After transitioning from the Kerala High Court to the Supreme Court of India, what differences have you observed in terms of legal strategy, advocacy, and the overall courtroom environment?
First of all, a big thumbs up to LawSikho and SuperLawyer for reaching out to young lawyers, interviewing them, and sharing their experiences with the wider legal community. It’s an encouraging initiative that inspires and guides many who are just starting out in the profession. I trust that this exchange of experiences among lawyers is carried out within the bounds of professional ethics, and serves to strengthen the legal fraternity.
Coming to the question, in terms of legal strategy and advocacy, I have not observed any significant difference from the High Court. The manner in which we draft a petition or present a case before the court is almost the same. These are the basics. They apply uniformly across all courts. The only difference I observed was the time available during the admission stage in the Supreme Court. You typically get only one to three minutes to argue the matter, and within that short span, you must convince the court that the case warrants admission and the issuance of notice to the parties. If you have a strong case on merits, are well-prepared, and present it with due respect to the court and the opposing side, the court will hear you regardless of your experience or age in the profession.
You’ve taken up several pro bono matters, including a notable case involving life-saving treatment for an infant. What drives your commitment to such causes, and how do you balance them alongside a demanding practice?
I won’t claim to have taken up several pro bono matters, but yes, I have handled a few because I believe it is not just the duty of a lawyer, but also a moral responsibility as a human being to help those in need, to the extent we can. One such case that I will always be proud of as a lawyer was about securing life-saving treatment for an infant. The child was only five months old. Her parents had already lost two daughters to a rare genetic disorder called Spinal Muscular Atrophy. Naturally, they were terrified that their third daughter might meet the same fate. Through the intervention of some social activists, they reached out to me. To save the child, they needed Rs.18 crores, an amount far beyond their reach. I filed a writ petition seeking financial assistance from the State, arguing that the right to life is a fundamental right under the Constitution, and it is the duty of the State to ensure that this right is not violated. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nagaresh passed an interim order directing that the child be provided with complete free treatment, based on a statement made by Government Pleader Ms. Parvathy Kottol, who was handling the case at that time. The State extended full support to the family. What stood out to me in this experience was how, in such extreme situations, Judges and Government Pleaders are also willing to go beyond their regular roles to ensure justice is served.
With experience spanning Constitutional, Administrative, and Criminal Law, how do you tailor your approach to building cases in each of these distinct domains, and what strategies help you stay current across them?
At this point in time, I don’t believe it’s possible for me to plan and settle into a specific area of law. The areas of law one ends up working in often depend on the offices one has assisted, or the nature of the cases you get. Moreover, legal subjects often overlap, say, a criminal case may give rise to constitutional questions.
While I was a junior at Nagaraj Associates, I had the opportunity to assist in a wide range of matters across various fields. In my personal view, at this stage of practice, a lawyer should be open to working across all kinds of matters, be it civil, criminal, constitutional, arbitration, or any other area of law.
Your PIL led to significant changes in Telegram’s content moderation policies. Could you share about it?
No, the platform did not change any policy on its own. The PIL was filed specifically to curb child pornography on this particular platform. When the court issued notice to the State Government, the State supported the Petitioner and even stated that the platform was a “safe haven for criminals.” Later on, the Central Government issued the new IT Rules, which included the appointment of a Nodal Officer for all digital platforms to address such complaints. The court then relegated the Petitioner to approach the Nodal Officer under these rules. As per my understanding, the platform no longer retains such objectionable content. It is now being removed immediately upon detection or complaint.
Having handled a wide range of cases across different legal domains, could you share one of the most complex or challenging cases you’ve worked on and how you navigated its intricacies?
One case that stands out was that of a minor boy who aspired to study at Jawahar Navodaya School. His admission was rejected on the ground that he had not studied in a rural area, as required by the rules. We challenged these rules. In the second round of litigation, after the Single Bench dismissed the case, I filed a writ appeal. At that time, I had just two years of experience in the profession. I studied the case to the best of my ability and appeared before the Division Bench led by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jayasankaran Nambiar. However, during the admission hearing, the questions posed by the Bench made me feel as though I didn’t even know the basics despite all the time and effort I had invested in preparation. The court granted me one more week to prepare. When I returned the following week, I argued the matter with all the relevant case laws. Yet, each argument was carefully questioned and, one after the other, rejected by the court. Despite that, when the final judgment was delivered, the court directed the school to grant admission to the student, with a specific note that the relief granted would not be treated as a precedent. What made the experience unforgettable was that the Hon’ble Judges recorded in the judgment how I had presented the arguments in court. After pronouncing the judgment, they smiled at me and said, “We are granting this relief only because of your hard work on this case.” That moment was a huge relief, not just for the child, but also for me as a young lawyer. It gave me immense confidence to continue in the profession.
In one of your cases, the court emphasized that a guilty plea should not automatically result in a lenient sentence. How do you perceive the judiciary’s evolving stance on sentencing and plea bargaining in the Indian legal system?
There is a growing trend where, when charges are framed and read over to the accused, they admit guilt on the spot, believing that the matter will end with the payment of a small fine. In one such case, the Petitioner had suffered a head injury from an attack, yet the accused was let off with just a petty fine. This was challenged, and the court took serious note of the same, issuing a strong warning to the trial court against exonerating accused persons in serious cases merely on payment of fines. While plea bargaining is an accepted legal practice, in my personal opinion, it should not become a means for the accused to escape the real punishment prescribed by law for serious offences.
As someone who has independently argued cases before the Supreme Court and contributed to reported judgments, what guidance would you offer to young lawyers aiming to build a strong practice?
As anyone would say, hard work and stepping out of your comfort zone are the only ways to grow. In my case, I decided to move to Delhi after five years of practice at the High Court even though I had a handful of cases there. Some well-wishers asked me, “Why would you leave a steady practice to become a briefless lawyer in a new place?” Honestly, I wasn’t sure if my decision was right. Coming from Kerala, where we enjoy clean air, good food, water, and a clean environment, the shift was tough. I initially found accommodation in a very poor locality, and the weather, food, and overall conditions in Delhi weakened me both physically and mentally. At one point, I even questioned if I had made a mistake. But within two months, I started receiving briefs in the Supreme Court from senior colleagues at the High Court. That’s when I realised that the hard work I had put in back home was beginning to pay off in a new form. So yes, in my experience, hard work remains the only way to build a strong and lasting practice. One guiding principle I always carry with me is a piece of advice from my senior, Mr. Adv. Nagaraj Narayanan, once gave me: “Never ever suppress any facts from the court, even if they go against you.” That integrity is something I strive to uphold in every case I handle.
What initially inspired you to pursue a career in law, and how has your vision for your legal practice evolved over the years? What are your aspirations going forward?
It was my father who first inspired me to pursue law as a profession. I remain ever grateful to him for his constant support. Today, my wife, Ipsita Ojal, who is also a lawyer, stands beside me, making her own sacrifices by joining me in Delhi to support my journey. Over the years, my vision for legal practice has matured from simply building a career to creating a meaningful and principled practice. I aspire to continue growing in this profession, staying true to the values that brought me here, and to keep practising with the same commitment and integrity that I began with.
