one of the largest patent portfolios in India. We are managing portfolios in over 80 countries, spanning over 30,000 patents.

    So, handling that kind of a portfolio, I realized that most of my clients are from outside India. During COVID, you get time to ponder a lot about what we are doing and what we are giving back to society. During those days, I realized, let’s start an IP help desk to help startups, because startups are in the most gullible phase. I have seen investors who are real sharks take over their hard-earned innovation and everything. So I launched the IP help desk just to help them understand their questions, their issues, and guide them or handhold them without charging them. Because initially, they’re short on money and they think everybody is trying to sell something.

    I have done over 150 pro bono workshops across the country in the last two and a half years. These are not just lectures; they’re conversations where I help to demystify IP to the founders, to the people at incubation centers, those who have just started, and I give them practical, usable advice.

    How to stagger the cost. How you can protect yourself with minimum cost. So that when you attract investors, you may pay me but how can we get to that stage where you are attractive to the investor and protected. Because IP should not be an afterthought. It should be part of the innovation process from day one.

    Founders and researchers need to understand their rights and the value of protection. That’s what I do. I try to make them understand where the value lies. It’s not a cost center, it’s an asset. Slowly and gradually, I’m assisting over 1,000 startups at the moment, who are transforming in their trust in me, their confidence, and their outlook. For me, this is a way of giving back to the ecosystem, because ultimately this ecosystem has shaped me, and I ensure that the next generation has all the tools to compete globally. Because Indians should be competing globally. Big companies or multinationals will not build India. It will be the SME sector that writes the next India growth story.

    So that’s what my mission is to enable startups to lead the India story. Whatever little I can contribute, I try to contribute.

    That’s not little, that’s huge. One person can bring in so much change and can bring in so many people together to work towards one goal of making India again an IP hub as you have envisioned for everyone.

    Yeah, that’s why I keep my Fridays open for four hours. Anybody can book a slot and they can ask questions, without any charges. So that’s something that attracts most people.

    Wow! We would love to promote that aspect. And we’ll definitely talk about this the Fridays that you keep open for people to come to you and have that free consultation. That’s something which is not easily available, at least from such senior attorneys who are already managing such big portfolios.

    This is something that is very inspiring for young professionals also. So, sir, how would you like to talk about the intersection of science, innovation, and law, and what kind of core skills these young professionals can seek when they’re trying or thinking of building a career? And what do you propose to build that particular mindset, and what kind of advice would you like to give to them so that they can thrive in this particular field of intellectual property, keeping in mind that they also have to give back to society, as you already are doing?

    For anybody to give back to society, they should first focus on building their career and themselves. And they should enjoy IP, because this is a field where, if you don’t enjoy it, you cannot work a single day. That joy, that kick you don’t have to drag yourself to the office any day. You just look forward to it. And for that, the basics for students or young professionals is that you should develop interdisciplinary fluency.

    You should have a passion for science, an understanding of law, and an ability to look at business so that you are able to connect the dots. That’s something I always suggest. It’s not about mastering one thing. You have to be a jack of all trades. You have to be good at multiple things, because if you go in one direction if you are very good at law, IP is not for you. That’s the core legal side. If you’re good at engineering, IP is not for you either.

    You should have a flair for multiple things. That’s what IP requires. You should also cultivate a habit of deep listening, because the majority of my clients describe symptoms, not problems. My job is to diagnose both.

    They would just give me a situation where they’re stuck. That’s just a symptom. The real problem lies somewhere else. I need to identify what the root problem is and then provide a solution. Somebody has sued them filing a countersuit is not always the solution. There is also room for arbitration.

    If my case is not very strong, I would look for other avenues where I could bring the other party to the negotiating table. So that’s all part of business strategy. Secondly, I would advise the young generation to stay curious, because IP is evolving rapidly, especially with areas like AI, genomics, cleantech, and the majority of the new avenues that are coming.

    If you are not curious, if you are not rigorously reading, it’ll be very difficult to stay updated. This field needs you to be relevant. And finally, last but not the least be ethical. Cutting corners is not going to help you survive long in this field. This field is built on trust. So if you try to cut corners, you might get one or two clients, or you might get one or two cases, which would be shortcuts.

    But integrity will help you build a career. That’s a must. This field rewards only those who are sharp and sensitive. It’s not something you should be ruthless about. Those who can think like a scientist, act like a lawyer, and listen like a consultant. I always say to anybody who is hired that you should have good listening skills, but you should act like a lawyer and think like a scientist.

    That’s what an IP lawyer should be. It’s not a one-dimensional career, I would say. I have been actively mentoring our juniors to understand what I call IP fluency. It’s the ability to connect innovation, law, and commercial relevance. Because there is a brilliant invention that somebody has done, most of the inventors are very passionate about what they have created.

    But is it packaged enough to be marketable as a product? An IP lawyer would stop before that. I go that extra step. How would the market perceive this? What would be the best sales strategy? If you could associate your product with some bigger brand, how would this complement?

    So, those kinds of strategies I come up with because I try to help the business grow rather than just limiting myself to the IP side. So if you are someone who is curious, ethical, and eager to make an impact, IP is the career for you. It’s a very fulfilling career path. But choosing wisely is what I suggest.

    We also have one very good initiative in our organization where we have weekly training sessions for everybody. Whatever is there, they are given specific topics to present to the entire organization. Every fortnight, we have sessions so they get to dive deeper into that particular topic. That is something I have been doing regularly in this organization, because for me, it’s all about the culture that we build. We are here to nurture, and that’s what we have been doing.

    So I’ll start with “curiosity is the key, thinking like a scientist, acting like a lawyer.” Sir, keeping all that in mind, how have you developed this culture inside your organization and made sure that everyone is aligned with the whole process? Because it’s a huge organization.

    It’s in several jurisdictions as well. So the kind of thought process that’s involved also requires an understanding of having very good mental health as well as physical health. How have you worked on that and made sure that all your team members are not only aligned but also following the certain protocols that you may have set? Because it has become a very big and growing issue of mental health problems and compromised physical health and people have started talking about it. So how do you work around that and make sure that you also stay healthy and that your team across the globe is also equally healthy?

    It’s definitely a journey. I would say I’ve been trying hard to maintain a balance, but yes, it’s still a learning curve. I used to equate longer hours with better outcomes.

    That was earlier. Over time, I have realized or with experience, I could do things much quicker and I have realized that clear thinking, a strategic approach, and, I would say, strong leadership all combine to form a structure that helps you remain fit. By fit, I mean mental health more, because lawyers get involved in a case so much that they’re not able to shut down when they’re not working.

    Even in the subconscious mind, a case keeps on going. When you are so involved, a setback in court would ruin your evening, which shouldn’t be.

    So a lot of times it happens, but now I take time and ensure that I switch off. I listen to music, go for walks, or the best I like is speaking to young professionals that helps me unwind.

    And I have a supporting family. I have a very close group of friends. I have kids who help me relax, and that’s how I keep my mental balance. I would say they help me recharge, especially when things get intense and it happens almost every week. So that’s how it is.

    Delegation of work and another important point that I forgot worth mentioning, is building a strong second line. Because as the firm grows, you need to have a second line that takes care of the majority of my issues so that I come into the picture at a very later stage.

    That helps me go out and work daily because prioritizing mental health is not just about myself, but it’s all across the firm. Because if you are not sustainable, it’ll not last long. You’ll burn out.

    So we need to keep that flame alive but that flame should not burn you is what I always tell people. You stay motivated, but at least learn to enjoy, and that enjoyment should come.

    I’m very fortunate to have a set of friends who keep me grounded. They don’t let me fly too long. So that’s how I relax and unwind. And I’m still learning. Scaling means having trust in your second line, having trust in your delegation, having trust in your processes and culture. I’m very thankful that I have built a very good team. It’s a slow and steady process.

    Every hiring goes through a lot of vetting.

    I’m personally involved in most of the hirings that happen in the company because the culture should be intact. The mindset you can teach a person but you can’t change the attitude. So that is one thing I always, always look for in people. Somebody who has not played any sport would not be a good team player, is what I feel.

    So these are small, small things that I keep in mind when I look for people while hiring. I like to speak to them for an hour or so to understand and pick up some things from their mind. That person might be a brilliant asset, but if it’s not a fit for the culture, then he’s not the person for me.

    Amazing views, sir. Thank you so much for talking about building a very strong second line as well as delegating your work obviously with diligence and with the understanding that it’ll work after you have delegated.

    Sir, while you were talking about IP rights and IP management and other aspects of intellectual property, you also talked about negotiations and management. We would like to ask you your thoughts about the arbitrations that keep happening in intellectual property. How do you see the future of IP arbitration in India and globally as well? Because you have a global presence.

    I have been involved in several IP transactions as well, and over time I realized that your biggest competitors could be your potential collaborators in the future. This is a big jigsaw puzzle. Every piece needs to fit in somewhere, and that is something where there is always room for negotiation, because nobody is outrightly against anybody.

    It’s that everybody is protecting their own business interests. So in the broader sense, what we do is we try, as I mentioned earlier, to deconstruct the dispute. What is the major negotiating point? What is a strict no-go?

    Is there any chance where a financial negotiation could also take place?

    Because initially, I was also involved in a lot of IP valuation work as well. So, if there is a dollar value attributed to this particular piece of technology, could there be a royalty scope wherein we could have a negotiation around that?

    Arbitration is not always about having a mandatory step, because these days, courts have been constantly pushing for arbitration, and people should first try out arbitration before starting the trial.

    But arbitration as a first step needs to be taken care of. The real challenge I feel in India is that there are not enough trained arbitrators. Arbitration is a very, very specialized niche that is going to be very lucrative. There is very little expertise in that particular domain.

    Because an arbitrator who specializes in aerospace would not be a good fit for e-commerce.

    So for somebody who is a domain-specific arbitrator it has been a wonderful experience working with some very good arbitrators trained in Singapore or Dubai.

    Because those two centers I really like the framework they have: the training of arbitrators, the certification courses they offer.

    It’s amazing. I have had the fortune of working with quite a few of them, and I wish India had that kind of setup, where we have training schools for arbitrators where there is a specific coursework, six months or eight months, wherein arbitrators are trained to arbitrate. Because most of the time, we have our own biases, and arbitrators shouldn’t be biased.

    So those are small, small things that arbitrators need to inculcate. With training and proper guidance from established institutes across the globe, India can be a major hub because that would lead to a reduction in a lot of the backlog we have in courts, if there is a good arbitration mechanism.

    In IP, I would say it’s very laughable that most of the businesses 500, 600 crore businesses were started by a family. When they split, they don’t have a proper agreement about IPR or brands, and that fight goes on.

    Those family businesses I’ve been involved in a lot of feuds in family businesses where the brand, who owns the brand later, is a real nightmare, because many people don’t understand the value of the brand unless they see that they can’t sell using that brand. Then the valuation starts.

    So it’s still in a very, very nascent stage in India.

    But I am very hopeful that the next crop would be more accustomed to and more inclined towards alternate dispute resolution mechanisms.

    Sir, with the kind of experience and exposure you’re offering through your workshops, I truly hope many others follow your lead so that India can become the IP hub you’ve envisioned. As we come to the end of this conversation, I’d love to understand how you keep yourself updated with everything happening in the IP world. How much do you read, how often do you interact with the international community, and what differences have you observed in the understanding of IP rights across jurisdictions? Since you’ve worked in over 80 jurisdictions, you must have encountered varied approaches to the same IP concepts. It would be great if you could share those insights for the benefit of young professionals.

    Definitely. Because IP is a global thing. It’s not restrained. You need protection in multiple countries, but each country has a different law that we should understand. Each country has a different patentability criterion.

    Some things are patentable here, some things are not patentable here. Method patents are patentable in some countries, some countries only allow system claims. So this kind of thing, where you are seeking global protection if you don’t have a bird’s eye view of different jurisdictions that are patentable in Japan might not be patentable here in India. Or let’s say there is a business method patent, which is allowed in the US but not allowed in India. Software patents we face a lot of issues regarding Section 3D or repurposing of drugs. So all those things you need to work with attorneys across multiple jurisdictions to understand.

    If you are starting with a PCT application, my team has been trained with US attorneys, European attorneys, Canadian attorneys, even Japanese and Chinese attorneys. So when we write a PCT, you have room to amend in that specific jurisdiction when you enter that.

    When you are trying to prosecute applications across the globe if you are working here most people would go and help you to submit with a foreign attorney without giving you the legal perspective. Let’s say if you file in the US with 20 claims.

    Same application if you go to Europe why go with 20 claims if you have to pay an additional claim fee for five extra claims? Because above 15, Europe charges. In China, it charges above 10. Some people I have encountered in the past it’s against my profession but I would say that just to justify the billing of $20,000, they write a 200-page patent.

    That invention was brilliant and beautiful, and it should have been protected across the globe. But the translation cost was so high that the client could not afford to file in non-English jurisdictions. Only nine or ten countries allow you to file in English. The rest all require local language. You get the translation done.

    Why write a textbook when you are writing a patent? Be concise, be compliant, and think about the business of the client rather than your billing is what I always suggest. So having a global perspective with regard to global filings has been the hallmark of our success because our patents get prosecuted in multiple jurisdictions, and we are the ones who are responsible for all the jurisdictions.

    We would not say that we have drafted as per Indian law and the rest you take care of with your local attorneys. Then you keep on having office action after office action after office action, and you end up spending a lot without getting the patent because it was written in such a manner that there is very little room to go ahead.

    I’ll tell you, these days I’m facing a lot of issues with Indian companies, I would say. They cut corners while drafting a patent. They come to us for making a response for a US office action. After our response, the claims are allowed, but the final objection comes that there is no support for those claims in the specification.

    You can amend the claims, but you can’t amend the specification. A brilliant innovation goes down the drain because you have already disclosed most of the things. There are remedies that we suggest, but you end up having your cost at least 1.5 to 1.8 times. You try to save a few dollars and you end up spending a fortune. So that’s something that needs to be told to the people and to the business community that it’s always a penny-wise and pound-foolish situation.

    That is the kind of situation that most Indian businesses are facing these days.

    And as you mentioned at the start, they don’t want to pay. They will pay. They’ll pay when they are in a soup. Why get in a soup? Have preventive strategies first. That’s my advice.

    Why get into a suing battle later when paying upfront can keep you protected for life? I’d really like to understand your thoughts and motivation. How do you envision the IP hub idea becoming a reality in India over the next decade, especially considering the high-profile cases you’ve handled and the challenges you’ve seen businesses face? Since you’re mentoring so many attorneys, startups, and businesses, what would your advice or strategy be to help make this vision real, especially with the government also actively working towards IP awareness? How can both young professionals and seasoned attorneys contribute to this goal?

    I would say that we need to shift our mindset from domestic-first to a global situation. It should be global by design. Most of the people file PCT applications, and I have seen people who say that they have got a worldwide patent.

    So that’s the level of awareness they have. And they don’t enter the national phase, and everything goes down the drain.

    So if you start with a global perspective, then only you’ll be able to compete globally. That’s why KAnalysis started. We came up with the idea everybody laughed at us that how can you manage through a single window so many jurisdictions?

    Step by step, step by step, the team got trained. We got trained in understanding different countries, different jurisdictions, what kind of objections each country has. We have built strategies where you could save at least 40% of your cost if you plan your prosecution and global IP filing strategically. Minimum 40% saving that we have shown repeatedly again and again.

    That’s a huge amount of money considering you are looking at 8 to 10 jurisdictions to file. Of course, India has made commendable strides. It’s not that India has not done anything. At that time, there was no digital filing when I started. Now it’s all digital.

    Expedited examination is a very welcome step that we have. They have increased outreach programs, which is very good. They have stakeholders’ meetings that is a very welcome step.

    The major problem that I see is inconsistency in the examination of patents. Delay has been something that I have always been seeing, but now at least with expedited examinations and all, I’ve been able to get patents within a year, many times.

    So those are some things that have certainly helped. Just like USPTO, the Indian Patent Office needs to adapt to AI for basic things. You can’t replace humans, but at least the formalities checks and all those things could be automated. USPTO has automated all those things.

    That would help us get a better outcome, faster outcome, and reduce the delay in enforcement.

    I empathize with the judiciary because they have a huge backlog, but the Indian system legal reform is the need of the hour. If you want to be business-friendly, you need to have fast-track courts. IP divisions here in two high courts is a very welcome step. It’s really, really helpful. But we need to have more dedicated IP courts across the country.

    IP should be the prime focus of the country. Because if you want to become a so-called Vishwa Guru, then you need to focus on IP. If you don’t do that, you’ll not be a business-friendly jurisdiction. You’ll just be a center for cheap labor, and your manufacturing will move somewhere else because they will be cheaper than you.

    Unless you innovate, unless you try to remain attractive to innovation, unless you create an ecosystem for innovation you’ll just remain like that.

    We have seen examples. Malaysia was one such country which could not innovate. It rose very fast, and then stagnated and phased out. They were calling it the next bright spot.

    Innovation sustains. The US hardly makes anything. They innovate. So innovation needs to be nurtured.

    And at the very grassroots levels, school curriculum should have at least a course on IPR. I tell my kids a very fascinating story. They were making some paintings at home, so I told them to always sign your painting.

    Otherwise, somebody else would take the credit. That’s IPR.

    So that’s something we need to inculcate and create right from the initial days that anything you create, it’s your intellectual property.

    And think beyond. And our education system also needs an overhaul where we have relevant courses that are more aligned with industry requirements.

    That is something I look forward to with this government. Let’s see how much they do.

     Thank you, sir, for being here and for your incredible dedication to intellectual property. It’s rare to see someone live and breathe IP the way you do. We truly appreciate you taking the time to share your insights on IP rights, monetization, valuation, and so much more. Your passion is inspiring, and we hope it drives India closer to becoming a global IP hub.

    One thing I would like to add in the end.

    We should learn to celebrate innovators like we celebrate a lot of things.

    We should have a national program to celebrate innovators. That would be really an encouraging sign for anybody to innovate.

    Get in touch with Nilanshu Shekhar –

  • Bridging Borders: Making Law Accessible for Startups Worldwide – Priyanka Mandhani, Corporate lawyer, Company Secretary and Founder of Juris Summit.

    Bridging Borders: Making Law Accessible for Startups Worldwide – Priyanka Mandhani, Corporate lawyer, Company Secretary and Founder of Juris Summit.

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

    I will start backwards. I’ll not start with the very first question, why you chose law, but I would request you to answer first why and when you decided to start Juris Summit, what was the reason that you started it so soon? What are your plans? How are you going to work on the cross border business laws, and what do you see and where do you see yourself and Juris Summit in next, let’s say five years and a decade?

    I’m so thankful and grateful for all of the SuperLawyer team for bringing this opportunity to me. And yes, I’m looking forward to collaborating with you people and also to giving guidance to all the newcomers who are wishing and willing to start their career on an international platform.

    So, yeah, you know, there are some things, like we said, we get it out of WhatsApp chat.

    So me and my partner Sohan, we met in a WhatsApp group, like in a freelancer group, and at that time, back after two years, we had started our individual freelancing journey. So, we individually found that startups, they struggle, particularly startups, they struggle a lot because there are two things.

    First thing is, particularly I’m talking about the US startups. The United States law firms charge a lot. I would say 800 dollars per hour, and even beyond that. So I was like, what is this? Why are they charging this much?

    Of course, they provide services and they do everything that needs to be done, but we also are authorized to do that, and we can also do it at a lesser price. So that was the first point. And the second point, startups, they want everything fast. They approach any lawyer or somewhere that gives us a template, we will do it ourselves. And in that template, the alignment of business, the clauses, they’re not properly as per their business. They’re not aligned with their business.

    So these are the two things which I felt that I needed to bridge a gap between this thing. So at that time, I had a talk with Sohan. Sohan, this is the problem, we need to fill it out. So he said, so let’s go, let’s build an agency. Then let’s work together.

    And I said, yeah, let’s do it. Why not? And then without a second thought, it was just like bam! Out of a WhatsApp chat. We set up an agency.

    Amazing journey. Amazing start. So let’s now get back to the basics. How did you become convinced that you have to do law as well as company secretaryship?

    And with this kind of dual qualification, how did you pave your way towards not only being an Indian lawyer, but also a lawyer who’s internationally acclaimed and who has moved to Germany and is working from there?

    So, the thing is, I wanted to become a chartered accountant firstly, so I started my journey back then. I’ve cleared my CPT, and after that I could not understand what was happening, but suddenly in that period of time, my interest was very much into law. Then I thought of the professional course of company secretary, and without second thought, again, I enrolled myself into company secretary and successfully I’ve completed everything in the first attempt. And side by side, as this is a law field, I also enrolled myself for an LLB course, a three years course. So I’ve also completed my LLB, and fortunately in the last year of LLB I topped the university, Swami Ramanand Teerth Marathwada University.

    So, this is how I wanted to prepare myself fully, and after all these things were done, still I felt like something was missing. Then I found courses like US corporate laws, then diploma in international business laws.

    And that thing fascinated me. I said I want to do this. I want to set up a remote practice for myself. I wanted to do this thing. So without a second thought, I enrolled myself. And today I’m here so that I can work from Germany with US law firms, and not only US, all over the world, I can work with every country’s client.

    So, with all these things, which you decide on a first go, what kind of experience do you have of the transition that you have done from traditional legal practice to starting, founding and running a specialized legal agency, which is right now catering mostly to international clients, particularly in US, like you already have explained about startups. How is your experience about the agency and how does it work for you and your partner and the kind of challenges that you see in having Indian laws, having international laws and their comparison? How does that work for you?

    I would start with the traditional law firms in India or wherever we can say. So, at the law firm I had access to a predictable environment, and consistent staff support was there. Then we had a particular library where we can read and where we can update ourselves. But mostly there were domestic clients, and there were Indian timelines, as you must be aware of, then billing expectations. And so all these things were somewhere I feel they’re keeping me down, they’re setting up boundaries for me.

    So, when I started a legal agency, these were not the things. There were, obviously, challenges because time zone and communication are the biggest challenges when we start an agency that is hundred percent remote and which deals with international clients.

    So, we have staff, obviously we have staff, and what we do is someone between us is always awake at US time zone so that we can grab all the opportunities, so that we can reply to all the clients. And even if he’s not there, what do we do, because we use technology, right?

    We have to use technology. We set auto replies to that particular person. In that way, we don’t push the client, we can’t talk right now, and it’s not our time zone. This is how we work.

    So even if there is any urgent matter or something  because we see clients that want something within 24 hours, within a few hours we actually do that. We don’t say we can’t do this. This is not a timeline to deliver everything, nothing like that. We’ll do everything.

    Someone from us will have to do that. And we have set our agency like that only. So these are the challenges: timeline and communication.

    So, talking about communication, recently we had a client from Saudi Arabia, and I personally had to deal with him.

    So, the first time I didn’t understand what he’s talking about, his accent was so difficult to understand. But thanks to the notes we take, whenever we start a meeting, on the other end we start taking notes. So thanks to all these things, thanks to technology, we understand these things.

    So these are the challenges we overcome, and that’s how it works.

     This shows that the kind of work that you are doing is getting more and more  reach, and that is something which is the value addition to your work at Juris Summit.  So the kind of driving force that you, your partners and the people who work with you have, what kind of gaps or insufficiencies or legal issues you have seen in US business laws as compared to Indian business laws? And the kind of observation that has helped you overcome those challenges and help US companies or businesses have their legal work done with you.

    Okay, so, I mentioned this before, that for billing, the US firms charge a lot. So this is the first thing that we wanted to fill the gap  to provide services at a lower price than the US law firms.

    The second thing, obviously, about the DIY route you know, templates from online platforms and Reddit forums they get. So these are the gaps Juris Summit set out to fill. We offer a third party responsive, startup-savvy legal support delivered by us. Like we are experienced, we have an experienced team and at a cost that makes sense for early-stage companies.

    I’m talking particularly here about the early stage because businesses which are already set, normally, they don’t hesitate or they don’t struggle this much. So, we focus on flat fees. Not an hourly basis. There’s no surprising billings and nothing like that. Scope-defined engagements and what we call it legal sprints.

    So, founders know exactly what they are paying for. So for example, what if there is a review document with us, we have to review that document, we make sure we provide another document  that we just don’t review it and tell him that these are the findings and these are the loopholes that we need to fill.

    And these are the liability clauses and everything. Not like that. What we suggest from the very first clause, to try to make him understand in a simple language. We make a document and we write it in a simple language, clause to clause, that you should know what you are signing. So this is our approach  to make him understand everything.

    We speak their language in short, I can say we speak their language. We don’t just recite, deliver code or GDPR clauses, we explain what it means for their product, their fundraising, or any contractor agreement. So this is how we work.

    And Juris Summit is all about delivering clarity, speed, strategy at the point where founders need it most. We don’t just drop documents, we help build legally sound businesses one decision at a time. And that’s the gap we saw and the reason we are here.

     So on that note, how do you guys keep yourself updated with the new changes in laws in different jurisdictions. Not only the US, like you just now said that you dealt with a client from Saudi Arabia, then other jurisdictions also. So what is your way of keeping yourself updated and keeping your team updated as well?

     So, what happens is normally when we start our day, normally, we start our day at 9:00 AM. 

    So for the first half hour, particularly of mine, I look for all the US jurisdictions, the updates and everything.  There are many newsletters which I have subscribed to.  Then I also have many attorneys. Like we have a group with US attorneys to get the updates. Hey, what’s going on? What’s new? We talk normally like that. So  I get updates from them. And on the other hand, Sohan, he handles Indian jurisdiction, all the Indian and Asian. So basically our first hour or half an hour is only to update ourselves with all the knowledge.

    And apart from this, what we do is set a meeting every 15 days or weekly, biweekly. And, we exchange each other’s knowledge. Hey, what’s new? What did you see? What did you see in the last 15 days? Please share with us what’s up? And everything is online, so we keep a very friendly manner, very relaxed atmosphere, everyone shares his or her thoughts. So like that we exchange our thoughts and we keep updated.

     Are there any specific reading materials or any channel which you especially look out for? Because there are so many of them. If you could name a few, it would be very helpful for the learners as well.

    There are many channels, newsletters. See, it depends upon the learner, how they find it, how easy it is to get the knowledge from that particular newsletter or particular journal or everything.

    So it depends upon the learner, there are many. If you Google it, you will find it. And there are many AIs. Research tools or even if you go to LexisNexis or Westlaw websites. These are the websites where you get all the knowledge.

    Even if you type, what’s the update here tonight? If you even Google it, you’ll get an idea. You will get a list thoroughly. So not a particular channel or anything I follow, but it depends upon, what exactly I want to see on that particular day, that’s how I Google it. And there are a number of websites and journals and everything.

     So let’s move ahead and understand how you help the startups and SMEs, especially those that are led by non-US founders,  but they are being navigated by US federal laws or state laws. How do you make sure that you explain those things, especially tax compliance and other overwhelming aspects of law to your client and make sure that it has been taken care while you help their startup being established in us from scratch until the time they need your help.

     Yeah, as you mentioned that US Federal and tax compliance may be overwhelming and to simplify this is our job, so we simplify US federal and state tax compliances for non-US founders by removing the overwhelm and breaking everything into clear and actionable steps. So for example, we begin with a founder friendly roadmap.  We draft a simple PDF, a simple agreement or like an information document and that outlines all the key tax obligations across federal or state levels.  So this includes important filings like the EIN, then form 5472 then franchise tax and sales tax registration with its timeline and responsible parties that is clearly indicated in that particular document. So since we don’t use a client portal, we ensure accessibility and clarity by sharing checklists and guides over email and tools like Google Drive, we use that. So, you know, founders can track their progress step by step.

     We provide all necessary templates where it’s 83 B, election letter or a sales tax exemption certificate with instruction return in plain English. This is how we manage it. And for ongoing compliances as well, we partner with experienced CPAs.

    Like we have many CPAs in our touch and bookkeepers who specialize in cross-border entities. So this is how we provide all the information to them.  And once introduced, we stay in loop to ensure filings are accurate, then deadlines are met. And the startup stays in solid ground.

    So, as I mentioned earlier, our goal is very simple. Remove all the complexities, bring structure to compliances and let non-US founders focus on building and remove that overwhelmingness.

    How do you manage your physical and mental health while you are doing all of this in different timelines?

    Because obviously sitting in one timeline and working. But managing different timelines, having that presence all the time, that all 24 hours we are available for clients. How do you manage that particular aspect of your life where you have to take care of your physical health as well as your mental health?

    Yeah, start your day with meditation. And hitting a gym, that thing keeps me going all day because, as you have also already mentioned, I have to keep aligned with every time zone and everything. So obviously, this is hectic, this is not easy. But if you manage things properly, it’s all about time management.

    We can’t say we don’t have time, we can’t say that. We have to manage the time, and then we’ll have time automatically. And for my mental health, I walk a lot. It gives me clarity when I walk. It clears my mind. Take a walk in nature for, let’s say, 15 to 20, even 20 minutes, just one round or something.

    It’ll help you boost your thinking and give clarity on what you are doing. And after every two hours, take a break of 10 minutes. It’ll boost your productivity, we would say. So we have to manage. I don’t say no to anything.

    I say I can do it. So there is nothing that you can’t do, I feel. You have to do it. If you decide, there will be a way. You will have to find a way and you can do it.

     You can do everything with an amazing understanding and the way you are doing it, may you have all the success that you have planned for yourself. It’s an amazing experience to understand how you have gone so far, just by the sheer willpower of being able to do anything and everything under the sun.

     It’s an overwhelming thought as well that you carry forward yourself with the thought of being able to do it.

     One more thing. It’s not easy to keep motivated and to stay positive all the time. Because there were times in my life as well where  I started this freelancing journey, there were times where I didn’t get clients. I had to struggle. But the thing is we have to keep going without giving up.

    This is the mantra. Don’t give up. Stand back. There will be your time.  You can’t give up. That’s it. You can’t give up. You have to keep putting in the hard work.

    Get in touch with Priyanka Mandhani –

  • “I have learned that in matrimonial litigation especially highly contested and long-pending matters mediation is often the most effective tool.” – Rajiv Rajpurohit, Family Law Practitioner at the Courts of Ahmedabad & Pune.

    “I have learned that in matrimonial litigation especially highly contested and long-pending matters mediation is often the most effective tool.” – Rajiv Rajpurohit, Family Law Practitioner at the Courts of Ahmedabad & Pune.

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

    You’ve mentioned that your advent into the field of law was almost accidental, as you initially planned to pursue an MBA in Pune but were influenced by friends studying law. How did that unexpected shift shape your career path and your approach to the profession?

    I completed my schooling at a Government school in Rajasthan. In 2006, I moved to Pune for further studies. As everyone knows, Pune is often referred to as the “Oxford of the East.” At that time, Business Administration was in high demand, so after completing my schooling, I pursued a BBA in Pune. During those days, I had a few friends and acquaintances who were studying at various law schools. In the evenings, we would often meet for tea or simply hang out. They would share their experiences about academic activities, court visits, and legal studies. Listening to them gradually developed my interest in law, and I began considering admission to the field. Before enrolling in law school, I worked with the Symbiosis Group for a few months. However, when the time came to make a final decision whether to pursue an MBA or law. I was not fully confident and remained unsure. It was then that my father guided me towards pursuing law. With his approval and encouragement, I finally decided to enroll in law school. Most importantly, till date, my father has been a constant source of motivation and support, especially during a difficult phase when I felt like giving up legal practice and considering another career path. His encouragement has always kept me going.