I believe more young lawyers should actively come to the Supreme Court. It’s one of the most effective ways to make litigation at the apex court more accessible and affordable for litigants, especially those from underprivileged backgrounds. Until we have separate regional benches established across the country, the presence of committed and capable young lawyers at the Supreme Court in Delhi is essential to bridge the gap.
Balancing the demands of a legal career with personal life can be challenging. How do you manage this balance, and what are your preferred ways to unwind or recharge outside of work?
For me, the answer is simple. My family. Amid the pressures of legal practice, spending time with my loved ones helps me stay grounded and recharged. Their presence gives me both strength and perspective, and it’s through those quiet moments with family that I find balance.
You’ve had an impressive journey-from top-tier law firms to leading legal roles in global MNCs. How has your professional experience shaped your approach to legal advisory today?
Thanks. My career, as a corporate and commercial lawyer, has spanned over twenty years across law firm and in-house roles, and each stage has played a significant part in guiding my approach to proactive and business-centric legal support.
I started my professional journey in 2004 at AZB & Partners (“AZB”), New Delhi. I was involved in complex transactional work, including advising on matters pertaining to FDI, joint ventures, M&A, software licensing, and general corporate advisory. In 2010, while in AZB, I had an opportunity to do a secondment with Boeing International Corporation India Private Limited for a year, where I got my first exposure to an in-house legal environment. It was a transformative phase that helped me understand how legal advice fits within broader business objectives, something not always visible from a pure law firm perspective.
This early insight laid the foundation for what became the most defining part of my career at Bentley Systems India Private Limited, a USA- based software MNC (“Bentley Systems”). At Bentley Systems, I served as Legal Counsel for almost twelve and a half years, across Asia South, and later expanded my remit acrosstheSouth-East Asia region.
My primary responsibilities included managing a wide spectrum of responsibilities, including contract management and negotiation, software licensing, regulatory compliance, employment law matters, corporate leasing, contractual and commercial risk identification, and mitigation. This role further refined my ability to deliver practical, business-focused legal solutions across borders and industry contexts in an in-house legal environment. This role further deepened my appreciation for the unique challenges that businesses face.
Over time, I came to see how legal support, when truly embedded in the business, could shift from being a reactive function to a proactive enabler of growth, innovation, and risk resilience. not just in navigating legal risks I began to see how legal issues were rarely isolated as they were often intertwined with operational realities, commercial strategy, and internal culture. This further broadened my understanding of how legal support must evolve- not just to protect the business, but also to empower it.
What inspired you to start Bridge Counsels?
Working in both top-tier law firms and as in-house counsel gave me a deep insight into how legal services function at both ends of the spectrum. On one hand, I experienced the deep technical expertise and structured advisory of law firms while on the other hand, I saw the need for legal support to be responsive, integrated, and aligned with business realities, especially in fast-moving environments.
What stood out to me over the years was a significant gap in the market, particularly among startups, MSMEs, and even in growth-stage companies, which often lacked access to quality legal advice because they didn’t have the scale or budget to maintain a full-fledged in-house legal team. Yet their need for ongoing, dedicated legal support was no less critical.
I firmly believe that founders should invest their time and energy in the growth of their respective business and leave the legal, commercial and corporate matters to experienced experts. This realization led me to launch Bridge Counsels which is designed to provide Fractional General Counsel (“Fractional GC”) as a service
My focus at Bridge Counsels is to serve as a legal partner offering structured, proactive, and business-focused legal support tailored to each client’s scale and stage of growth. Therefore, at Bridge Counsels, my aim is to bridge the gap between the high-touch, strategic insight of an in-house legal team and the flexibility of an external counsel. The name Bridge Counsels reflects this philosophy, bridging business needs with legal clarity.
How do you define the role of a Fractional general counsel, and how does this model differ from having an in-house legal team or relying solely on traditional law firms?
The role of a Fractional GC is to provide continuous and strategic legal engagement to businesses as their de facto Head of Legal or General Counsel, delivering end-to-end legal support on a flexible, outsourced basis. This setup would help businesses, especially startups or growing companies, to get expert legal support without hiring a full-time employee.
A Fractional GC can offer companies, often startups or small businesses or foreign multinational companies proposing to enter India, the opportunity to work with experienced former in-house lawyers without incurring the cost of a full-time general counsel, helping them manage their daily legal needs and make informed strategic decisions.
Unlike in-house counsel who works full-time for a single company, Fractional GCs can support multiple clients while acting as trusted, long-term advisors. They are more integrated into the company’s daily operations, unlike traditional law firms, often participating in strategic planning and internal meetings. This model suits businesses that want consistent legal guidance tailored to their evolving needs, without the need to form a full legal department.
A Fractional GC not only provides strategic legal support but also acts as a bridge between the company and external legal service providers such as law firms, consultants, and specialists. They help control legal costs, identify the right external resources, and manage them efficiently. At its core, their role is to protect the company’s interests, ensure consistency in legal strategy, and make sure that external advisors align with the business’s goals and risk appetite.
What type of companies would benefit most from hiring a Fractional GC, and at what stage in their journey is it most impactful to bring one on board?
As stated above, startups and emerging enterprises typically benefit the most from hiring a Fractional GC. A Fractional GC can step into an early-stage business and provide high-level commercial advice to the board, especially when there is no established in-house legal leadership. They support key areas, including contracts, employment, data privacy, intellectual property, real estate transactions and regulatory compliance.
The most impactful time to bring in a Fractional GC is during key growth phases. This includes raising funds, expanding the team, entering new markets, or forming significant partnerships. At these stages, decisions carry a higher legal risk, and it becomes crucial to have someone who understands the business and can provide strategic guidance.
While a Fractional GC is often associated with small and medium-sized enterprises, this model is not limited to early-stage companies. Businesses at any stage of growth can benefit from this flexible legal support. Large-scale enterprises may also use a Fractional GC for urgent, short-term projects that need experienced oversight. Fractional GC can efficiently handle routine legal tasks such as drafting and reviewing contracts, updating internal policies, managing compliance calendars, supporting HR and employment matters, coordinating with external counsel, and maintaining legal templates. This allows lean in-house teams to focus on strategic priorities while ensuring day-to-day legal operations run smoothly and compliantly.
As you build bridges, what are the kinds of responsibilities and deliverables you envision handling as a Fractional GC on a recurring basis? How are you preparing to meet those needs from day one?
As a Fractional GC, I am expected to handle a range of responsibilities that align legal strategy with business goals. This includes managing risk proactively before it becomes an issue, supporting contract negotiations, ensuring regulatory compliance, and helping with corporate governance. I also aim to develop legal frameworks that support growth, guide internal teams, and collaborate closely with leadership to make informed, legally sound decisions that move the company forward.