    You have conducted highly contested divorce cases, resolved long-pending disputes through mediation, and handled matters ranging from custody to NRI divorces. How challenging is it to navigate cross-border family disputes, particularly NRI divorces, and what key stakeholders are usually involved?

    I have been practicing law since 2013, Over the years, I have handled hundreds of matrimonial disputes and cases in Ahmedabad, Pune and Mumbai, and have also appeared before several Hon’ble High Courts in India also before the Hon’ble supreme court of India. One common aspect in matrimonial disputes whether contested or mutual consent, whether involving NRIs, is that they often revolve around key issues such as claims of alimony, division of immovable assets, child custody, and other financial considerations. In such matters, the role of a lawyer is not limited to representing a client in court; it is also about guiding all stakeholders toward what is reasonable and achievable. In NRI divorce cases, the first challenge is often the logistical aspect ensuring the presence of parties or enabling their participation through virtual hearings, which most courts now facilitate. In mutual consent divorces for NRIs, the process can be straightforward once formalities are understood and complied with as per the law and procedure. From my experience, NRIs are usually clear about their terms, conditions, and settlement formulas, but it becomes the lawyer’s job to draft, execute, and present those terms in a legally sound manner so that there are no future disputes, particularly regarding child custody or financial obligations, another is regarding the if any joint property in foreign country and one of the spouse is in India and not looking for forward to go back., when I talk about long pending divorce cases I recall one particular case where a client had been contesting a matter for years. And later after a few years he came to me with the mindset of “ that he would only like to contest” rather than resolving it. After understanding his case history, I advised him that litigation should be the last resort, and that he should first try to settle the matter through communication either directly, via lawyers, or through mediation. Initially hesitant, he eventually followed my advice. Within three months, the matter was resolved amicably, something that could have been achieved years earlier had proper guidance been given. From my practice, I have learned that in matrimonial litigation especially highly contested and long-pending matters mediation is often the most effective tool. The key is to fully understand the facts, the parties’ financial capacities, the complexity of the issues, and the emotional aspects, and then to guide the stakeholders toward a reasonable middle ground. I firmly believe there should never be a point where a lawyer loses hope of settlement. Keeping that hope alive until the very end, unless a final order is passed, is essential in family disputes.

    With over a decade of experience before the Family Courts and High Courts in both Gujarat and Maharashtra, what procedural differences have you observed while practicing in these jurisdictions?

    This is indeed a very important question, because understanding procedural differences is crucial when practicing in different jurisdictions. Yes, there are significant differences between Gujarat and Maharashtra, and I have learned a great deal from working alongside lawyers in both states. When it comes to procedures, there are differences in the prescribed formats for filing applications, the method of preparing compilations, and the specific documentation requirements. The process for exhibiting documents also varies slightly between the two jurisdictions. In family matters, I have observed differences in the conciliation and mediation processes. The filing procedure itself also differs. For example, in Maharashtra, one can file a matter without physically going to court; everything can be done virtually through the court portal. Even the administration of an oath can be completed virtually by uploading a video, which is not the same in Gujarat. These procedural nuances highlight the importance of adapting to local practices while ensuring compliance with the law.

    Your practice emphasizes amicable, reconciliation-focused solutions. What trends have you noticed in the growing use of ADR in matrimonial disputes, and how do you see it shaping the future of family law?

    Yes, I strongly believe that there should be amicable solutions in matrimonial disputes because it is ultimately a question of precious time of life. If one is able to take a timely decision and resolve the dispute, it is far better than letting it remain in court for years, which rarely leads either party anywhere. However, it is important that both parties are willing to be reasonable with each other, even while keeping their differences, and remain focused during mediation. Nowadays, I see that even the Hon’ble Supreme Court actively promotes mediation in many matters. In my experience, Family Court judges also often take the initiative to speak with both parties, understand their concerns, and encourage amicable settlements. If the parties show willingness, mediation can be a highly effective tool. Such solutions can be facilitated by any authority through various methods, including formal mediation or counselling. Sometimes, emotions run high and parties are initially unable to take rational decisions. However, after proper counselling, they are often in a better position to make fair and reasonable decisions. Therefore, irrespective of the situation, I always advise that Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and amicable settlements should be explored, as they are often the best way to ensure a fair and lasting resolution.

    You began your career as a Legal Associate under senior advocates before founding your own firm. What lessons from those early years continue to guide your courtroom strategy today?

    Yes, I began my career working with a lawyer who had many years of experience. I learned a great deal from advocates during my time in Pune and later in Ahmedabad. One of the key lessons I have learned is that if you wish to succeed as a litigation lawyer particularly in matrimonial matters, which often involve divorce, custody disputes, alimony, maintenance, and domestic violence, the first and foremost skill you need is to listen carefully to your client. You must understand where the real problem lies, while also respecting the emotional circumstances of the parties. I have also learned that you should never be judgmental when listening to clients. Instead, your role is to ensure you understand their circumstances fully. From my seniors, I learned the importance of proper drafting and being thoroughly prepared with arguments. I recall that when I was assisting senior lawyers, they would take detailed notes point-by-point and spend hours preparing final arguments for divorce cases. Contrary to the perception that matrimonial litigation is straightforward, I have found it to be complex, involving significant factual and legal research, especially since family disputes often involve many incidents that form the grounds for divorce. As per High Court and Supreme Court judgments, it is essential to keep updating oneself on recent case law. I have made it a habit to learn continuously from court proceedings, by listening to arguments and closely studying judgments.

    What motivated you to establish your own practice, and what vision did you have for it in the beginning? How did you overcome the initial challenges?

    It is always a challenge to choose litigation as a career after completing law. Initially, I opted for corporate work, but later my father motivated me to practice in court. He advised me to go to the court every day, whether I had a brief or not. I had no contacts who could help me enter the field of litigation, so I followed my father’s advice. I began visiting the court daily and interacting with lawyers. Eventually, I met one of my professors from my graduation days, who was also a practicing lawyer. I sought his help and asked if I could join his office. He told me that he didn’t have many matters at that time but could refer me to someone else. He gave me a reference to another advocate in Pune. When I went to meet this advocate, he asked me just one question: “When do you want to start?” My answer was, “I can start right now.” He immediately agreed and told me I could join and start working. I didn’t even go back home. I began working on the brief that very day. The second thing he told me was, “You will have to work hard, I will take care of your basic needs and concerns.” That assurance gave me the confidence I needed, and that is how my journey began. And this is how my journey started for my first client. One thing I learned early on is that you never know where clients will come from. They may walk in from anywhere, even from the court corridors. Sometimes, they may watch you argue in court, be impressed with your performance, and later ask for your contact details. In this profession, your performance is what pays you both in the form of clients and valuable contacts.

    What inspired you to choose matrimonial and family litigation as your primary specialization, and how has working in this niche shaped your perspective on law?

    Yes, my interest gradually shifted towards matrimonial law. Since I started my practice, I used to accompany my senior in family court matters assigned to me. Most of these cases, particularly matrimonial disputes, involved domestic violence and divorce. Slowly and gradually, this became my primary practice area. Although I have also handled other matters, over time my focus has increasingly been on matrimonial disputes and family matters. While I would not call it a specialisation, with experience I have gained significant exposure in this field. As I have already stated, dealing with matrimonial matters is not easy. It requires a great deal of skill, patience, and the ability to handle sensitive human emotions. I believe this area of law has immense potential, and one should continue to explore, understand, and work in depth within family and matrimonial matters

    Having such a diverse practice now and over a decade of experience, what advice would you give to new entrants in the field of law?

    All entrants in the field of law must be prepared to work hard, especially in the initial stages. One should not assume that any particular branch of law is not worth exploring. If an opportunity comes your way, it should be accepted and explored, as it may eventually lead to your mainstream practice. Therefore, do not make up your mind too early or immediately after graduating from law school. Take up different matters, handle them diligently, and if needed, seek guidance from experienced senior lawyers or practitioners in that particular area. Learn from each experience, as this gradual exposure will help you discover your true area of interest and expertise.

    Managing a practice across two jurisdictions can be demanding. How do you balance professional commitments with personal life, and what activities help you unwind and recharge?

    Yes, certainly, sometimes it requires motivation, but right from the beginning I chose to practise in two jurisdictions. As far as personal life is concerned, it goes without saying that law is a profession where, especially in the initial years, one has to compromise on personal life and carry the pressures of professional responsibilities. Being a noble profession, law demands complete dedication and 100% commitment. There is no other option but to prioritise professional life first. After a certain number of years, personal life also finds its balance, as family members begin to understand the efforts and challenges of a lawyer’s journey. Eventually, it becomes a routine. So yes, whether personal or professional, at the end of the day, life goes with the flow, and with time one learns how to manage both.

    Get in touch with Rajiv Rajpurohit –

  • “Cryptocurrency in India still sits in a grey area. It’s taxed, monitored under money laundering laws, but still not officially recognised as currency.” – Aashish Patankar, Trial and White Collar Crime Lawyer.

    “Cryptocurrency in India still sits in a grey area. It’s taxed, monitored under money laundering laws, but still not officially recognised as currency.” – Aashish Patankar, Trial and White Collar Crime Lawyer.

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

    Your doctoral research focuses on economic frauds with special reference to the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act, 1999 (MPID). How has your academic background in commerce, finance, and corporate law influenced your understanding of white-collar crimes? Could you also highlight some key gaps or challenges you’ve identified in the enforcement of the MPID Act during your research?

    My academic background in commerce, finance, and corporate law has helped me develop the way I think about economic offences. Once you have grasped the mechanics of finance and corporate structures, it is easier to understand how the system is exploited. 

    During my research on the MPID Act, one challenge I have consistently noticed is that while the legislation is well-intentioned and aimed at protecting depositors, its enforcement often struggles because of delays in attachment and prosecution. Many times, by the time the authorities act and pursue the offender, the trail has already grown cold and recovery is nearly impossible. Another gap is the edges of enforcement and conflict of central legislation as PMLA, Companies Act, SEBI laws and the MPID Act being a state level enforcement, and derails any sense of priority in jurisdiction or proceedings.

    The Act is strong, but sometimes its effectiveness can be compromised in practice through procedural delays, poor agency coordination, and attempts to strike a balance between depositors’ protection and the rights of bona fide third parties. This is where I see a need for more extensive reform and clarification.

    You have handled several high-profile and complex criminal defence cases involving multi-crore corporate frauds and GST evasion. Could you share one particularly challenging case experience and how you strategized your way through it?

    Certainly! One case that comes to my mind right now involved a large corporate fraud and GST evasion worth several crores – and it was particularly significant as it was one of the first arrests in Maharashtra specifically for fraudulent availment of input tax credit, but more than the amount, it was the structure of the operation that made it really demanding for me. It was a well-orchestrated network of multiple shell companies, benami directors, and several documents that had been carefully planned to appear legitimate. By the time I stepped in, the arrest had already been made.

    From the remand hearing stage itself, I appeared for the accused and continued representing them through the entire process until we successfully secured bail.

    We also highlighted violations of procedural safeguards under the CGST and MGST provisions. Beside this, we took help from an independent forensic accountant who examined the financial transactions. Our goal from the beginning was to show that these were not necessarily fraudulent movements of money, but could also be read as genuine business activity with commercial rationale. 

    You successfully defended clients in a multi-crore Bitcoin scam case, an area where financial fraud converges with evolving technologies. With the advent of the new Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) rules, how do you see defence strategies evolving in cases involving cryptocurrencies and digital financial crimes?

    Yes, I have defended some clients in Bitcoin scam cases, including matters related to one of India’s biggest cryptocurrency frauds, the GainBitcoin scam case. This was a massive Rs 6,600 crore Ponzi scheme that was allegedly masterminded by Amit Bhardwaj and his brother Ajay Bhardwaj, and it really opened my eyes to how technology and financial laws are starting to collide. Because of the introduction of the new Digital Personal Data Protection Act, I think defence strategies are going to change in very different ways.

    I appeared for my clients from the remand stage itself and continued through the entire process until we secured bail. 

    For one, we now have a solid legal basis to question how agencies are handling personal digital data, how it’s collected, stored, shared. In crypto cases, most of the evidence is digital, so if investigators skip steps or mishandle that data, we can raise serious doubts in court. Earlier, we didn’t have a clear law backing that argument, now we do.

    Also, cryptocurrency in India still sits in a grey area. It’s taxed, monitored under money laundering laws, but still not officially recognised as currency. And this confusion gives us room to argue that our clients were operating within what was legally understood at the time, even if the law was unclear.

    As part of your professional and social commitment, you’ve provided pro bono legal aid to under-trial prisoners and represented numerous indigent accused across Maharashtra’s trial courts. What systemic barriers have you observed in ensuring fair representation for under-trials, and how can the legal fraternity work towards making justice more accessible for marginalized communities?

    Working in trial courts across Maharashtra and providing pro bono aid to under-trials has helped me understand how the system functions on the ground. One of the biggest issues, I would like to share, is the absolute lack of legal aid lawyers compared to the number of under-trial prisoners(UTP). Most legal aid lawyers, I know, are handling 200+ cases at once, that’s why it’s not surprising that many under-trials meet their lawyers for the first time in court. There’s no time for proper case prep, and that really affects the outcome in my perspective.

    Let me share two specific cases that highlight these challenges. I appeared for an accused in a case punishable under Section 328 IPC and other relevant sections, who had been in jail for five years. While I successfully secured his bail, he didn’t have the financial condition to furnish the surety. The only viable option was to file a discharge application, which I presented before the Baramati District Court, and the court was pleased to discharge the accused from the case.

    In another case, I represented a person charged under Section 302 IPC who was languishing in jail for six years. I conducted the entire trial, and he was ultimately acquitted by the Pune District Court. These cases show how prolonged incarceration affects the most vulnerable.

    Even when bail is granted, release gets delayed, sometimes for weeks or months, just because of delayed paperwork and sometimes, miscommunication between courts and jails. I have seen people stay behind bars for months after getting bail, which is truly heart-breaking. Add to that the language barriers, missing documents, and financial struggles, and you have got people stuck in the system with no help.

    If you ask me about my opinion, then I would suggest that we need more trained legal aid lawyers, regular jail visits, digital tools to track cases, and also we need to make communities aware about their basic legal rights. If we, as lawyers, law students, bar associations, and NGOs, come together and build a more connected, grassroots-level support system, it can make a big difference.

    You have authored several papers and conducted numerous lectures and seminars. In your view, what role does academic writing and legal scholarship play in shaping legal practice? What advice would you offer to young legal professionals looking to contribute to this space?

    For me, academic writing has played a meaningful role in connecting and relating legal theory with day-to-day practice. With the help of writing and research, I have been able to step back from the routine of litigation and examine the different patterns and challenges within the legal system. Well-reasoned legal scholarship usually finds its way into judgments, reforms, and legal education, and I have seen how it can directly influence how the law is interpreted and applied.

    To all the young professionals, I would recommend starting with small, focused pieces, perhaps a case law or analysis of a recent development in your area of practice. Choose topics that reflect current legal challenges or procedural issues you observe in court. Try to show your practical experience with the help of your writing. Engage with ongoing academic conversations, attend seminars, and collaborate with others in the field. Writing regularly with purpose sharpens your thinking and builds your skills.

    You’ve appeared as counsel across various jurisdictions, including trial courts and the Bombay High Court, and have assisted in representing prominent politicians, bureaucrats, and celebrities. In the initial phases, what were the endearing experiences that laid the foundation to your practice?

    In the early years, what really changed me was the time I spent observing and working with senior advocates at the Bombay High Court. Watching them argue, handle the pressure, and understand tough situations have taught me more than any class or lecture ever could. I was fortunate to assist in matters that ranged from bail to high-stakes commercial disputes, and that variety gave me a good solid base to start my own practice.

    I still remember my first proper argument in court, it was a small matter, but for me, it was a big moment. The judge asked a tough question, and while I fumbled a bit, I also learned how to hold my ground. Those moments, when you get knocked a little and then find your footing, are mostly the ones that stay with you.