I would prepare myself by deeply understanding the company’s industry, operations, and goals. My primary goal is to be agile, responsive, and business-minded, delivering practical legal advice that aligns with long-term strategy.
As you engage with fast-scaling startups and growth-stage businesses, how do you plan to help them navigate legal risks and regulatory compliance, especially when they operate across sectors or jurisdictions?
When working with fast-growing startups or businesses across sectors, my focus is on offering practical legal guidance that aligns with their pace and growth. I begin by understanding the business model and key regulatory touchpoints, whether in contracts, data privacy, employment, or fundraising. From there, I help build simple, workable systems such as basic compliance processes or policy inputs that support sound decision-making. The aim is to be a steady legal partner, offering clarity and foresight as companies scale and navigate legal challenges. Confidence, knowing they are protected and compliant at every step.
In a Fractional GC model where you’re not embedded full-time, how do you plan to ensure deep alignment, continuity, and confidentiality with leadership teams?
That’s a great question and one I take very seriously. My aim would always be to stay closely connected with founders or businesses through regular interactions and be available when needed. The goal is to be seen not as an outsider, but as a trusted legal partner who understands the business and supports it with consistency and confidentiality.
Startups often move fast. Can a Fractional GC really make a difference during key moments like fundraising, investor negotiations, or M&A? Could you share an example
In India, startups often face complex legal challenges during key growth phases such as raising funds, expanding teams, entering new jurisdictions, or finalizing strategic partnerships. These challenges include navigating investor negotiations, managing ESOPs, ensuring regulatory compliance, and reviewing commercial contracts. A Fractional GC brings senior legal oversight without the cost of a full-time hire, making it ideal not just for early-stage companies but also for growing businesses that need structured legal support without expanding their in-house teams. Established enterprises also use Fractional GCs services for short-term or high-stakes projects requiring experienced legal direction.
What should founders or CXOs look for when choosing a Fractional GC beyond just credentials? What soft skills and instincts make a real difference?
Beyond credentials, founders should look for a Fractional GC who’s practical, business-minded, and easy to talk to, someone who can offer clear advice without legal jargon. They should have the judgment to say “no” when it matters, to protect the company’s interests. Identifying legal risks early, communicating them to leadership, and striking the right balance between legal protection and business growth are key. A good GC doesn’t slow things down; they help you grow smartly and safely.
You’ve also built internship and mentorship opportunities at Bridge Counsels. What role do young lawyers and law students play in your model and what advice would you offer them as they enter the evolving legal profession?
In the Fractional GC model, young lawyers and law students support senior counsel across multiple clients by assisting with contract drafting, compliance research, and legal operations. They gain exposure to varied industries and fast-paced legal issues, learning how to align legal advice with business strategy. Unlike traditional roles with narrowly defined tasks, this model provides a broader, more strategic perspective on how law drives growth. They actively contribute rather than merely observe and build the skills to become future legal advisors with strong commercial judgment and cross-sector experience. It’s a dynamic environment that prepares them to think like trusted advisors rather than technical legal executors. They aren’t passive participants as they engage meaningfully while developing the capabilities needed to grow into future in-house leaders or strategic legal partners.
As you enter the evolving legal profession, my advice is to stay curious and open to learning. Today’s legal landscape demands not only strong legal knowledge but also a deep understanding of business. Focus on sharpening your research, writing, and communication skills while also learning to think commercially and practically. Always ask questions, take initiative, and seek feedback. Don’t aim to know the law; strive to understand how it applies to real-world decisions. Most importantly, be adaptable, because those who grow with change will be the ones who lead it.
After completing your Bachelor’s in Technology in Electronics and Communication, you decided to pursue a career in law. What inspired this shift, and how has your technical background contributed to your legal career?
While I was doing my undergraduate studies in Electronics and Communication Engineering, I developed a strong appreciation for structured problem-solving and analytical thinking. A pivotal moment came when I worked on a project involving video capturing and recognition technology for identifying letters and numbers on car plates. After dedicating significant time and effort to develop this innovation, I discovered that a subsequent batch had replicated my idea for their project. This sparked a deep curiosity in me on how I could protect my work and ensure exclusive rights over something I had created.
This realization led me to explore the legal frameworks that govern innovation and ownership. While I thoroughly enjoyed the technical challenges of engineering, I found myself increasingly drawn to the interplay between technology, commerce, and human interaction—how ideas are protected, commercialized, and integrated into society. This marked the beginning of my journey into the field of law and specially, intellectual property law. I decided to pursue law, with a clear objective to practice IP law once I graduate.
When I began my legal journey, I recognized a clear gap in the market—clients, much like myself in my engineering days, were increasingly seeking nuanced, technology-driven solutions to complex intellectual property challenges, particularly around ownership and innovation. In that moment, I knew I had found my calling.
How did your L.L.M. at Boston University School of Law shape your perspective on Intellectual Property law, and how have the skills and experiences gained there influenced your approach to high-stakes International and domestic IP litigation and advisory?
My LL.M. at Boston University School of Law was a transformative experience that significantly shaped my approach to Intellectual Property law. Beyond the rigorous academic curriculum, one of the most valuable takeaways was learning how to move beyond theoretical understanding and apply legal principles in a practical and commercial context. I had taken classes on trial court advocacy, legal writing, and related practical modules, the insights from which continue to guide my approach to legal practice even today.
Having students from all over the world, not only helped me build lasting professional relationships which I continue to maintain to this day, but also fostered a global legal mindset that has helped me while advising or litigating matters involving international stakeholders.
I strongly encourage those looking to specialize in a particular field of law to pursue a Master’s degree, as it offers both depth of knowledge and invaluable exposure to diverse legal perspectives.
Having worked with various prominent IP law firms, what motivated you to transition to establishing your own practice, what were the hurdles that you faced while founding Nikhil Chawla and Associates?
When I founded Nikhil Chawla and Associates, like with any new venture, the initial phase came with its share of challenges—building a client base, establishing credibility, and navigating the uncertainty that comes with stepping out independently. There were days where I found myself questioning my decision of starting on my own.
During this time, I had the opportunity to interact with several senior advocates. One piece of advice from Swathi Sukumar, Senior Advocate, particularly stayed with me—she said, “you just have to show up at the office every day, the work will eventually come.” That simple yet profound advice became a guiding principle for me in the early days, reinforcing the importance of persistence, presence, and consistency in building a practice.
6 months of feeling doubtful about everything and no sign of progress is the entry price that you have to pay before things start to move in the right direction. Having said that, with relentless hard work and unwavering dedication, you will find yourself moving in the right direction—without it, you risk getting lost in the vast sea of lawyers around you.
As a dual-qualified lawyer and an AI enthusiast and Certified Information Privacy Professional, how do you see the intersection of AI, data protection, and privacy laws evolving in the near future?
The intersection of AI, data protection, and privacy law has become, if not already, the most consequential area of legal and regulatory evolution in the modern era.