    Working with senior counsel also taught me how much court preparation matters. And when I started assisting in high-profile matters, I realised a new thing about managing the expectations of well-known clients, is a skill in itself.

    Looking back, it was those early experiences, good and tough, that gave me both clarity and confidence. They still guide me on how I approach my cases today.

    Looking back at your robust and diverse career, what inspired you to pursue law? What was your original vision, and how has that evolved over time? What are your aspirations going forward?

    To be honest, law was not always the plan. Coming from a family business in finance and share broking, I was naturally exposed to the financial world from an early age. I even pursued an MBA in Finance, thinking I would follow that path. However, my interest in law kept growing stronger than anything else.

    I didn’t grow up with the idea of becoming a lawyer; it came more from curiosity and also with a need to find something that combined structure with impact. Over time, I realised how powerful the law could be in changing lives and solving problems. That’s when it became more than a profession and started feeling like a purpose.

    My early vision was probably moulded by the usual excitement of arguing in court, but as I started handling cases, my understanding of the law grew more. I began to see it less as a tool to win arguments and more as a way to balance justice.

    Now, my focus is on deepening that expertise, working on policy-heavy cases, white-collar crimes, and contributing to the law around data and tech laws. I also work on the corporate advisory side. A major part of my corporate practice involves drafting and negotiating commercial agreements, including non-disclosure agreements. I regularly advise companies on confidentiality matters and information security protocols that align with both legal requirements and business objectives.

    This dual exposure has helped me a lot in understanding how preparation and preventive corporate advisory go hand in hand.

    In the future I would like to build a practice that will represent and also educate, mentor to create awareness about legal reform. The law is always evolving, and I want to keep evolving with it.

    What advice would you give to law students and young professionals hoping to build a career in economic offenses and financial crime litigation? Is there a particular roadmap or mindset you’d recommend to help them stay ahead in this rapidly evolving space?

    Economic offences are really wide, which makes it hard to grasp it all at once. If your goal is to start a practice focused on economic offences and financial crime litigation, I would suggest learning as much as you can about financial systems and how they actually work. This area is much more about understanding how money travels in the economy and how the regulators generally think. So, alongside your legal studies, make sure you have spent time on basic accounting, and the financial regulations.

    In your early years, try to work alongside lawyers, or firms dealing with white-collar crime, with the ED or CBI issues, and with cases of corporate fraud. Try to watch closely how investigations are conducted, and how documentation is compiled, the process of taking statements, and how enforcement agencies operate. This will give you an initial understanding of the concept.

    Given the high-stakes and often intense nature of  litigation, how do you maintain your composure in stressful situations? What practices help you manage pressure while also taking care of your mental well-being?
    Litigation matters are intensive, long hours, and involve tight timelines, high stakes. It’s very easy to lose your balance if you don’t actively protect it. With time, I have learnt that managing pressure means building the capacity to carry stress without letting it overwhelm you.

    I maintain a strict routine of one hour of meditation and one hour at the gym daily. This combination has become non-negotiable for me, regardless of how demanding my case load gets. I have also become very mindful of boundaries. I have stopped glorifying all-nighters. I delegate when I need to, I disconnect when I must.

    Law can really push you. If you don’t pace yourself, you’ll burn out before you build anything that lasts.

    Get in touch with Ashish Patankar –

  • “In my view, not every conflict calls for the rigours of litigation, many can be effectively  resolved through dialogue and a planned, structured settlement process.” – Ankita Sarangi, Advocate-on-Record and  IMI Accredited Mediator.

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

    Looking back at your formative years and legal education, what early experiences  shaped your perspective towards law and inspired you to pursue a career in  litigation and dispute resolution? 

    Born and brought up in Delhi, I completed my schooling at DPS RK Puram, studying  from nursery to 12th grade, with the initial years up to Class 5 spent in the junior wing  of the school. 

    I belong to the pre-CLAT era, when each law school conducted its own entrance  examination. At that time, choosing a college also meant carefully evaluating both its  location and the professional opportunities that followed. I had intentionally decided  against taking multiple entrance exams, but a trusted recommendation persuaded me to  attempt the entrance for the National University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS).  I was later formally informed that I had successfully cleared the entrance exam and was  eligible to secure admission to NUALS. However, after passing the entrance exam for  Indraprastha University (Amity Law School), I chose to enrol there, as its location in  Delhi-NCR and its ranking in the top ten law colleges in India, were rather significant  factors in my decision at the time. 

    My decision was primarily driven by the fact that Delhi provided a far more conducive  environment for pursuing a career in law, particularly in litigation, which was my area  of interest. However, with the benefit of hindsight, I now believe that institutional  rankings are of limited consequence in the long run, especially for those committed to  a career in litigation since law is a profession that transcends classroom learning and genuine mastery can only be forged through practical application and real-world experience. 

    While the school provided a solid platform, it was the inspiration I drew from my  parents, both of whom had worked with the government and were highly accomplished from an early age, that set a high benchmark for me and encouraged me to take my  academics seriously while also pursuing co-curricular activities such as debates and  beyond. I was always drawn to writing and was made aware that I had a natural ease with language. Outside the school curriculum, I found joy in exploring a variety of non  fiction books and articles, driven by a curiosity to better understand how the world  works. I was particularly drawn to topics in psychology and neuroscience, which still continue to captivate me. I believe this reading has also quietly shaped me in becoming more empathetic, a quality that proves valuable particularly in mediation. I’ve always  found satisfaction in tackling problems and working toward practical solutions, and was  grateful that others felt comfortable seeking my advice. Through helping them resolve  personal conflicts and find common ground, I developed a sincere interest in  Alternative Dispute Resolution. 

    During my academic years, I remained actively engaged in co-curricular activities,  including parliamentary debates, Model United Nations, coupled with several extra  curricular such as taking part in inter-school competitions, winning as a solo singer in  important music competitions as well as inter school level athletics which I believe does give one confidence and discipline while also encouraging prompt, judicious thinking  under pressure, and embrace competition. In my opinion, extra-curricular and co-curricular activities teach early on that winning and losing are both part of the game,  something I came to appreciate through sports and other competitions in these formative years, and which continues to shape my approach as a lawyer. 

    During your time at Law School, you undertook intensive internships with leading  law firms, arbitration centres, and the offices of Additional Solicitor General. How  were they transformative, and how did they influence your career path?

    Internships were not mandatory for students at that time, unlike the current practice in  most colleges, following the BCI notification. The primary reason to pursue them for  me, was to gain exposure to the profession at an early stage. I was very keen on  exploring a wide range of laws, including unconventional areas such as Sports Law and  TDSAT matters, which were not commonly taken up. I enjoyed the process of securing  internships through my own effort which has also helped me become independent. I  actively went for interviews, followed up with offices, and treated the process as a  learning experience in itself. Alongside this, I also participated in many inter-college  and intra-college moot court competitions as a speaker and was fortunate to secure good  positions and awards. After graduating, I have been invited to judge college moot  courts, which often reminds me of my own time as a speaker and participant, recalling  the long hours and sometimes several months of preparation that went into each round.

    One experience from the internship days that stands out for me is when I wanted to  intern with the office of an ex-ASG, which was very coveted, and very few students  would get selected or allowed to intern at the office at a time. I pursued the application  consistently, without using any references, and was ultimately offered the chance to  intern. When he later realized that my family was acquainted with him, he asked why I  had gone through the entire process, but for me, the satisfaction lay in doing it  independently. Similarly, I secured internships at several law firms and at DIAC (at the  time known as Delhi High Court Arbitration Centre), again through persistent  applications and interviews. At DIAC, I gained early exposure to institutional  arbitration and was introduced to how such proceedings are conducted in practice. 

    It’s worth mentioning that all my internships, except one, were unpaid and I never had  any reservations about that. It was generally understood that internships were about  learning rather than stipends; payment, if offered, was considered a bonus, not an  entitlement. The one exception was at a law firm where, at the time of joining, I was  clearly informed that I would be paid a fixed amount for the duration. If an internship  is undertaken mainly or solely for financial reasons, it is important that this be  communicated at the outset, since paid internships carry a very different set of  expectations. Raising monetary demands midway is neither fair to the seniors nor  consistent with professional conduct. Any agreement regarding payment should,  therefore, be clearly confirmed in writing, preferably over mail. 

    Each firm I interned with also gave me insights into its specialized practice areas, which helped me appreciate the finer aspects of the profession and further helped me  develop a sense of independence very early on. I believe internships are extremely  important for law students, as they offer a practical glimpse into what lies ahead after  law school. During my internship, I often worked long hours, staying back even after  the associates had left to complete the work they had assigned, often under strict  deadlines, and was usually among the first to arrive each morning, not with the intention  of being absorbed in the firms, but simply to absorb as much as possible and maximize  the learning experience.

    You began your professional journey assisting the Additional Solicitor General at  the Delhi High Court, where you were exposed to high-profile government  litigation at a very early stage. Soon after, you worked with an Advocate-on Record at the Supreme Court. Looking back, what lessons did you draw from  these formative experiences, and how did they shape your understanding of  appellate practice and prepare you for eventually qualifying as an AOR yourself? 

    Immediately after graduation, I joined as an associate with the then ASG and had the  opportunity to work on high-profile cases, including the “Nirbhaya” case among others. My time in the office gave me practical exposure to handling government matters,  understanding the functioning of such offices, and working in a fast-paced environment  where cases often arrived late in the evening and required the four associates to read  files and prepare briefs within tight deadlines for the next day’s listing, which was quite  demanding and often required working late into the night. While attending meetings  and briefings was an interesting learning experience, starting the career in a designated  senior’s office has its limitations, particularly in drafting, which is an essential skill for  any litigating lawyer. Seeking more substantial drafting experience, I decided to join  an AOR in the Supreme Court with whom I was already familiar. This arrangement  allowed me to pursue my own private practice before lower courts and tribunals part time while working in the office, where I would take initiative to draft SLPs and  government-side Counters, as the office was on the panel for the State Government. 

    While this may not hold true for everyone, I had recognized that taking the AOR exam  would be professionally significant, yet I could not have anticipated the profound  impact it would have on my career once I qualified. I was aware that becoming an  Advocate-on-Record, particularly in the current generation, carries significant prestige, responsibility and accountability. Most who qualify today have amassed significant  experience across various courts and tribunals before reaching the appellate stage  practice, which equips them with a deeper understanding of the nuances of such  practice, a perspective that is harder to acquire when starting directly at that level.

    By 2014, you had taken the bold step of establishing an independent practice.  What were some of the challenges you faced and how did you navigate them? 

    When I began my independent practice, my work was mainly in lower courts, service  disputes before the CAT, and High Court litigation, and much of it non-contentious. Initially, I dedicated time to working on several pro bono cases. One of the turning  points came when I was empanelled with DLSA/DSLSA for the CAT panel, where I  was one of the five advocates and was selected on merit through a shortlisting and  interview process. It is often assumed that legal aid is confined to the economically  weaker sections, but under The Legal Services Authorities Act, children, women, senior  citizens, disabled and socially backward classes are equally entitled irrespective of  income. This gave me exposure to clients from very diverse backgrounds and allowed  me to develop the ability to handle people and their concerns at an early stage. 

    What made the experience especially meaningful was the trust it created. The  beneficiaries who appreciated my commitment towards their cause and work, often  referred me to their acquaintances, and I would also receive referrals from some  unexpected sources, such as court staff in some courts and other professional networks.  The referrals have not been confined to service matters, but I have also been entrusted  with their personal matters, including criminal, property, and matrimonial cases, among  others. These acknowledgments strengthened my belief in sincerity and perseverance  as the foundation of practice.  

    On a more personal note, I come from a family of high achievers and accomplished  individuals, most of whom have pursued structured and conventional career paths. 

    Except for my grandfather, who had earned great respect in his time as a prominent  lawyer, I had not personally heard of anyone establish an independent practice and face  the unique challenges that come with it, though I often wish he had still been practicing  when I entered the profession as he was a great inspiration and influenced my decision  to pursue law. I grew up hearing stories of how clients valued his exceptional legal  acumen and how he consistently achieved favourable verdicts. 

    Choosing litigation, and doing so as a self-made woman lawyer, brings its own set of  hurdles, but it also gave me resilience, confidence, and the satisfaction of building a  practice on my own merit. I believe it is important for anyone to have some support  system, and for me, that strength came primarily from my grandfather and parents, who  consistently encouraged me to pursue my dreams without being bound by the  conventional expectations of society.  

    You’ve dealt with a wide spectrum of cases in the Supreme Court as an Advocate on-Record, a few of which resulted in reportable judgments. How do you see these  experiences contributing to your professional and personal journey? 

    While my work in the High Court and lower courts has spanned matters, including appearances both for the government and for private parties, much of my work in the  Supreme Court has involved representing predominantly private parties, including  matters against different State Governments. What I’ve really valued about being an  AOR is the chance to engage with a wide variety of matters, all under one roof in a  short span. Over the years, I’ve handled cases touching on GST, Customs, SEBI,  statutory appeals from NCLAT, Service disputes, Transfer Petitions, and criminal  matters including bail, with some of them resulting in reportable judgments. Among  those, most recently, I argued a batch of cases concerning compassionate appointments,  where the Hon’ble Apex court upheld the High Court’s decision in favor of my clients,  granted the relief we sought, and issued important directives to the State. 

    On the professional and personal front, it is truly the vagaries of litigation that will shape you the most over time. There are days when I appear for a Petitioner/Applicant on a particular issue, and almost immediately thereafter, I may find myself defending  the Respondent on the same point in another matter. This frequent transition between perspectives necessitates not only a versatile approach to advocacy but also enhances the way one navigates difficulties in life, while also serving as a reminder that the law  is never unidimensional. 

    Your work as a mediator accredited by the International Mediation Institute  reflects a strong commitment to alternative dispute resolution. Alongside  mediation, you also have substantial experience in arbitration. In your view, how are these mechanisms evolving in India, and what role do you see them playing in  the future of dispute resolution? 

    In my view, not every conflict calls for the rigours of litigation, many can be effectively  resolved through dialogue and a planned, structured settlement process, a perspective  also endorsed by several sitting and retired judges across different courts. This line of  thought naturally steered me towards arbitration and mediation, reflecting an  inclination I had held from early on.  

    The journey for me in mediation began with intensive training of 120 hours initially with an international institute based in Germany, which involved regular simulations  and close interaction with participants from diverse jurisdictions. This foundation  gradually opened opportunities to mediate international disputes alongside colleagues  from different countries, many of whom became professional associates during the  course of training. I became involved in this sphere when mediation was still at its  nascent stage, much prior to the establishment of a statutory framework and I was aware  that it was a burgeoning field with great potential in future. Referrals followed naturally,  leading to further exposure and practice. I would like to think of mediation, by its very  nature, as an inherent skill while also one that is refined through experience and  continuous practice. Once qualified as a mediator, one need not wear the mediator’s hat  at all times. The profession demands the ability to know how to switch hats, as the skill  set of a mediator differs fundamentally from that of an advocate. 

    During mediation training, we are introduced to several techniques, which come in  handy, one of which is the classic ‘Orange parable’, it illustrates how two daughters  quarrelled over an orange; one wanted the fruit to eat, the other the peel to bake a cake.  By simply dividing it in half, each lost half of what she truly needed, but had the mother  asked why they wanted it, both could have received 100% of what they sought. The  story highlights how exploring underlying interests, rather than positions, often creates  outcomes that add value at no extra cost. 

    My interest in arbitration began during college while preparing as a speaker for a  prestigious international arbitration moot court competition. The research and learning  involved sparked a deep curiosity about the entire process. This led me to apply for an  internship with the DIAC, where I spent a few months gaining first-hand exposure  while still in college. Gradually, I began handling arbitration matters and found the process very engaging, particularly the intricacies of cross-examination, which require  precision and technicality rather than generic questioning, given that its appreciation in arbitration differs from that in a trial. A few years later, I found myself as an arbitrator  in a matter that was successfully steered towards settlement. Over the years, I joined  several national and international arbitration organizations through paid annual  memberships. While these affiliations offer valuable professional connections, I believe  the primary focus should remain on steadily building meaningful work in the field as  accumulating memberships alone, without gradually building substantive work, may  not serve a deeper purpose in advancing one’s practice or the profession. 