With the enactment of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, India has taken a foundational step toward codifying privacy rights and data protection obligations. However, the law still leaves several gaps when it comes to regulating AI-specific concerns such as algorithmic transparency, automated decision-making, and the right to explanation. In parallel, India is also formulating its National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence and has published ethical AI guidelines through NITI Aayog. These developments signal the government’s intent to promote responsible AI while safeguarding individual rights.
All of us are already aware that AI has become omnipresent and part of our everyday lives. However, its widespread adoption also raises critical legal and ethical questions ranging from informed consent, purpose limitation, and data minimization to algorithmic accountability. In parallel, concerns around bias, discrimination, and automated profiling are becoming more pronounced. These issues are steadily making their way to the forefront of legal discourse, and our legal systems will soon be called upon to adjudicate upon this, drawing a clear Lakshman Rekha between what is permissible and what is not.
Going forward, professionals with a grounding in both law and technology will be key to shaping this transition, ensuring that innovation does not come at the cost of civil liberties. I believe the future will require lawyers who understand code, technologists who understand rights, and courts who can bridge both worlds.
Could you share your experience while representing a leading music label in a high-profile copyright infringement dispute against an internationally renowned hip-hop artist. How did you prepare for such a case and what were the key outcomes?
When I started my private practice, the first case I was entrusted with involved handling a dispute against the renowned hip hop/rap artist Bohemia. I was representing a music company that had entered into an exclusive artist agreement with Bohemia, which he breached by collaborating with other parties in violation of the agreement’s terms.
During our preparation for this case, we knew that seeking specific enforcement of personal service obligations was not permissible under the Specific Relief Act. However, we were able to identify a negative covenant in the agreement that prohibited him from collaborating with third-party labels during the term of the agreement. We also found legal precedents supporting the enforcement of such negative covenants in agreements involving personal qualifications.
As a result, on the very first day, we secured an ad interim order restraining Bohemia from working with any third-party labels for the remainder of the agreement’s term. This interim injunction ultimately paved the way for an early settlement.
After the settlement, Bohemia even released a track referencing the litigation. The success in the Bohemia matter opened the door for me to handle other high-profile media and entertainment disputes, including cases involving prominent artists such as Badshah and Satinder Sartaaj.
What advice would you offer to young professionals aspiring to follow in your footsteps and build successful careers in intellectual property, technology law, and commercial litigation?
Law is a profession that demands dedication and discipline, it is meant for those who truly love the law. Without that passion, it’s difficult to sustain the commitment the profession requires.
Talking from my own experience, when I had started my legal career, I sometimes relied on shortcuts instead of diligently reading statutes and studying case law. Over time, I came to realize that true success in this profession requires depth, being thorough with the law and cultivating a strong understanding of legal principles. Unfortunately, I see many young professionals today falling into the same trap. What we truly need are students and professionals committed to rigorous legal study and a genuine passion for the craft of law.
It is important to be working with a good mentor, someone who can guide, challenge, and shape you. Equally important is being at the right firm/advocate, where the work culture, values, and opportunities align with your long-term goals.
You’ve built a distinguished independent practice, representing both high-stakes private clients and government enterprises. What inspired your transition from being an Associate under a Senior Advocate to establish your own practice?
Thank you very much. As much as I appreciate the kind gesture, I feel it is too soon to say that I have a distinguished practice. I am definitely humbled and grateful by the opportunities that have come my way; there is still a lot of learning left and I hope to achieve more at the right time.
While practicing law, as one matures and learns to grasp how the legal industry operates in India, one reaches a stage where there is a simultaneous urge to make your own mark in the profession. One’s personal aspirations coupled with the rigorous training which is undertaken during the initial years of practice leads one to desire more from their capabilities as a lawyer. You get down to brass tacks, work on your thought-process and make an honest attempt at handling a legal brief sans supervision. In the process, you wish to hold your own turf, work with the tools which you have gathered, seek client(s) and navigate the case accordingly. You also become accountable and feel ready to take the flak when things don’t go as per expectations. In essence, this feeling is very subjective and the inflection point cannot be attributed to a single event.
To answer your query, I feel ‘inspiration’ is not a linear term. It can come from the mundane to the magnificent moments of your personal and professional endeavours. They are building blocks of your personality which end up getting chronicled in the vicissitudes of life. In my case, there have been various instances which have inspired me to cut the cord and carry my own weight. Growing up in New Delhi one has an early exposure to the power corridors and legal circles of India. One of the earliest exposures which I can recollect is watching parliamentary debates and reading interviews of many senior lawyers and distinguished legal luminaries. This was a constant source of inspiration during my formative years. A chance-meet with some of the prominent figures in the legal world was also a source of encouragement to consider joining the profession.
While these are contributory factors, I owe substantial credit to my Senior Mr. Prashanto C. Sen, Sr. Advocate who, being a first-generation lawyer, has established a flourishing litigation practice in India. His noble approach to the profession, impeccable standards and going the extra mile to serve the legal needs of his clientele inspired me the most. While taking me under his wings, he not only taught me the fundamentals of law; his training and invaluable wisdom which I imbibed, helped me come out of my shell at an early stage of my litigation career and further encouraged me to start my own practice.
Your practice spans infrastructure, mining, energy, and arbitration sectors known for their complexity and regulatory intensity. What drew you to these domains, and how did your early exposure during internships and associate years influence this path?
Yes, my practice till now has ended up within the four corners of these domains that you have mentioned. Just to give you a brief overview, after graduating in B.A. (Hons.) from the University of Delhi where I read Economics, I pursued the three-year LL.B. course at Campus Law Centre, Faculty of Law, University of Delhi. While attending law school, I used to be drawn towards understanding the dynamics of laws and regulations which are applicable while conducting business activities and commercial dealings. This was probably because of my background in Economics which is a commercially – oriented field.
With time I was clear that I would like to gain further knowledge and deeper insights into commercial laws which are applied in business affairs. My interests and curiosity piqued during Company Law classes at CLC, and I wanted to further analyse how these laws end up navigating businesses in the real world. In order to see whether I fit into these domains, apart from general reading at law school, I simultaneously undertook multiple legal internships at some of the most prestigious law firms as well as the Attorney General of India’s office. My internship days taught me the basics of not just corporate law practice but also how to conduct oneself in law firms. Although as interns we had limited roles, it was during these rigorous training sessions that I got the initial exposure to these domains. At corporate law firms, I was able to understand how lawyers apply the law on a day-to-day basis to help corporations and other businesses solve complex legal issues in these sectors. I was fortunate to intern under some of the best legal minds in the country, many of whom showed excellent qualities of being a lawyer and were very patient with the younger lot.
When I decided to pursue a career in litigation, Commercial Litigation and Disputes Resolution came as a natural choice since it includes a mix of both – appearing before judicial forums and practicing commercial laws. It also includes within its fold advisory, ADR and counsel work. I chose counsel-chamber practice since there is more responsibility which is put on your shoulders thereby shortening the learning curve. In chamber practice, you are directly dealing with clients while single handedly assisting your Senior.