    It is becoming increasingly clear that ADR is not merely an alternative but represents  the future of dispute resolution. With technological advancements enabling Online  Dispute Resolution (ODR) and the legal framework evolving accordingly, it is  especially being recognized as the way forward for cross-border disputes. Even for that matter in domestic arbitration and mediation, the ability for counsels and parties to  participate remotely is a convenience that was virtually unknown until recently and with  that convenience comes a greater willingness among people to engage in the process, leaving fewer excuses to avoid it. 

    Beyond your work in courtrooms, you have also been invited to various forums  and platforms. Could you share how such opportunities have enriched your  professional journey? 

    My longstanding interest in subjects extending beyond law such as international  relations/foreign affairs, which I have actively explored by writing articles on diverse  topics that were published in reputed newspapers and journals, I believe for me, has  opened doors to unique opportunities beyond conventional legal practice. These  engagements have allowed me to be invited to various forums, media platforms and  different Embassies, participate in discussions on cross-border issues, and build  meaningful connections with diplomats and professionals in the field and beyond. Such  interactions also help to enrich your professional outlook.

    Alongside your independent practice, you serve as a Senior panel counsel for  prominent government bodies like MTNL, NDMC, MCD, DDA and others. How  different is it to represent government and public sector entities compared to  private clients, and what unique responsibilities come with it? 

    Representing government and public sector entities presents challenges and  opportunities that are distinct from a private practice involving private parties. The  outcomes in public sector matters often have far-reaching implications, potentially  impacting public funds, policy decisions, or matters of governance, rather than just  individual or corporate interests. The process of receiving and executing instructions  often involves multiple layers of guidance and approvals, requiring both patience and  clear communication as directives pass through several officials. There is also an  increased sense of accountability, as being a lawyer for the government involves  safeguarding the public interest in addition to advancing the client’s position. Timelines  and strategies can be shaped by the internal institutional protocols and procedural  requirements, yet the obligation on the panel counsels to maintain the highest  professional standards is unwavering. It requires not only a certain level of legal  expertise, understanding of the court craft but also a balanced approach that respects  both the letter of the law and the wider societal stakes involved. At the same time,  private practice from the private Petitioner and Applicant’s side offers unique rewards.  The chance to work closely with clients, shape the strategy of a matter, and see the  tangible impact of your work makes the experience deeply satisfying, while each setting  brings its own distinct professional lessons.  

    It bears mention that I have often encountered conflict of interest, since many  individuals approach me for matters involving the same departments where I am  empanelled. This highlights a limitation one cannot afford to put all their eggs in one  basket. In fact, empanelment is sometimes perceived as the ultimate goal for many  freshers, whereas in reality, it should only be meant to an end. The real challenge lies  in the dynamics of whether matters are actually assigned which has numerous variables  at play that are not always apparent to individuals aspiring for empanelment. In my  view, empanelment is valuable only if one has a reasonable prospect of leveraging them  over the long term, since more often than not they come at the cost of opportunities in  private practice that one has to forgo.

    With constant changes in legislation, regulatory frameworks, and commercial  practices, how do you stay updated on the latest legal developments? What advice  would you offer to students and young lawyers who aspire to build successful  careers in litigation and dispute resolution?

    First and foremost, I believe it is important to discover one’s own “Ikigai” , a concept  beautifully articulated in the book by the same name, which speaks of finding one’s  true purpose. For me, law was never about money or wealth, it goes much deeper. 

    At the same time, conviction alone is not enough, the law demands continuous learning,  and purpose finds its true meaning only when matched with consistency and diligence. To stay current with the constant changes in legislation, regulatory frameworks, and  commercial practices, I rely on a blend of traditional resources and contemporary tools.  I am subscribed to reputed legal journals and follow bi monthly if not weekly updates  from regulatory bodies. If a particular webinar or conference interests me, I make it a  point to watch the sessions or recordings whenever time permits, as they invariably  provide practical perspectives that go beyond what one finds in print. 

    On a more practical level, I find some WhatsApp groups to be useful for timely updates  though one must be selective, as some are driven by informal exchanges rather than  substance. I have also maintained paid subscriptions to legal databases, and whenever  possible, I even like to read international publications such as The Economist and The  Guardian to keep a more rounded view. In litigation, time management is extremely  critical. There is always too much to read and absorb, so the key lies in prioritizing  credible sources and ensuring that learning remains consistent, even if not exhaustive. After all, there are perhaps only a few professions/roles that demand knowledge across  a vast spectrum of disciplines and engagement with society at large namely those of a  judge, a civil servant and an advocate. Therefore, as a lawyer, the reading cannot be  confined to judgments alone. 

    For students and young lawyers aspiring to build careers in litigation and dispute  resolution, my advice is to not follow someone else’s path just because it worked for  them. Your journey is unique, so find what resonates with you and let it guide your  growth in this dynamic field.

    Get in touch with Ankita Sarangi –

  • “I truly realized that law was my calling when I began to understand how the legal system serves as a tool to help individuals identify and secure their rights, while safeguarding their interests.” – Vrinda Daga, Founder at VR LAW.

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

    With over a decade of experience spanning litigation, arbitration, and corporate advisory, what inspired your transition from an academic background in economics to a full-fledged legal career? What drew you to the practice of law?

    Anyone who chooses to pursue a challenging or demanding field must first ask themselves a fundamental question about their motivation and commitment. For me, the transition from Economics to Law was shaped by a single, thought-provoking evening discussion with my mentor, who questioned me about my future career path while I was in the second year of my undergraduate program. Unlike many of my peers who found Economics dry and difficult subject to grasp, I had a different perspective. Economics not only deepened my understanding of fundamental commercial principles, such as demand and supply, but also sharpened my analytical thinking and ability to evaluate situations rationally. I truly realized that law was my calling when I began to understand how the legal system serves as a tool to help individuals identify and secure their rights, while safeguarding their interests.

    You’ve represented clients in high-stakes civil and commercial disputes. Could you share one of the most challenging cases you’ve handled so far, what made it particularly demanding, and how did it shape your approach?

    Maintaining the confidentiality of parties is essential to preserve their dignity and integrity. One such instance involved a family dispute where the daughter-in-law claimed rights over the assets of her mother-in-law based on a Memorandum of Family Arrangement executed among the family members. The mother-in-law and daughter-in-law were residing in the same house, while the son (and husband of the daughter-in-law) was living abroad.

    The mother-in-law, who had inherited both movable and immovable assets from her deceased husband, was dependent on the court’s intervention to access and utilize these assets for her daily maintenance. However, due to the COVID-19 outbreak, court proceedings were delayed, disrupting the entire legal process. Eventually, through the intervention and mutual discussions facilitated by the legal representatives of both parties, a settlement was amicably reached.

    The family settlement not only resolved long-standing disputes and differences but also brought much-needed relief to the family members, allowing them to move forward amicably in their respective lives. Personally, this case gave me immense satisfaction, as the elderly mother-in-law finally found peace and solace in her old age, gaining relief from what could have been an unending cycle of family disputes and disagreements.

    This experience was one of the most significant family settlements I have been involved in, and it changed my approach to handling family disputes. Since then, I have consistently advised my clients to consider amicable resolution and mutual settlement wherever possible, rather than engaging in prolonged and indefinite litigation.

    In your advisory work with startups on legal compliance and employment law, what are some of the common legal pitfalls you’ve observed? How do you tailor your guidance to meet the unique needs of early-stage businesses?

    Each startup venturing into the development of its unique business model in today’s competitive market is not only driven by innovation but also holds confidential and proprietary data and information. At inception, the intent is almost always to build the business in an atmosphere of complete confidentiality and discretion. However, due to a lack of awareness regarding legal requirements and compliance frameworks, many startup founders inadvertently overlook key statutory obligations.

    When a startup founder or their associate seeks legal advice, I make it a priority to first educate them on the bare minimum legal and compliance requirements necessary to establish their entity in a structured and compliant manner. I then advocate the importance of legal structuring to ensure smooth and sustainable business operations.

    In my view, guidance is not a one-time exercise—it is a continuous process. However, the role of a legal advisor extends beyond merely offering guidance. Accessibility and consistent availability are equally critical in enabling early-stage businesses to remain legally compliant and to gradually manoeuvre independently with confidence. A legal advisor must act not just as a consultant, but as a reliable partner throughout the startup’s journey, ensuring that the foundation is strong and the business is equipped to navigate complexities on its own over time.

    I firmly believe that it is an advocate’s professional and ethical responsibility to provide clients—whether a startup or an individual—with clear interpretations of the law, as well as a thorough explanation of their roles, responsibilities, rights, and duties. This, to me, goes beyond a moral obligation; it is part of our code of conduct as legal professionals.

    Having worked both as an independent practitioner and within a law firm, how would you compare the dynamics, responsibilities, and client expectations in each setting? What motivated your decision to establish a law firm?

    In my view, independent practice and firm practice are two sides of the same coin. As an independent legal practitioner, the focus is largely on litigation matters, including Alternative Dispute Resolution. On the other hand, firm practice generally offers a broader scope—you cater to both litigation and non-litigation matters.

    That said, if a firm intends to maintain a more focused approach, it can adopt a boutique law firm model, which specializes in a limited set of core areas. This ultimately depends on individual choice and the vision one has for their practice.

    At VR Law, we follow the boutique law firm model. We handle a mix of litigation and non-litigation work, such as general commercial litigation and contracts, while consciously narrowing our focus to ensure depth and quality. Our primary intention is to deliver optimum outcomes to our clients.

    Now, if I were to compare firm practice with independent practice, I would say it’s not a matter of one being better than the other—they simply operate differently. In firm practice, there is more structured client interaction, compliance, documentation, and continuous updates to clients. It also requires being consistently aware of amendments, circulars, and procedures in order to provide prompt and accurate solutions.

    Independent practice, of course, carries responsibilities as well, but compared to firm practice, the quantum of compliance and client management is relatively lighter. In the end, both have their own value depending on what a lawyer seeks in their professional journey.

    Your legal practice spans a wide range of sectors from real estate to intellectual property catering to a diverse clientele. How do you keep yourself abreast of changing regulatory frameworks and sector-specific legal developments?

    This is actually a tough one, but I believe there is one thing common to all lawyers—whether attorneys, counsels, or legal practitioners—and that is reading. Regardless of the format or medium we adopt in our daily routine, reading is a must. Like most budding and practicing lawyers, I make it a point to read or listen to the latest judgments, legal updates, circulars, or notifications.

    There are times when professional or administrative responsibilities take over, and I may not be able to keep up on a daily basis. But I always make sure to go back, revisit, and update myself. Thanks to social media platforms and digital resources, access to legal updates has become much easier.

    That said, I firmly believe that nothing can replace the bare act. I make it a habit to go back to the law itself—read the provisions, understand the legislative intent, and refresh my interpretation at regular intervals. What’s interesting is that each time you read a bare act, your understanding of a concept deepens, and your perspective evolves, allowing you to apply it in a more refined and effective manner.

    Most importantly, I would like to share an advice given by my senior, Mr. Chaitanya Mehta (Managing Partner, Dhruve Liladhar & Co.) in the early years of my practice i.e.‘Whatever you read in life never goes wasted.’ This advice has always stayed with me and continues to guide my approach to learning and paving my journey as a lawyer.

    You’ve contributed to legal education through seminars and guest lectures. What drives your commitment to academic engagement, and what is your idea to bridging the gap between classroom theory and real-world legal practice for aspiring lawyers?

    As a first-generation lawyer, my curiosity and drive to learn have always pushed me to attend seminars and lectures that broaden my understanding of different areas of law. Over time, I realized that while these forums provide valuable insights, the information is often presented in a complex and highly technical manner. So, when I got the opportunity to conduct sessions myself, I made it a point to simplify the content, weave in real-life professional and personal experiences, and make it relatable for aspiring lawyers.

    To bridge the gap between classroom theory and real-world practice, I focus on making law relatable and practical. Beyond seminars and guest lectures, I also got opportunities to mentor juniors/budding lawyers. Along with sharing case experiences, I encourage juniors to read and critically evaluate the law, and whenever possible, I give them opportunities to appear and represent clients. 

    This combination of theory, mentorship, and hands-on exposure not only motivates them but also builds their confidence as aspiring lawyers. For me, academic engagement is not just about transferring knowledge—it’s about empowering young lawyers to connect theory with practice and grow into confident professionals.

    Looking back to your early years in the profession, what were some of the initial hurdles you faced as a young lawyer? Now, with a diverse practice in place, what vision do you have for your future and that of your firm?

    The challenges faced as a young legal practitioner vary for each individual. When I began my career as an independent lawyer, I quickly realized that building a practice from scratch extended far beyond courtroom appearances. Key initial hurdles included:

    • Establishing a Professional Network: Building meaningful relationships with fellow colleagues, including senior counsels and peers, was critical to gaining credibility and support in the legal community.
    • Client Accessibility and Trust: Ensuring clients could easily approach me required consistent availability, clear communication, and regular updates on their cases to build trust and confidence.
    • Staying Updated with Legal Developments: Keeping abreast of the ever-evolving legal framework, including new provisions, amendments, and modifications, demanded continuous learning and adaptability.
    • Balancing Multiple Roles: As an independent practitioner, I had to manage not only legal work but also administrative tasks, client consultations, and providing well-reasoned legal opinions.

    When I transitioned from my independent practice to establishing my boutique law firm, the scope of responsibilities expanded significantly. Beyond administrative duties, new challenges emerged such as :

    • Team Management: Leading a team of juniors, associates, and interns involved reviewing their work, discussing their perspectives on cases, assigning clients, and fostering a collaborative environment through team-bonding sessions.
    • Feedback and Growth: Providing constructive feedback to team members while also seeking their input was essential for creating a supportive and dynamic workplace.
    • Self-Evaluation: Continuously assessing my own performance and behavior as a leader and colleague ensured I maintained strong relationships within the team and the broader legal community.

    Hurdles in a legal career never truly disappear; they evolve with time. However, these challenges become more manageable with a supportive team and a strong professional network. My vision for the future of my practice and firm is rooted in growth, collaboration, and excellence by Building a Resilient Team, Expanding Client-Centric Services, Contributing to the Legal Community and Personal and Professional Growth.

    With the unwavering support of my family, colleagues, and team, combined with divine blessings, I was and am still able to navigate challenges and achieve my vision as a lawyer.

    What advice would you offer to students aspiring to enter the legal profession? Are there any resources, reading materials, or experiences you would recommend to help them build a strong foundation?

    Although I personally believe that I am still in the process of maneuvering and exploring the dynamics of legal studies and practice, I firmly believe that one must continuously focus on Learning, Reading, and Adapting.

    Learning goes beyond textbooks—it is about broadening one’s knowledge through practical exposure, observation, and critical engagement with real-world issues. Reading, on the other hand, does not merely mean going through books, judgments, or case studies; it also means reading between the lines, evaluating facts, analysing circumstances, and interpreting the unstated aspects of a situation. Adapting is equally vital—it requires embracing the ever-evolving dynamics of law and thoughtfully adopting them into one’s practice.

    One of the most important lessons I have imbibed and also share with aspiring lawyers is this: always place yourself in the situation first, and then prepare your legal framework. This approach not only safeguards the client’s interest but also enables a lawyer to anticipate potential challenges and assess the possible adverse implications of any act or deed.