Importantly, Mining, energy and other areas of the infrastructure sector are highly regulated and routinely end up being exposed to major and complex litigations against the State. They require consistent consultations with counsels, legal experts and sectoral specialists. I was lucky to be selected at the Chambers of Mr. Prashanto Sen, SA to start my legal career. It was during my initial days as an Associate where I got a proper exposure to these domains. During my term as an Associate, I was tasked with handling very high stakes litigations for not just infrastructure MNCs but also government/PSU bodies as well as sector-Regulators such as CCI and AERA. This was a golden opportunity since one got to analyse issues from both ends of the spectrum – as a private entity as well as a public body. We were tasked with counsel work in diverse fields of law and I was taking care of briefs concerning three major sectors: mining, electricity and aviation. I was therefore very fortunate to get the right exposure in these fields at an early stage of my litigation career, and perhaps this was the inflection point since the exposure helped me shape my domain knowledge, and provided the required impetus to refine my legal craft.
Representing clients in high-stakes disputes involves navigating regulatory and commercial pressures. Could you share a particularly challenging or defining case and how was your experience dealing with it?
That is correct, it is a high-pressure area of practice. Room for error is minimal. The stakes are very high and the timelines equally rigid.
Till date, one of the most challenging and defining cases as an Independent Counsel has been C.A. No. 262/2020 (titled Vedanta Ltd. v. R.N. Mohapatra and Ors.) where I was engaged before the High Court in writ proceedings as well as the Supreme Court. The case involved various complex and interesting legal issue(s) concerning Constitutional Law, Contracts, Customs and Trade Law, Civil Contempt Jurisprudence. This litigation spanned over a period of close to 3 years and was one of my very first legal brief(s) as a newly-minted independent Counsel. It was during the course of this litigation that I ended up building great rapport with many able lawyers – both in-house and outside Counsels and commercial-management specialists with whom I still share a working relationship. I was also fortunate to have been guided by Senior in-house counsels and industry leaders, who were very kind to acknowledge my efforts and support me further in my practice.
I would say that handling high stakes disputes help you come out of your comfort zone as a lawyer. The experience(s) ends up educating you on the ground realities of how academic knowledge is to be applied whilst handling a matter, to the benefit of the client whose business interests are at stake and who is relying on your capabilities to assist them.
These opportunities don’t knock on your doors very often; therefore, it is imperative that you take up such cases without any hesitation. You can always learn along the way. While handling these disputes one faces a lot of challenges – both professionally and personally – which end up testing your mettle. These cases are laborious and demand long hours which at times run into late nights and early mornings, working on weekends, gruelling schedules and exhausting deadlines, all while micromanaging immense pressure from the client. However, when you come out on the other end, you will always be satisfied irrespective of the outcome of the case and be glad that you pushed through.
Having advised both government enterprises and Fortune 500 companies, what key differences have you observed in their legal cultures, decision-making processes, and approaches to risk?
In my limited experience, I would say that the legal culture per se is not very distinguishable. At the end of the day both sets of corporations engage lawyers who play a very specific role. Lawyers have their tasks cut out and are only performing their duties as per the terms of engagement/Vakalat.
While it is true that private and public corporations have their distinct characteristics and cultures, both do have their sector-specific targets and goals which are required to be fulfilled at all times. The legal team(s) of both are answerable to the management’s needs. Thus, at a macro level and from the outside one does not feel that there is much difference in the day-to-day operations and engagements.
I cannot comment much on the decision-making process of either of the two, but I would say that there is a certain level of risk-taking appetite, which is much higher in private corporations as compared to government enterprises. This is borne out of various factors: Private corporations are Laser-focused on profitable outcomes of their decisions with minimal externalities. The time lines are very strict and there is little to no room for any ambiguity. The targets and management/commercial asks are very clearly classified and is percolated through a chain of command. As a corollary, the expectations from an outside Counsel also becomes crystal clear. Private corporations are democratic in that there is much more room to express creative ideas, out-of-the-box thinking is encouraged during conferences and at times appreciated. Frankly, one sees a very peculiar pattern where, due to the fact that private organisations encourage quick and bold decision-making efforts, the unnecessary clutter and irrelevant thought process are weeded out at the very initial stages of brainstorming, helping the team to clearly demarcate the tasks at hand and focus on the relevant issues.
On the other hand, PSEs work in a more conservative fashion but are professional in their conduct. There are already established norms and set patterns/traditions which are adhered to and followed while performing the tasks at these organisations. I would say that the propensity-appetite to take risks in PSEs are much lower and there is a consistent effort to avert exposure to untoward outcomes. Being a government company which is answerable to the state exchequer and other departments, a PSE always has a touch of public duty in their actions which ends up contributing to the behaviour of not being very intrepid. This factor is ingrained in the functioning of many PSEs and is reflected while handing litigations and taking decisions. PSEs do command a lot of admiration and respect for the work which they are doing in the infrastructure domain – they are very clear on their roles and the primary objective of building the nation. In that pursuit, many are working tirelessly to achieve this goal.
You initially studied economics before pursuing law. What led you to choose a career in law, and how has your academic grounding in economics complemented your legal work?
This is a very interesting question. I will say that an error of judgment led me into reading economics which then led me to law. It was during my first year of graduation at Sri Venkateswara College (University of Delhi) where I read taxation and basics of Public Economics. I had an epiphany and I started reading more basics of law which was available in the University library. This made me realise that law was my actual calling throughout. Since I did not want to let go of the opportunity of pursuing a coveted course such as Economics from DU, I decided to sit tight and then pursue the three-year LL.B. course offered by the Faculty of Law, University of Delhi.
Although Economics and Law only converge in certain specific legal fields such as Competition/Anti-Trust, Aviation, etc., in my personal opinion I feel Economics helped me to a great extent in shaping my commercial analyses of legal issues. B.A. (H) Economics is rigorous and is a highly analytical course rooted in problem solving capabilities. Further, commercial clients need a result-oriented approach to a dispute. The grounding in economics certainly complemented my legal work and till date helps me understand business-commercial needs in a better fashion.
For young litigators looking to build a niche in infrastructure or regulatory disputes, what skills and experiences should they focus on early in their careers?
For young litigators my advice is to undertake a lot of drafting work during the initial years of their career. Drafting is like solving mathematical equations – the more you do it the more skilled you become. Secondly, stay up to date with what’s happening around the world – read at least 2 national dailies. It is very important that your client believes that their lawyer is not living under a rock! Thirdly, you need to know which laws and bare acts to look into whilst dealing with a client query – while no one expects you to verbatim learn the statutes, it is expected that you can figure out the applicable laws on the issues. This comes with practice and it is important that you keep revising the bare acts occasionally/during vacations. Fourthly, it is a harsh suggestion but in order to survive in litigation you cannot look at the clock till you finish a task – infrastructure and regulatory sector is a very demanding branch with gruelling working hours. Just like building muscles during strength training, you need to build stamina to brave the requirements in independent practice. The longer hours you pull during your initial days will make or break your practice in the subsequent years. So be ready to give it your all. Lastly, and most importantly no matter how much pressure is put on you or how powerful your clientele is, never compromise on your ethics and integrity. Go to bed with a clean conscience. As Advocates, the Standards of Professional Conduct and Etiquette under the Advocates Act, 1961 is our Holy Scripture. As Officers of the Court, it is our solemn duty to uphold the Code’s sanctity. Make sure your professional standards don’t drop by any margin whatsoever.