    Today, we are surrounded by umpteen sources of knowledge—both in print and digital media. Yet, the strongest foundation for any lawyer lies in the habit of reading bare acts thoroughly. This means not just skimming through provisions, but studying them holistically—from the long title, statement of objects and reasons, and definitions, to the substantive provisions, explanations, and even the repealing and saving clauses. At the initial stage, the significance of this practice may not be apparent. However, as one delves deeper into the subject, it becomes evident that every word in a statute carries its own weight, purpose, and interpretation.

    With the growing judicial backlog in India, ADR mechanisms are increasingly being viewed as effective alternatives. How do you foresee the evolution of ADR in India, especially in light of recent legislative reforms and institutional developments?

    Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), particularly arbitration, has fundamentally changed the

    approach to dispute resolution in India. Increasingly, parties—especially in small and medium-sized businesses—are making it a practice to include arbitration clauses in their contracts, reducing judicial dependency and facilitating resolution through neutral third parties.

    The enactment of the Mediation Act, 2023 has given further impetus to ADR by providing statutory recognition to mediation as a structured process, thereby enabling early resolution of disputes and further reducing the burden on courts but at a preliminary stage. Alongside this, the shift towards institutional Arbitration and Mediation is a development we should accept with open arms. Institutional mechanisms ensure greater consistency, procedural discipline, and credibility, in contrast to ad hoc practices which often lead to delays and inefficiencies.

    That said, the evolution of ADR in India will require time and investment in capacity building— whether in terms of institutions, trained professionals, or awareness among litigants. Encouragingly, the interest of the younger generation of lawyers in ADR is growing rapidly. Coupled with legislative reforms and judicial support, these developments are poised to revolutionize India’s dispute resolution framework, making ADR a central pillar of justice delivery in the years ahead.

    Get in touch with Vrinda Daga –

  • “Whether arguing corporate disputes, pursuing PILs, or handling sensitive criminal trials, every brief is a trust placed in my hands, to be discharged with integrity and dignity.” – Shashank Singh, Founding Partner, CTS Partners LLP.

    “Whether arguing corporate disputes, pursuing PILs, or handling sensitive criminal trials, every brief is a trust placed in my hands, to be discharged with integrity and dignity.” – Shashank Singh, Founding Partner, CTS Partners LLP.

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

    How did you transition from your early years in litigation to regularly appearing before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Delhi High Court, and various other forums across the country? What were some key early learning experiences that laid the foundation for your practice?

    My transition from the early years of litigation to regularly appearing before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Delhi High Court, and other forums across the country was not sudden but a steady climb. I began in the trial courts of Delhi, handling matters where stakes for clients were immediate and personal. Those formative years taught me that advocacy rests on preparation, precision, and respect for procedure. Drafting pleadings instilled discipline, cross-examination taught patience, and interim applications honed the ability to think on my feet.

    Gradually, I began assisting in matters before the Delhi High Court. The shift required a different skill: structuring arguments with clarity and economy so that cases could survive preliminary objections. As clients entrusted me with appellate work, I appeared before various High Courts and Tribunals, while also briefing senior counsel in complex matters, learning how to condense large records into strategic briefs.

    The opportunity to appear before the Hon’ble Supreme Court followed naturally. It began with assisting in Special Leave Petitions and transfer petitions, and over time, I began appearing independently in interlocutory and final hearings. The guiding principle, instilled in me early on, has remained the same: never step into court without absolute command over your brief.

    Looking back, the lessons that shaped me did not come from one case or one forum but from consistently engaging with diverse matters, from trial disputes to appellate work and public interest litigation. Each stage built upon the last, creating a practice grounded not in chance but in cumulative discipline.

    As the Founding Partner of CTS Partners LLP, how do you balance leading the firm’s litigation and advisory verticals, and what vision do you have for the firm’s growth in an evolving legal market?

    Balancing litigation and advisory is less about dividing time than ensuring both strengthen each other. Litigation shows how contracts hold up when tested, while advisory allows disputes to be anticipated and avoided. At CTS Partners, we built our practice on this philosophy. Our litigation work is rooted in preparation, advocacy, and navigating complex forums, while our advisory practice focuses on precise drafting, foresight, and regulatory clarity, sharpened by lessons from court.

    As Founding Partner, I ensure insights flow between the two. A dispute in arbitration refines our contract reviews, while advisory on transactions always factors potential litigation risks. This constant feedback loop is what makes us effective across both fronts.

    My vision for CTS Partners LLP is to be recognised not only for competence but for partnering with clients through the entire lifecycle of their ventures, from inception and compliance to disputes and enforcement. In a rapidly evolving legal market shaped by technology and sectoral change, we aim to combine the rigour of the traditional bar with innovation in delivery. With a deliberate focus on sectors like Aviation, Biotechnology, Renewable Energy, and Infrastructure, we seek to build a firm that creates enduring value for clients while shaping standards in emerging industries.

    Your grandfather, Hon’ble Mr. Justice K. N. Singh, was a towering figure in the legal fraternity. How did his guidance shape your professional philosophy and influence your career choices?

    Law in my family has never been just a profession, it has been a legacy of values passed across generations. My great-grandfather was a judge, my grandfather, Hon’ble Mr. Justice K. N. Singh, served as the 22nd Chief Justice of India, and several of my uncles and cousins have served on the Bench. Growing up, the lessons came not from books, but from conversations with my grandfather where governance, justice, and human dignity were discussed as naturally as daily affairs.

    The principle he impressed upon me was simple: “You may choose to earn or choose to learn. If you choose to learn today, Lady Law shall ensure you never have to worry about the other.” From him I learned that credibility rests on preparation, judgment, and integrity, not just oratory. Even after holding the highest judicial office, he valued respectful disagreement if it was backed by logic and research. That humility before the law left a lasting mark on me. I still recall my first matter, a bail application under the Official Secrets Act. Nervous as I was, I narrated every detail to him afterwards. His focus was not the outcome, but the strategy, questions of law, and procedural nuances. The lesson was clear: never enter a courtroom unprepared.

    These principles have remained my compass. Whether arguing corporate disputes, pursuing PILs, or handling sensitive criminal trials, every brief is a trust placed in my hands, to be discharged with integrity and dignity. My family’s service to the law is not a pedestal for me to stand on, but a standard to live up to. Legacy, in my view, lies not in offices held, but in the work you do case by case, client by client, cause by cause.

    You have worked extensively in the aviation sector, including regulatory compliance, aircraft leasing, and contractual review involving sovereign obligations and global norms. What are the sector specific challenges you encounter, and how do you balance domestic legal frameworks with international regulatory requirements?

    My work in the aviation sector began with PSUs such as Air India Engineering Services Ltd. (AIESL), where every matter sits at the intersection of domestic law, international treaties, and operational realities. Whether it is a long-term aircraft lease, an MRO agreement, or a procurement contract, the advice must be technically sound, commercially viable, and compliant with sovereign obligations.

    The sector’s foremost challenge is reconciling India’s regulatory framework with global commitments. For instance, an aircraft lease must satisfy the Cape Town Convention while also meeting the Directorate General of Civil Aviation’s requirements. Counsel must draft provisions that withstand scrutiny in Indian courts yet remain recognisable abroad. The PSU context adds another layer, requiring compliance with General Financial Rules and vigilance norms, often at odds with international market standards. Bridging this gap without diluting compliance or commercial feasibility is where legal strategy becomes critical.

    Aviation also evolves faster than legislation. Engine configurations, safety protocols, and maintenance cycles change constantly, making flexibility in drafting essential. This requires working closely with engineers, procurement teams, and regulators so that legal language keeps pace with operational realities.

    Balancing domestic and international frameworks comes down to identifying the non-negotiables: statutory mandates, governmental approvals, and compliance procedures on one hand; treaty obligations, OEM standards, and global safety norms on the other. Once these are secured, agreements and dispute strategies can be structured to preserve both sides. In aviation, the cost of error is never just financial – it touches reputation and safety. That is why I approach every matter with the objective of delivering solutions that are watertight in compliance, workable in execution, and defensible before both domestic regulators and international counterparties.

    You have worked on plant genetics and environmental sustainability. How do you see biotechnology law evolving in India, especially in light of climate change and sustainability concerns?

    My engagement with biotechnology law has been rooted in real-world solutions. A case in point is my intervention before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court on the city’s air pollution crisis, where I proposed structured plantation of tissue-cultured Bamboo developed through plant genetics. This variety grows at nearly 1.5 feet per day, reaching 40 feet within two years, is non-invasive, requires minimal maintenance, and has one of the highest carbon absorption capacities among terrestrial plants. Its significance goes beyond ecology—it is also a raw material for CNG, ethanol, and electricity generation, aligning environmental goals with renewable energy targets, employment generation, and revenue creation for the State.

    This experience reflects the direction in which biotechnology law in India must evolve. Our current framework, spanning plant variety protection, patents, biosafety rules, and biodiversity obligations, largely operates in silos, whereas real biotechnology projects cut across them. As climate change accelerates, the law will need to shift from merely managing risk to actively enabling innovation with measurable environmental and social value.

    Three changes are critical. First, integrating climate and sustainability targets into sectoral approvals so projects with clear ecological benefits face streamlined pathways. Second, creating predictable and time-bound regulatory clearance systems that allow innovators to move from laboratory to field efficiently. Third, balancing commercial exploitation with safeguards for biodiversity, soil health, and community rights. My experience shows that when legal strategy is integrated at the inception of a scientific plan, both compliance and commercial viability are far more likely. The future of biotechnology law in India lies in anticipating regulatory concerns early while enabling science to deliver climate resilience, food security, and economic opportunity.

    In the media and entertainment industry, you have handled intellectual property rights, contractual enforcement, and content regulation. How do you approach safeguarding creative rights in an age where digital content is expanding at an unprecedented pace?

    Safeguarding creative rights today requires more than reactive enforcement. With content created and distributed at unprecedented speed, the law must be embedded from the inception of a project. Contracts need to be precise and anticipatory, covering ownership, attribution, territories, and protection across emerging platforms, including streaming, interactive media, and AI-assisted formats.

    Infringement now extends beyond copying to unauthorised adaptations, derivative works, and misappropriation of concepts. My role is to anticipate these risks and ensure that protective clauses and enforcement mechanisms are in place upfront. Globally, frameworks like the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act provide structured procedures for takedowns and intermediary liability. India, however, still relies on broader provisions under the Information Technology Act, which were not designed for AI-driven content or mass online distribution. This absence of a dedicated framework, especially for AI training on copyrighted material, creates significant gaps for creators.

    In this environment, I adopt a proactive approach: contracts that are both jurisdiction-specific and internationally aware, active monitoring of infringement, and swift enforcement across forums. Protecting creative investment requires foresight and adaptability. My objective is to ensure creators can innovate and share their work with confidence, knowing their rights remain secure even as technology evolves.

    What has been one of the most challenging cases in your career, and how did you navigate the legal and personal complexities involved?

    In the course of practice, we encounter matters that test our interpretation of law, our procedural skill, or our ability to strategize under pressure. Then there are cases that demand far more, cases that place you directly before the rawest realities of human cruelty and compel you to carry forth with both the composure of an advocate and the compassion of a human being.

    One of the most difficult matters I have ever handled involved grave offences under Sections 376 and 377 of the Indian Penal Code, along with offences under the POCSO Act. The accused included the father of the victims, a young girl and her brother along with his associates. Representing the children in such circumstances is not merely about applying the statute. It requires a trauma informed approach, where every interaction is measured, where every question is weighed against the risk of inflicting further pain, and where the dignity of the victims is the paramount consideration. The courtroom in such matters is not just a place of law, it becomes a place where emotional safeguards are as vital as legal safeguards.

    What made this case uniquely difficult for me was how close it felt to home. My own nieces and nephews are of the same age as the victims. In the conference, as I listened to these children speak about their lives, their words were those of any child – school, friends, small joys, yet behind them lay a history no child should have to bear. In their eyes I could see my own kin, and that realisation was unsettling. It is one thing to know the facts as counsel, and quite another to feel them through the lens of your own family. The challenge was to channel that proximity into determination rather than distraction. The law required me to be measured, precise, and unwavering in court, while the human reality urged me to protect them as if they were my own. Every procedural choice, every submission, had to preserve the strength of the case while ensuring the children did not have to relive the trauma unnecessarily.

    In the end, what stays with me is not just the legal conclusion but the resilience of those two young lives. Despite their ordeal, they bore themselves with a quiet strength that left an impression far deeper than any verdict could. For me, this case was a stark reminder that advocacy is not only about securing justice on paper, but also about ensuring that those we represent are met with dignity, protection, and faith in the process.

    From environmental issues to governance reforms, your PIL work has addressed causes of broad public significance. In your view, what role will PILs play in shaping India’s legal landscape over the next 20 years?

    Public Interest Litigation has been one of India’s most transformative judicial innovations, allowing citizens to seek structural remedies for systemic wrongs. Its strength lies in a legacy built on landmark interventions: from Kesavananda Bharati’s Basic Structure doctrine which expanded judicial responsibility, to M.C. Mehta’s environmental cases that introduced CNG in Delhi’s transport fleet, to Vishaka which created an entirely new framework against workplace harassment. These cases show how PILs can reshape governance where legislation lags.

    When I intervened in Delhi’s air pollution crisis, I sought not rhetoric but a science-based solution: structured plantation of high-yield tissue-cultured Bamboo with extraordinary carbon absorption capacity and multiple commercial uses in clean fuels. The aim was to confront ecological, economic, and employment concerns in a single implementable measure.

    Looking ahead, the frontier of PILs will broaden to issues like climate change, cross-border crimes, digital privacy, and algorithmic governance. With India yet to enact a comprehensive AI law, it is conceivable that the first major questions of AI ethics and accountability will reach the courts through PILs. The challenge will be to preserve credibility by ensuring PILs remain grounded in research, evidence, and workable outcomes rather than quick, media-driven filings.

    If pursued with rigour and foresight, PILs will remain one of the most powerful levers of systemic reform, holding the State accountable, shaping public policy, and safeguarding constitutional values for the next generation.

    You have been active in mentorship and legal aid. What advice would you give young lawyers who aspire to appear in higher courts and work across diverse legal domains?

    The first thing I realised in practice is that there is no shortcut in law. This profession is not a place for instant gratification. The cases that test you, the seniors who challenge you, and the long hours of research for a matter that may be over in two minutes in court, all form part of the process that shapes a lawyer’s instinct.

    For those aspiring to appear before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the High Courts, or even specialised tribunals, it is essential to understand that higher court practice is not built on clever argumentation alone. It rests on a solid command over facts, procedure, and precedent, as well as the ability to anticipate the bench’s concerns and respond with clarity. This requires discipline in preparation, not just reading the brief but living with it until every argument becomes second nature. Equally important is the ability to listen. Sometimes, knowing when not to speak is as strategic as knowing what to say.

    In my own journey, one of the most formative experiences was working with Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. S. Endlaw, Retired Judge of the Delhi High Court. He not only taught me how to carry myself in court but also encouraged me to observe the craft of Senior Advocates who argued complex matters before him. He would remind us that the art of advocacy lies as much in how an argument is presented as in the law that supports it. From him, I also learnt the discipline of research, not simply gathering material, but knowing what to look for, how to sift through competing strands of law, and how to present it with clarity. Perhaps most importantly, working under him gave me perspective on how a Judge, not one from my own family background but from outside, views a matter. To this day, I try to place myself in that position, to imagine how a Judge thinks, reacts, and weighs an argument. That training continues to guide me.

    In terms of practice, I feel that the wide range of matters I have handled—from aviation and energy to medical science and biotechnology, has been a real advantage. Some of these areas are highly technical, but that is precisely what the profession demands: the ability to absorb, adapt, and make sense of disciplines far outside one’s own training. The law, by its very design, pushes you to step beyond comfort zones and to develop the capacity to present almost anything with clarity and conviction. In India, this adaptability is becoming even more important. With a rapidly expanding Bar, seniors with decades of experience, and the recent entry of foreign law firms, competition is only going to get more intense. Against that backdrop, being multifaceted is not simply a matter of choice but of survival and effectiveness, since clients increasingly expect lawyers who can handle diverse and often overlapping fields. This is not to suggest that there is anything wrong with focusing on a single specialised field. But in our system, cultivating breadth in the early years gives a young lawyer resilience, perspective, and the confidence to meet very different kinds of challenges.