What’s one core principle or motto that has guided your legal journey? How do you envision the growth of your practice and your role in the evolving legal landscape of India?
There is a Latin phrase ‘Incende naves’ which means burn the ships. It isn’t about ships, it is about committing oneself to a belief, and striving towards achieving your goals and endeavours to the best of your abilities without looking back. This core principle has guided my legal journey from the day I stepped into law school. Legal practice (of any nature – litigation/corporate) is a complicated voyage riddled with uncertainties and externalities. I believe in order to survive in litigation you need this core principle ingrained in you at a very initial stage of life. If you enjoy the law, keep your head down and work when times get tough, respect your seniors, there are enough reasons to pursue your journey.
To answer your other question, I feel litigation and disputes practice is here to stay notwithstanding the onset of the Artificial Intelligence revolution across fields. Law is a distinct arena where no matter how much technology one infuses, one will always need the reassurance of a legal mind and a human touch. The legal landscape of India is definitely undergoing successive churns; this is part and parcel of a growing economy. I am looking forward to seeing more ADR mechanisms being put in place. I see a significant growth in arbitration as well as mediation sectors in the next couple of years. While my practice is already within the core litigation space, I do envision to move more and more into the arbitration and other ADR practice. There is a lot of work to be done in these fields.
With a practice that spans high-stakes matters and sectoral expertise, how do you maintain personal balance, and what keeps you intellectually and professionally motivated in the long run?
In independent practice, how you manage your time is mostly up to you. It is important to have a daily routine and more important to stick to it. In my case, there are days when you don’t get time to even sit for a minute, but then there are days which are fairly light. So, I balance it out. On lighter days I do strength training, read a lot of non-fiction books (especially on current affairs, economics, etc.), and occasionally travel with family.
In the long run, the only thing which motivates you is your passion for law, helping people in need, and knowing that you are now part of a very illustrious and prestigious community, be it litigation or transactional practice. There is fairly no other stream of motivation because your career is not a straight steam-lined path. In order to find more motivation, it is important that you go to courts even on days when you don’t have a matter listed, sit and observe the judges as well as the seniors who are arguing a case, stay up to date on any important judgments and maintain very healthy professional boundaries between your practice and your clientele.
Sir, you have extensive experience advising and representing clients across diverse legal domains. Looking back, what initially inspired you to pursue a career in law? How did your integrated B.S.W., LL.B. degree from Gujarat National Law University shape your early understanding of the legal system and its role in society?
Firstly, thank you for inviting me to your platform to share my journey. From a young age, I took a keen interest in public affairs. I religiously read the newspapers and followed the news on television. The dynamics of politics, society and international affairs fascinated me. To me, the study of law seemed like the perfect pathway to enter public life. I felt, and was also advised, that the subjects one would study in law school would hold me in good stead in achieving my goals at that point in time. So, that is how I found myself in law school. It is a different matter that at present, I’m doing something slightly removed from public affairs in the way I understood it as a teenager. But then again, litigation also intersects with public affairs, so I am content doing it.
As far as choosing BSW as my stream in law school goes, it was entirely by happenstance. I was allotted GNLU after the third round of CLAT counselling, by which time seats in my preferred Bachelor of Arts stream were unavailable. Given that BSW also aligned with my career objectives at that point of time, I decided to take the plunge. There was some trepidation, given that we were the first batch that was being offered this course. However, looking back, I have no regrets, given that it exposed me to a range of experiences, especially in the course of field work in rural areas, that I would otherwise not have had.
In the early stages of your legal career, what were some of the key formative experiences or challenges that deepened your understanding of the law and helped shape the direction of your professional journey?
Before I joined law school, I had a vague idea that the practice of law is demanding. It was during my internships while in law school that I got my first glimpse of what it actually meant. I had the privilege of doing most of my internships in Delhi at the Supreme Court and Delhi High Court. At first, I was star struck, seeing stalwarts of the legal profession in such close proximity. Over time, I saw them in action and gradually, began to recognise the mastery in their craft. Often, the fees charged by top lawyers get the spotlight, but what people do not see is the years of effort, hard-work, dedication and sacrifice that precedes that. Being exposed to that environment gave me a sense of what it takes to succeed in the profession. I, very reluctantly, came to terms with the fact that the conventional notions of work life balance would have to be foregone. After all, one has to work seven days a week for most of the year. Professional life is often fast paced and dynamic. It is certainly not for every personality type. At the same time, the profession also offers a sense of fulfilment and reward, provided the right effort is put in. Therefore, if one is able to accept the trade-offs, the profession can be deeply rewarding.
It was also during my internship phase and subsequent professional life that my understanding of the law truly started taking shape. It’s still an ongoing process. For me, it was essential to move beyond books and see the law in action to truly internalise it.
What was your motivation behind taking the England & Wales Solicitor Qualification Exam (“SQE”)? How has your dual qualification influenced your approach to your practice area?
My decision to prepare for the SQE was guided by multiple factors. Primarily, I believed that since the Indian legal system is largely derived from English law and is relevant to some extent in shaping Indian jurisprudence, pursuing it would be a good idea. The area of English law that I was keenest on learning was civil commercial law, which is especially relevant to my practice area. It has a rich jurisprudence dating back almost three centuries and continues to be the preferred legal system to govern a range of commercial contracts. A hallmark of English law is that it has adapted itself over time to facilitate commerce by balancing predictability and flexibility. That is why it continues to be referred to for guidance across the Common Law world. I was eager to learn about its development in greater detail.
Preparing for the exam was a unique experience, offering its share of excitement and overwhelm. It felt like going through law school again with the advantage of some professional experience, which made grasping concepts easier. The fact that Indian law aligns with English law in many aspects also helped. For me, being exposed to facets of civil commercial law and civil procedure were deeply enriching. It was remarkable to see the level of detail with which the Civil Procedure Rules along with the practice directions dealt with. Another subject which fascinated me was Equity and Trusts. It did not occupy a prominent position in Indian law school syllabi at our time. However, once I entered the profession, I understood the importance of this body of law, especially to my practice area.
On the whole, studying for the SQE certainly broadened my perspective on my legal practice, which I try to bring to bear in my work. One example that comes to mind is the guidance on steps to be taken and best practices at different stages of a litigation (from pre-claim to execution) are pieces which I have sought to incorporate into my practice.
You’ve represented and advised clients in and relating to both, domestic and international arbitrations. What are your thoughts on the evolution of the arbitration landscape in India and where it stands in the international landscape?
One of the most important considerations while incorporating arbitration clauses in contracts is the choice of seat, given its ramifications on the conduct of the arbitration and enforceability of the award. While choosing a seat, parties would essentially look at whether the legal framework, predisposition of courts and the general structure of the legal system is favourable to aiding arbitration, from the interim measures stage to enforcement of the award. In the last 15 years, there has been a concerted effort in India to encourage arbitration, be it through judicial decisions or legislative change. Pain points have sought to be resolved. The general trend has been positive. After all, it must be recognised that to attract and encourage trade and commerce, India needs to provide an effective and efficient dispute resolution mechanism to businesses. Arbitration provides a potential answer to this. However, one hurdle that is yet to be overcome entirely are the delays in courts processes, right from appointment of arbitrators to hearing challenges to awards. This is primarily a consequence of the heavy roster of Indian judges. This structural bottleneck would have to be addressed if India is to compete as a hub of international arbitration. Here again, the general trajectory has been in the right direction. We must also recognise that the effect of changes sought to be made will not appear overnight. We can certainly be hopeful that in the coming decade, India will occupy a more prominent role in the international arbitration landscape.
As a Principal Associate in Khaitan & Co’s dispute resolution practice, you’ve dealt with complex matters across insolvency, arbitration, and constitutional litigation. Can you please talk about some of the key strategic and legal insights from your experience?
Without going into the specifics of matters, one of the significant learnings from my professional life is that no matter how good or bad a client’s case might appear to be, its ultimate outcome is far from certain. Therefore, while humility is the order of the day in all situations, it assumes even more importance when your client appears to be on a strong footing. One must never let their guards down.
On the other hand, even when your client does not appear to have the best of cases, earnest effort can get your client a result favourable to it in the circumstances. Essentially, the outcome of a case is not always black and white in terms of winning or losing. There are a range of outcomes in between which can be of tremendous help to clients. It is, therefore, important to understand the Client’s needs and devise strategy accordingly. While the Client should be given an accurate account of the merits of their case, it should not influence how you defend the case.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, lawyers must remember that they are officers of the court and they have a responsibility to assist the court in arriving at the right decision. Therefore, it is important to strike a balance between the responsibilities towards your client and the court.
Also, while litigation strategy is essential, it has to be balanced with thinking on the feet. We operate in a dynamic environment, where evolving circumstances might require a complete reorientation of strategy. Therefore, it is important to develop the muscle to deal with such changes.
With your interest in public policy and sports governance, what institutional or regulatory reforms do you believe are most needed in India’s sports ecosystem? Are there specific areas where legal intervention could drive meaningful change?
The need of the hour is to ensure good governance of sports governing bodies (“SGBs”) so that the interest of athletes is at the forefront. A report by the Indian Express earlier this year highlighted that 770 sports-related litigations pending in courts across India, out of which more than 200 related to governance of the SGBs. This means that valuable energy and finances that could have been used to support athletes is being diverted towards other causes. Ensuring that SGBs get their houses in order is essential so that athletes can receive the support they need and deserve. There are numerous accounts of athletes having to fight against the system to achieve their goals. If we are to become a sporting nation, reform of SGBs is fundamental.
The Union Government has taken several steps in the right direction. The Draft National Sports Governance Bill, 2024 which was published for public comments in October 2024, offers some hope. The Minister for Youth and Sports Affairs recently announced measures to foster more accountability from National Sports Federations. However, it must be remembered that sport is a State List subject under the Constitution. Therefore, the onus is on states to ensure good governance of SGBs at the State and District level. Orissa has shown the way in this regard. Moreover, it is critical to understand that to build India’s sporting credentials, we cannot look at the government for all our solutions. Private sector involvement and investment has to be facilitated across sports. For that to happen, a favourable sporting ecosystem conducive to investment has to be created, which takes us back to reform of SGBs. Private players will be wary of supporting sports which are not well administered. On the other hand, if the sport is being administered well, it will naturally attract private sector support. Rugby India is a case in point. Despite not being a major sport in India, it has managed to secure private sector funding because it is well governed and is more likely to achieve its targets, however modest they may be, than a sport which is more prominent but ill-administered.
What advice would you offer to young lawyers aspiring to work in the dispute resolution practice in a law firm? Were there any particular habits, values, or resources that played a significant role in your own professional development?
In a law firm, you don two hats- one of a lawyer and the other of a businessman. The latter does not get highlighted enough. As a junior, you are so engrossed in the minutiae of the legal side that the business side gets neglected. Before you know it, you are eligible for partnership and to stake your claim, you must show your business building credentials. It is then that you truly start focusing on it. While it is certainly true that the initial phase of your career should be spent honing your craft, some time should also be devoted to learning the business of law. As you move up the ladder, the amount of time you devote to it would necessarily need to go up. So, my advice to those aspiring to work in law firms would be to start learning the business of law early in your career so that you don’t have to endure baptism by fire.
As far as values go, the ones that have served me best are responsiveness and reliability, be it with colleagues, clients or even the Bench. These are fundamental to success in a service industry like ours.
To develop professionally, I have tried to push myself out of my comfort zone by embarking on educational endeavours frequently. Time is always a constraint but I have never let that be an excuse.
Finally, as lawyers, it is important to remain updated about developments in my practice area. It is also essential to anticipate areas where I could bring my professional skills to bear in the future, so that I can position myself accordingly. To this end, I try and read about developments and trends within and outside the law on a daily basis. I immensely enjoy reading and learning new things. I love that I’m able to do that in this profession.
Given the high-pressure nature of litigation and arbitration, how do you maintain a healthy work-life balance? Are there specific practices, routines, or philosophies that help you stay grounded, focused, and resilient in your career?
As I said before, to work in the law, you have to forego conventional notions of work-life balance. However, that does not need to come at the cost of spending time with your family and yourself. In fact, both are basic human needs. Even within this system, one can find a way to give them the time they deserve. All it requires is conscious effort and awareness. Being particular with your schedule helps. It goes without saying that support from family is also necessary in adjusting to this way of life.
It is important to underline the importance of taking care of one’s physical and mental health so that you are able to be the best version of yourself every day. It is very easy to go off the rails, given the demanding work environment. I try and fit in 3-4 days of physical activity every week. To regulate my emotions and nervous system, I have incorporated breath work into my routine. The third area which I try to focus on is the food I eat. I love eating but to operate optimally, I avoid eating foods that inhibit my mental functioning. I do indulge myself from time to time but not on a regular basis.
Coming from an academic background in economics, what inspired you to pursue a career in law? Has your background in economics enhanced your ability to navigate complex commercial and transactional disputes?
Looking back, I believe I was always meant to be a lawyer. I distinctly remember in Class 6, I wrote in my slam book that I wanted to be one, without fully understanding what it meant. One vivid memory is from a school session where we talked about our parents’ professions, and I was fascinated by a friend whose family included a prominent criminal counsel — I was hooked. My time at Modern School, Vasant Vihar, further shaped this instinct. I was drawn to history, public speaking, dramatics, and editorial work, all of which naturally nudged me toward law.