    Lastly, I believe it is important to never lose sight of the fact that law is a profession of service. Mentorship, legal aid, and pro bono work are not optional extras. They are reminders of why many of us entered the field in the first place. Whether representing a corporation in a regulatory matter or a victim in a criminal trial, the lawyer’s role is not just to safeguard rights but to protect dignity and trust. If one carries that ethic forward, higher courts will not only be places to appear in, but arenas where a lawyer can contribute meaningfully to the living fabric of the law.

    Get in touch with Shashank Singh –

  • “I began without grand design, yet my early immersion in constitutional law revealed something compelling: a practice that could simultaneously satisfy intellectual rigor and serve consequential social purpose.” – Siddharth Sijoria, Advocate at Supreme Court of India.

    “I began without grand design, yet my early immersion in constitutional law revealed something compelling: a practice that could simultaneously satisfy intellectual rigor and serve consequential social purpose.” – Siddharth Sijoria, Advocate at Supreme Court of India.

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

    Looking back, what motivated you to pursue law as a career? Did you have a particular vision for yourself when you first started, and were there any formative incidents or mentors who significantly shaped your path?

    Law discovered me rather than the reverse. During my formative years, I found myself deeply absorbed in poetry and literature—disciplines that demand precision in interpretation, sensitivity to nuance, and the ability to wield language as both artistic expression and analytical instrument. Law emerged as the natural culmination of these inclinations, a field where critical reasoning and linguistic precision determine outcomes of profound consequence.

    As a first-generation lawyer, I navigated without inherited wisdom. My education came through careful observation and, ultimately, through the extraordinary fortune of mentorship. During law school, I joined the chambers of the late T.R. Andhyarujina as an intern, spending afternoons and evenings there while attending classes. After graduation, I transitioned to full-time practice under his guidance. His influence proved transformational.

    Mr. Andhyarujina embodied a particular philosophy: that sustainable excellence emerges not from momentary brilliance but from disciplined preparation. His observation—”What a brilliant mind accomplishes in twenty minutes, a methodical mind achieves in thirty, provided it commits to the work”—became foundational to my approach.

    I began without grand design, yet my early immersion in constitutional law revealed something compelling: a practice that could simultaneously satisfy intellectual rigor and serve consequential social purpose. That understanding continues to inform my work today.

    Your LL.M. at Central European University offered a deeply comparative and international perspective on constitutional law. How did this global exposure influence your understanding of Indian jurisprudence?

    My constitutional law foundation was established during my Supreme Court years, working on landmark cases that revealed the sophistication of Indian jurisprudence—particularly our Basic Structure Doctrine, which represents one of India’s most profound contributions to global constitutional thought. When I decided to pursue advanced study, I received offers from several prestigious institutions but chose Central European University, which offered me a scholarship and possessed an unparalleled focus on comparative constitutional analysis.

    The academic experience was transformative. My thesis examined how the Basic Structure Doctrine operates across India, Colombia, and Benin—three democracies grappling with similar challenges of constitutional preservation against majoritarian excess. What emerged was striking: Indian constitutional jurisprudence commands extraordinary international respect. Our Supreme Court’s reasoning isn’t merely cited abroad—it actively shapes constitutional interpretation in courts from Bogotá to Johannesburg.

    This revelation fundamentally altered my understanding of constitutional practice. Indian constitutional law isn’t an isolated national phenomenon but part of a global conversation about democracy, rights, and institutional design. The comparative methodology I learned—analyzing how similar constitutional challenges are resolved across different legal traditions—has become central to how I approach constitutional interpretation. It revealed that while constitutional texts may be national, constitutional principles increasingly transcend borders.

    Working under T.R. Andhyarujina exposed you to landmark constitutional cases. How did that experience shape your litigation philosophy, particularly in handling complex constitutional matters?

    Mr. Andhyarujina approached constitutional interpretation with scientific rigor. He demonstrated that constitutional adjudication represents not rhetorical exercise but systematic methodology—testing state action against established principles while defining the proper relationship between governmental authority and individual liberty.

    The cases themselves were instructive. Yakub Memon v. State of Maharashtra engaged fundamental questions of due process in death penalty jurisprudence, particularly the safeguards surrounding curative and mercy petitions at the final stage. Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India tested the constitutional validity of criminal defamation, requiring the Court to balance free expression with the reputational rights protected under Article 21, and ultimately upholding criminal defamation as a reasonable restriction. State of Karnataka v. Selvi J. Jayalalitha reaffirmed that even a sitting Chief Minister enjoys no immunity from prosecution, emphasizing constitutional accountability. RBI v. Jayantilal N. Mistryadvanced transparency under the RTI Act, holding that the RBI, as a public regulator, cannot shield information behind claims of fiduciary duty. Union of India v. V. Sriharan clarified the distribution of remission powers, underscoring Union primacy in matters implicating terrorism or CBI investigation. Nabam Rebia v. Deputy Speaker addressed the Governor’s discretionary powers in state politics, reaffirming that—save in narrow constitutional exceptions—Governors cannot act independently of ministerial advice, thereby strengthening federalism and the principle of separation of powers.

    Each matter reinforced constitutional law’s practical consequences. Whether protecting individual liberty, defending democratic discourse, ensuring governmental accountability, or preserving federal balance, our arguments carried implications extending far beyond immediate parties. That methodology—meticulous preparation, analytical precision, unwavering constitutional fidelity—continues to guide my approach to complex constitutional matters today.

    After completing your master’s degree, you returned to India and chose to start practice independently. What motivated you to take that path, and what were the major challenges you faced in building your practice?

    I had always aspired to establish my own independent practice. In my view, every lawyer, sooner or later, has to  build their own chamber to truly establish themselves in the profession. Having already gained valuable experience at the Supreme Court and various High Courts, I felt it was the right time to take on greater responsibility. When you practice independently, you are directly accountable to your client—successes and failures alike rest on your shoulders. Unlike in a traditional chamber, where you are guided step by step in filing, drafting, or tracking matters, going independent compels you to learn these processes innately while carrying the full weight of client expectations.

    I went on to establish offices at the Madhya Pradesh High Court, primarily at the Gwalior and Indore Benches, while continuing my work in Delhi. Over the years, I have also been entrusted with significant responsibilities. I was appointed as Additional Advocate for the State of Maharashtra in the Krishna River water dispute following the formation of Telangana. I have been empanelled as Counsel for the State of Madhya Pradesh, and I also regularly represent institutions and industry bodies, including the Indian Association of Hallmarking Centres and other organisations connected with hallmarking regulation. Each of these experiences has enriched my practice and strengthened my resolve to continue balancing litigation with advisory work across diverse forums.

    After building a successful independent practice, what led you to join Clavius Legal? How do you envision the firm’s role in India’s evolving legal landscape?

    After years building independent practice—including state government representations and my appointment as Additional Advocate for Maharashtra in the Krishna River dispute—I reached a threshold where the matters I was handling demanded institutional sophistication commensurate with their complexity and global dimensions.

    Clavius Legal represented something distinctive in the Indian legal market: a boutique firm with genuinely international standards and integrated practice architecture. Aside from a very busy arbitration and white-collar crime practice that is marked by both scale and the magnitude of mandates we handle, we are building a public law, regulatory, and policy practice that increasingly intersects with our dispute resolution work. As India becomes increasingly central to the global economy, legal challenges no longer respect traditional practice boundaries. Modern disputes involving sovereign asset recovery actions, multinational enforcement investigations, or cross-border regulatory matters require teams capable of seamlessly integrating constitutional law, dispute resolution, regulatory expertise, and international legal cooperation.

    The firm’s vision aligns perfectly with contemporary realities. Today’s complex transnational matters—whether involving sovereign states, multinational corporations, or international arbitration—demand scale and sophistication that isolated practitioners simply cannot provide. Working as part of global teams on complex transnational cases has become the norm rather than exception. Our integrated model reflects this understanding: constitutional principles inform commercial disputes; regulatory compliance intersects with international law; dispute resolution increasingly involves multiple jurisdictions and enforcement mechanisms.

    As Practice Co-Chair for both Dispute Resolution and Public Law, Regulatory & Policy, my role involves ensuring that these different practice areas work seamlessly together. When we’re handling a cross-border investigation, for instance, it might simultaneously involve regulatory compliance issues, dispute resolution, and constitutional questions about procedural fairness.

    Alongside litigation, you have maintained an active presence in writing, teaching, and research. How do these engagements complement your courtroom practice?

    In my early years, I often read columns by eminent lawyers who could distill complex legal issues into short, sharp pieces. When I first attempted to write during my college days, I realized how difficult it actually was. Over time, and after several failed attempts, I began publishing articles in newspapers. That discipline of concise writing has greatly helped me in practice, especially in drafting synopses for the High Court and Supreme Court, where the ability to present arguments briefly and persuasively is crucial.

    I have always believed that writing, research, and teaching are integral to legal practice. They keep one updated on developments in the law while also strengthening analytical clarity. Even today, I remain engaged in such work—most recently with the Commonwealth Lawyers Association and the Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Centre, where we are working on a series of publications to mark 75 years of the Indian Constitution. Academic engagement and international conferences also provide opportunities to exchange ideas and learn from colleagues worldwide, which in turn enriches my courtroom advocacy.

    Teaching forces intellectual discipline—you cannot explain constitutional principles clearly unless you have mastered them yourself. Writing requires precision of expression. Both skills prove indispensable in advocacy, where clarity is paramount and time is often scarce.

    How does your international engagement, particularly through the Commonwealth Lawyers Association, enhance your practice?

    My role as Co-Chair of the Young Commonwealth Lawyers Organisation provided invaluable exposure to legal challenges across fifty-four jurisdictions while building networks essential for contemporary practice. The position involved creating platforms for professional dialogue, organizing training programs, and facilitating knowledge exchange.

    The collaboration opportunities proved particularly meaningful. Meeting the President of the Gambian Bar at our Goa conference led to involvement in constitutional amendment projects and subsequently to representing the Bar against Maiden Pharmaceuticals after contaminated cough syrup exports tragically caused over seventy children’s deaths in Gambia. These experiences underscore how international engagement enriches domestic practice while building capabilities essential for cross-border matters.

    This global perspective has become indispensable in modern practice. Matters routinely involve multiple legal systems—whether handling sovereign asset recovery actions, managing international arbitrations, or coordinating transnational enforcement proceedings. Working as part of global legal teams requires a deep understanding of how constitutional principles, due process requirements, and legal procedures translate across jurisdictions.

    Your practice spans constitutional law, criminal law, arbitration, and regulatory disputes. How does your constitutional grounding influence your approach across these varied areas?

    For me, the Constitution is not confined to writ petitions—it is the foundation that underpins every area of law. Whether I am arguing a criminal matter, an arbitration, or a regulatory dispute, I see the Constitution as the lens through which questions of fairness, due process, and accountability are assessed.

    In criminal cases, constitutional protections—like liberty, dignity, and safeguards against abuse of process—guide how I build defenses. Due process requirements are particularly crucial when representing individuals in white-collar investigations or enforcement proceedings, where constitutional safeguards must be rigorously protected against arbitrary state action. In arbitration and regulatory disputes, constitutional values inform arguments about equality, reasonableness, or the limits of executive power when regulatory aspects are involved.

    Even highly technical cases, such as hallmarking compliance or river water disputes, ultimately return to constitutional principles: how authority is exercised, whether discretion is checked, and whether justice is delivered consistently with rule of law.

    This constitutional grounding provides a unifying framework across diverse practice areas. Modern legal challenges increasingly span multiple disciplines—a regulatory investigation might involve constitutional law, enforcement proceedings, and policy advocacy simultaneously.

    What has been among your most challenging cases, and what lessons did they offer about modern legal practice?

    Every case brings its own challenges, but two stand out for me personally. The December 2021 nationwide protests by hallmarking centers presented extraordinary challenges. When the Bureau of Indian Standards suddenly imposed stringent compliance requirements—demanding costly upgrades while vesting broad discretionary authority in regulators—the entire industry faced potential shutdown. Courts typically hesitate to intervene in technical regulatory matters, yet representing an entire industry carries immense responsibility. Securing comprehensive protection from the Delhi High Court provided crucial relief during a critical period.

    Another case involved defending an individual falsely implicated in criminal proceedings. Drawing on Paramveer Singh Saini v. Baljit Singh—which mandates preserving police station CCTV footage to prevent custodial abuse—I convinced the Madhya Pradesh High Court to direct production of crucial evidence. The case illustrated how constitutional protections, when effectively invoked, can provide genuine relief against injustice while reinforcing due process fundamentals.

    Both matters demonstrated essential lessons about contemporary practice. Effective advocacy increasingly requires understanding technical regulatory frameworks alongside constitutional protections. Moreover, the scale and complexity of modern legal challenges make collaboration across practice areas not merely beneficial but necessary.

    What advice would you offer young lawyers aspiring to excellence in litigation and public law?

    Legal advice cannot be universal—every practitioner navigates unique circumstances and opportunities. However, certain principles prove consistently valuable. Young lawyers must cultivate genuine confidence grounded in rigorous preparation. Establish clear professional vision and develop systematic approaches for achieving defined objectives.

    Preparation remains paramount in litigation. Master both factual details and legal doctrine comprehensively. I learned through experience never to study only provisions directly relevant to immediate arguments—judges frequently pose questions whose answers lie in statutory sections you might otherwise overlook. Complete command of governing law and factual circumstances enables confident responses to both complex inquiries and seemingly simple questions.

    Cultivate disciplined reading habits, careful observation skills, and systematic preparation methodologies. Seek meaningful mentorship—finding seniors willing to teach makes a profound difference, though such opportunities often involve timing and persistence.

    Most importantly for contemporary practice, embrace collaborative approaches. Modern legal work transcends traditional boundaries. Constitutional challenges require understanding of regulatory frameworks; white-collar defense involves international enforcement cooperation; policy advocacy often connects to enforcement proceedings. Working as part of global teams on complex transnational cases demands ability to collaborate seamlessly across practice areas while maintaining doctrinal precision and constitutional grounding.

    Above all, remain perpetually curious about legal developments and committed to continuous learning.

    How do you maintain perspective and balance in such a demanding profession?

    Constitutional law provides inherent perspective. Regular engagement with fundamental questions of governance, liberty, and justice situates individual cases—regardless of complexity—within larger frameworks of professional purpose and social consequence.

    I sustain balance through continued teaching, writing, and mentoring activities. These pursuits remind me that legal practice ultimately serves purposes transcending individual professional achievement—service to clients, to institutional integrity, and to constitutional democracy itself.

    The collaborative nature of modern practice also helps. Complex matters require coordination across multiple disciplines, transforming pressure into shared intellectual engagement. Whether ensuring due process protections in enforcement proceedings or defending constitutional principles in regulatory matters, this collegial approach makes demanding challenges stimulating rather than merely stressful.

    Ultimately, remembering that constitutional law concerns human dignity and democratic governance provides both grounding and meaning beyond professional success. That larger purpose sustains one through the most demanding cases while reinforcing why this work matters.

    Get in touch with Siddharth Sijoria –

  • “The challenges of litigation, coupled with the responsibility of advocating for clients across diverse forums, continue to strengthen my passion for this profession.” – Ms. Vikas Jain, Advocate at Delhi High Court.

    “The challenges of litigation, coupled with the responsibility of advocating for clients across diverse forums, continue to strengthen my passion for this profession.” – Ms. Vikas Jain, Advocate at Delhi High Court.

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

    With nearly two decades of experience practicing across multiple courts and legal forums, what first inspired you to pursue a career in law, and how has your motivation evolved over the years?

    From an early stage, I was fascinated by how the law functions as both a shield and a tool for justice. Watching how legal interventions could alter the course of people’s lives inspired me to pursue this profession. Initially, my motivation stemmed from a desire to understand the technicalities of the law and its practical application. Over the years, however, the focus has shifted towards ensuring accessibility to justice and using legal knowledge to create meaningful impact. The challenges of litigation, coupled with the responsibility of advocating for clients across diverse forums, continue to strengthen my passion for this profession. Today, my motivation is rooted not only in professional growth but also in the satisfaction of standing by those who rely on law as their last resort.

    You have handled an exceptionally diverse range of matters, from property disputes and intellectual property rights to criminal law and matrimonial cases. How do you adapt your legal strategies to address the unique demands of such varied practice areas?

    Each practice area carries its own nuances, requiring flexibility and a tailored approach. For property disputes, the emphasis is often on documentary evidence and statutory interpretation. In intellectual property matters, strategy lies in understanding technical details and balancing innovation with enforcement. Criminal law demands precision in procedural safeguards, while matrimonial cases require a balance of empathy and firmness. I adapt by conducting extensive research, analyzing precedents, and understanding the unique facts of each matter rather than relying on a one-size-fits-all approach. Equally important is the ability to listen, both to clients and to the evolving expectations of courts, which ensures that strategies remain responsive and effective across different fields.

    Property law and land disputes in India often involve intricate regulatory frameworks and procedural challenges. What approach do you prefer while navigating these matters effectively?

    Property disputes in India demand patience, detail-oriented analysis, and a deep grasp of statutory provisions. My approach begins with meticulous scrutiny of title documents, revenue records, and mutation entries. Given the overlapping jurisdictions of civil courts, revenue authorities, and tribunals, I place emphasis on identifying the proper forum and ensuring procedural compliance at every step. I also rely heavily on precedents, since land-related judgments often clarify ambiguities. At the same time, I encourage alternative solutions such as mediation to avoid protracted litigation, especially in family or co-ownership matters. Ultimately, a combination of technical accuracy, strategic drafting, and practical problem-solving enables effective navigation of these complex disputes.

     In the early stages of your career, what pivotal experiences helped deepen your understanding of the law, and how did they shape your professional approach?

    The early years of my career were spent in extensive court exposure—observing proceedings, drafting pleadings, and assisting senior counsels. One pivotal experience was handling procedural objections in trial courts, which taught me the importance of detail and timing. Another formative experience was preparing special leave petitions for the Supreme Court, which deepened my appreciation for precision in framing legal questions. These experiences instilled in me the discipline of thorough preparation and respect for judicial time. They also helped me understand that every matter, irrespective of its size, deserves equal attention, since even minor details can alter the outcome. These lessons continue to guide my professional approach.

    Having appeared before the Supreme Court, High Courts, subordinate courts, tribunals, and other forums, how does your preparation and strategy differ when handling matters at various levels of the judicial system? Additionally, what has been one of the most challenging cases for you and how did you navigate it?

    Preparation varies significantly with the forum. In trial courts, strategy revolves around evidence, cross-examination, and building the factual record. High Court matters often focus on questions of law and precedents, while Supreme Court practice demands brevity, clarity, and framing of constitutional or substantial legal issues. One of the most challenging cases I handled involved a service matter concerning a disabled ex-serviceman’s appointment, which was delayed due to procedural hurdles. It required not only persistence before multiple forums but also empathy towards the litigant’s hardship. The case reinforced the importance of resilience, drafting precision, and relentless follow-up to achieve justice.

    When managing sensitive cases such as matrimonial disputes or criminal matters, how do you balance legal precision with empathy, and what preparation goes into handling emotionally charged situations?

    In sensitive cases, the lawyer’s role extends beyond legal arguments to offering emotional stability to clients. I approach these matters with active listening, ensuring that clients feel heard and supported while keeping the focus on the legal remedies available. Preparation involves anticipating emotional outbursts, safeguarding the dignity of parties, and ensuring that sensitive facts are presented with discretion. Empathy helps in building trust, while legal precision ensures that arguments remain credible before the court. This balance is essential because, in emotionally charged cases, the outcome is not only measured in legal terms but also in the client’s ability to move forward with dignity.

    Over the past 19 years, what significant changes have you observed in the legal profession, particularly with the advent of technology, and how have you adapted your practice to remain effective?

    The legal profession has undergone a remarkable transformation with the adoption of technology. E-filing, virtual hearings, digital research databases, and AI-driven tools have revolutionized how lawyers work. Earlier, access to judgments and precedents was time-consuming, but today, technology has made research more efficient and comprehensive. I have embraced these changes by adopting digital platforms, managing case files electronically, and using technology to enhance client communication. While traditional courtroom skills remain indispensable, technology has improved accessibility and speed. The key is to blend the discipline of classical legal practice with modern digital efficiency to remain relevant and Effective.

    What advice would you offer to young lawyers aspiring to build a versatile and enduring career in litigation and dispute resolution? Which skills, habits, or resources should they start cultivating from the earliest stages of their journey?

    To young lawyers, I would emphasise patience and persistence as the cornerstones of a litigation career. In the early stages, focus should be on building drafting skills, observing court proceedings, and learning procedural law in depth. Cultivate the habit of consistent legal research, as strong fundamentals in precedents and statutes build long-term confidence. Networking with peers, maintaining professional ethics, and respecting the bench are equally crucial. I also advise developing communication skills—both oral and written—as they are vital in every forum. Most importantly, never lose sight of empathy, because law is ultimately about people, and balancing technical knowledge with human understanding creates a truly enduring career.

    Get un touch with Ms. Vikas Jain –

  • “Practice in Environment law is not set like other fields, it’s evolving. Majority of the litigation is not statute based, but its based on the delegated legislation.” – Aniruddha Kulkarni, Standing Counsel for Environment and Climate Change Department, Government of Maharashtra.

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

    Coming from a commerce background, what inspired you to transition into the field of law? Were there any pivotal experiences that motivated this shift and shaped your early legal interests?

    I have been interested in nature and ecology since childhood. My grandfather served in the Indian Forest Service and retired as the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Head of Forest Force, Maharashtra State. His teachings have played a major role in my upbringing since my childhood. As a child I was used to identifying different types of flora and fauna in our home garden. I experienced wild animals in the wild through various wildlife safaris. I developed a habit of noting down their physical characteristics. 

    My daily jogging route passes through an amazing nature trail, Vetal Tekdi (hill in Marathi) , an urban forest in the city of Pune. As a college youth I started doing amateur photography wherein nature has been my major subject like clouds, sky, sunrise and sunset, trees, animals, birds, waterbodies, landscapes etc.

    In my last year of law, I applied to the Internship and Placement Cell of the college, wherein I gave Arbitration, Environment and IPR as areas of interest. NGT had started their Western Zonal Bench in Pune the same year and hence the Cell forwarded my application to the NGT. Luckily I was selected in the recruitment procedure which took place before a 5 Member interview panel at the NGT Principal Bench and being based in Pune, I was appointed as the first Judicial Intern at the NGT Pune Bench.

    I never aimed to practice environmental laws. Destiny brought me to the NGT.

    You hold degrees in Commerce and Law, along with an LL.M. in Constitutional and Administrative Laws. How has this multidisciplinary academic foundation influenced your approach to legal practice, particularly in the area of environmental law?

    I pursued LLM in Constitutional and Administrative Laws after 4 years of practice at Bar. I believe that a candidate requires psychological maturity to understand what one expects from a masters degree. I always wanted to pursue LLM in Constitutional and Administrative Laws with dedication. I never aimed to stand first in the University, however my dedication along with 100% attendance and consistency gave me a surprise. 

    Although NGT is a Tribunal, it is the only Tribunal in India which adjudicates issues affecting the public at large. It is also the only Tribunal where there is no hierarchy (unlike District Consumer Forum, State Consumer Commission and National Consumer Commission), no appellate Tribunal in between (like DRAT, NCLAT, ITAT, etc.) and appeal from NGT lies directly to the Supreme Court of India. So there are high stakes matters, wherein there is interpretation on the statutes and reliance on the case laws propounded by the Superior Judiciary.

    Moreover, being a Government Counsel, knowledge of Constitutional and Administrative Law is helpful in understanding how the decision making process takes place at various levels in the Government and the Legislature.

    As the Standing Counsel for the Environment and Climate Change Department, Government of Maharashtra, you represent several key departments and agencies. What major challenges do you encounter while advocating for government bodies in environmental and civil matters?

    The decision making process on the Government side is a detailed process which involves many people at many levels. It is not a one person decision process. Courts and litigants expect that the Govt should take decisions at the earliest however they probably are not aware of the steps through which the issues traverse and the reasons for delay in taking the decisions. Convincing this aspect to the courts and litigants is one of the challenges. 

    At times it is also observed that given the expanse of the bureaucracy and number of authorities, departments and  ministries who work in tandem, at times they might be having a different views of the same issue. Getting them together on a consensus and then taking a decision in the larger interest by predicting future consequences, is also a task. It takes time, however because the court expects compliance of their order, a decision is taken by the Govt. 

    Having worked closely with regulatory authorities like the Central Pollution Control Board, Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, and the Airports Authority of India, how do you stay ahead of evolving regulatory frameworks? How do you manage and prioritize high-stakes responsibilities across such diverse institutions?

    Practice in Environment law is not set like other fields, it’s evolving. Majority of the litigation is not statute based, but its based on the delegated legislation. The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Govt. Of India and the CPCB keep issuing amendments to the various notifications and rules through circulars, guidelines and office memorandums. These changes are brought as there are advancements in the science and even changing nature of business and industrial developments. Being a Govt counsel, I have to remain updated about the latest developments. Practising in environmental laws for more than a decade, I can see the law evolving. Being the Standing Counsel and representing the CPCB and MPCB in many cases, whenever there is a case being heard, even if I am not appearing in that case, the Hon’ble Tribunal enquires with me about the latest development about a policy or legal development at the Government level. 

    As and when there is a new development, either the Govt provides me with the same or I do my own research and I document all such changes. I prepare a directory of all such developments in the form of notifications, government resolutions, office memorandums, circulars, guidelines etc. 

    Being a Govt. Counsel I have to give equal priority to all the cases wherein the Govt. is a party. However, at times projects of public importance undertaken by the Govt. are challenged, that time the Govt. as well as me have to take care that no adverse orders are passed because it affects Govt. investment and if any such adverse order is passed, then the public is deprived of the benefits which accrue once the project is put to public use. 

    Your academic research and publications reveal a strong engagement with environmental jurisprudence. In what ways has your scholarly work influenced your litigation strategies and courtroom advocacy and how do you manage both pursuits?

    Research always helps, not just in publication but even in practice. Being Govt counsel I have access to a lot of official material which is otherwise not easily available and accessible. Whenever I work on academic research, such material is helpful for giving practical points. Similarly, if there is a case at hand, wherein I have done publication or if there is an ongoing research work, I can give the latest position of law or policy while advancing my arguments. Academic research and practice always compliment each other. It is not just the resources or knowledge, but even it improves the skills.

    Although finding time for doing academic research along with practice at Bar is difficult because first priority is always work. Research also takes time.

    As a Committee Member of the National Green Tribunal Bar Association (Western Zone), what are the key trends or emerging challenges you observe in the realm of environmental litigation in India?

    A lot of public as well as private infrastructural development is going on in the country. There are emissions of all kinds which are polluting the air and effluents which are polluting the water. Although there are laws for controlling all forms of pollution, enforcement is still a big issue. Issues of urban air pollution are getting chronic. Short term measures are not enough for even giving temporary respite and  Pollution Control Boards and other necessary Authorities, Boards, Ministries are understaffed. Vacancy in regulatory bodies affecting control and abatement of  pollution and penalising the polluter is an urgent need which needs to be addressed by the policy makers. At times the Govt. officers are overwhelmed due to work load and compliance of judicial orders, which can be addressed by creating sufficient posts and filling them with qualified people. 

    Climate Change is affecting everyone and nobody is in isolation and unaffected due to it. As the impacts of climate change intensify, we expect to see a continued rise in climate litigation as communities and environmental advocates demand accountability and justice from the regulators. 

    Environmental Laws is a dynamic law which is ever evolving. The changes are happening due to the policies implemented by the Govt. which gets challenged in the Courts, the courts either struck them down or direct the Govt. to modify. At times the uncertainty is caused due to judicial decisions that affect the industry. I haven’t come across any other prominent fields of law wherein the changes are taking so fast. Keeping ourselves updated with this ever changing field of law is a challenge to everyone, not just the lawyers but even the Govt. and the Judiciary. 

    As an adjunct faculty member teaching Environmental Law and related subjects at leading law schools, how do you incorporate your practical experience into the classroom? What guidance would you offer to students aspiring to build a career in environmental and civil law?

    In Pune city there are around 40 law colleges. The NGT Pune Bar is a small Bar and therefore I know that I am the only lawyer practising in environmental laws who is teaching the subject in two law colleges in the city. I educate my students by giving them practical inputs from the cases which I appear in at the NGT. As said earlier, NGT is probably the only Tribunal in India which deals with matters affecting the public at large. So people as well as students know these issues as they keep getting reported in newspapers and media. Further, I organise visits of students to the NGT wherein they get to see the pending cases which I discuss in class. Teaching and practice compliment each other. Experience from my practice at NGT helps me giving live examples to students and teaching experience gives me confidence to make better submissions in the court room.

    There is cut throat competition in traditional fields of law. Environmental Law is an emerging field where there is less to no competition. Students aim to practice in the corporate field, however they don’t know that practice at NGT is a part of practice in the corporate field as big companies, corporations and industries have to be defended for various alleged environmental non compliances. They need good lawyers to defend their cases. Environmental compliances form a major part of compliances by the companies. There is a dearth of good lawyers practising in environmental laws. Therefore every year I keep urging my students, especially in the final year, to consider environmental laws as a good field to practice once they get into the profession.

    Having said that, I even advise them that after passing out of their college, they shouldn’t directly jump to practice at the NGT or any Tribunal for that matter because Tribunals being quasi judicial authorities are not bound by the strict rigours of Civil Procedure Code and the Evidence Act (now replaced by the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam). For any lawyer, it is essential that they know the basics of the procedural laws. At the start of their practice, if they directly and exclusively start practice at a Tribunal, there are high chances of them not learning the procedural laws. So starting a practice exclusively in any field of law or Tribunal is advisable after having learnt about the basic procedural laws by appearing before the Trial Courts. Experience of appearing before the civil courts definitely helps and compliments practice in environmental laws because the cases before the NGT are of civil nature.

    Reflecting on the early phase of your career, what experiences most profoundly shaped your legal outlook? How did they contribute to building the foundation of your current practice and professional values?

    Having conceptual clarity on the basics of law is very important for shaping a good legal career. It starts from the law school and not when one enters the profession. Students are getting strayed away from studying through textbooks. Moreover, the majority of the students study from exam point of view rather than understanding the subject from knowledge point of view. They tend to study through readymade notes prepared by someone else rather than making their own notes. This habit is hazardous because it reflects in their professional lives later on. 

    Having a habit of studying through books and making my own notes helped me not only understand the subject but even making a conscious choice of which fields I want to explore and which I want to exclude when I get into the practice. In the age of AI, everyone is losing their ability to use their brains. As far as legal studies and profession is concerned there is a dangerous trend of students and young lawyers using AI for drafting and research. 

    My internship at the NGT in my last year gave me a different view towards litigation. When one undergoes a litigation internship under a practising lawyer, one prepares the case from their client side and anticipate what will be the tricky situations from the other side. However, when one interns under a judge, both the sides are kept before your boss and you have to assist them in decision making. High stakes are involved in many cases. Compensation which is awarded by the NGT goes in crores. Habit of preparing my own notes helped me in assisting the judges during the internship and that habit still helps me in my practice as well as preparing lectures. 

    Get in touch with Aniruddha Kulkarni –