However, as a first-generation lawyer with no immediate role models, I had to be practical. At that time, I had topped in economics and was equally passionate about history. I faced a real conundrum: pursue economics, follow history academically, or take the uncharted path into law.
I chose to study Economics (Hons.) at Delhi University, knowing well that if law was truly my calling, I could always pursue the three-year law course later. That clarity helped me focus. Though I did well academically, I realized early on that economics was not my true passion. I enjoyed its rigour but not the heart of it. The day I graduated was the day I gave myself permission to fully pursue law.
That said, I don’t regret my economics background — it has deeply shaped my approach to litigation. Understanding economic models, financial structures, and market behaviour enables me to unpack complex commercial disputes with greater insight. Whether it’s a shareholder conflict, contractual dispute, or regulatory challenge, my economics training helps me grasp the underlying commercial drivers, spot inconsistencies in financial narratives, think strategically and to ask “why” until something actually made sense. In high-stake litigation, clarity of thought and structured analysis make a tangible difference, and this analytical discipline has been a real asset throughout my career.
Early in your career, you worked with a range of law firms and senior lawyers. What are some of the foundational experiences during that period that continue to shape your legal practice today?
Early in my career, as a first-generation lawyer with a three-year law degree, I was acutely aware that I needed to make every internship count. I sought out diverse experiences, interning with Tier 1 and Tier 2 law firms, specialized litigation boutiques, corporate firms, and even spending time with trial court, High Court, and Supreme Court lawyers. This breadth gave me a panoramic view of the profession and helped me understand its many facets.
My final internship was with Mr. Amarjit Singh Chandhiok, Senior Advocate, which eventually led to me joining his chamber. Many questioned my choice to work with a senior counsel straight out of law school, but I knew the value of the environment I was entering. Fali S. Nariman’s phrase resonates deeply with me: “When you mention a famous racehorse, the first question is always, ‘From which stable?’ The stable matters.” For me, Mr. Chandhiok’s chamber was that stable, the ideal place to hone one’s craft.
Mr. Chandhiok is the quintessential mentor. His razor-sharp eye for detail, encyclopaedic knowledge of civil and commercial law, and unmatched clarity of thought set a high bar for anyone aspiring to excel in litigation. It was there I truly understood the critical importance of strategic thinking before stepping into court and the necessity of being impeccably prepared. The chamber handled a wide spectrum of complex cases—arbitrations, election petitions, shareholder disputes, guardianship matters, civil suits—each presenting unique challenges and learning opportunities.
The work ethic instilled in that chamber remains with me. Often, the briefs would come only by late evening, requiring all-nighters to prepare comprehensive notes for Mr. Chandhiok’s arguments the next day. This rigorous training taught me the value of hard work, discipline, and an unwavering attention to detail. But beyond the technical skills, it was Mr. Chandhiok’s words of wisdom after every case, his humility, and relentless pursuit of excellence, that reminded me there is always more to learn and room to grow.
Many successful lawyers speak warmly of their formative chambers, and I echo that sentiment. That environment shaped not just my legal skills but my approach to the profession and to clients, grounded in diligence, strategy, and integrity. It remains the foundation upon which I continue to build my practice today.
What made you switch from a Senior Counsel’s chamber to a tier 1 law firm, JSA Advocates & Solicitors. What changes did you encounter making the shift from a senior counsel to a law firm.
I wanted to broaden my horizons and take on the role of a drafting and filing counsel, while engaging with a wider spectrum of complex commercial and transactional disputes. I first learned about a vacancy on Mr. Dheeraj Nair’s (Partner) team through my best friend who works at JSA. I had also seen Mr. Nair in action, strategizing thoughtfully and decisively alongside Mr. Chandhiok during a court hearing, which left a lasting impression on me.
Having now worked alongside Mr. Nair for seven years, I can confidently say that I owe much of my professional growth and success to his exceptional mentorship. He is not only an outstanding lawyer with a deep strategic mind but also possesses exemplary client management skills. It was with him that I truly understood the importance of building long-term client relationships, something that requires not just hard work but countless sleepless nights until those eventual eureka moments arrive, and trust me, they always do. His ability to simplify complex problems, think several steps ahead, and communicate with clarity is truly inspiring. What stands out most is his commitment to nurturing young lawyers by instilling confidence and encouraging independent decision-making, qualities essential to growth in the formative years of a legal career.
JSA is a visionary firm that genuinely values every lawyer’s contribution, fostering a culture of collaboration, continuous learning, and innovation. The firm’s forward-thinking approach and emphasis on teamwork create the ideal environment to develop as a well-rounded legal professional. At JSA, talent is recognized and nurtured, and I continue to learn and grow every day.
Of course, working at a law firm involves a shift in perspective. You move to the other side of the spectrum, from pure advocacy to client interface, drafting, filing, conferencing, arguing in court, and even raising bills. You need to stay on top of all these aspects. Importantly, it is here that you truly appreciate the commercial side of law, the strategic thinking, client focus, and business realities that shape legal advice and advocacy.
What made you give the prestigious Advocate-on-Record examination? As an Advocate-on-Record at the Supreme Court of India, how has this designation influenced your practice, particularly when appearing before the Supreme Court? What additional responsibilities does this role entail?
My decision to pursue the Advocate-on-Record (AOR) examination was inspired by Mr. Dheeraj Nair, who is an AOR himself. His expertise and professionalism motivated me to deepen my engagement with Supreme Court practice. The AOR designation is a prestigious credential that signifies mastery over Supreme Court procedures, drafting, and advocacy.
Being an AOR has significantly influenced my practice by enabling me to file and argue cases directly before the Supreme Court, enhancing my ability to manage cases end-to-end. It has sharpened my drafting skills, improved my understanding of complex procedural nuances, and instilled a greater sense of responsibility and ethics.
Additionally, the role involves coordinating with multiple teams within the firm who seek to file cases before the Supreme Court, which helps expand one’s professional reputation. Being an AOR requires a comprehensive approach that balances client expectations, legal strategy, and court requirements. This designation has been instrumental in broadening my professional capabilities and strengthening my commitment to delivering high-quality advocacy at the highest judicial level.
You’ve advised on a wide array of legal issues including shareholder disputes and commercial contracts. What is your approach?
I have advised on a wide range of legal issues, with shareholder disputes being a key area of specialization. These disputes involve complex interpersonal dynamics, competing interests, and nuanced corporate governance challenges. Successfully resolving them requires a solid grasp of company law, contractual frameworks, and sharp negotiation and strategic skills.
My approach combines meticulous fact-finding with anticipating opposing strategies, crafting compelling arguments, and managing sensitive negotiations. This combination of legal acumen and practical strategy enables me to help clients navigate these disputes toward effective and sustainable outcomes.
With respect to gaming laws and regulatory compliance, how would you assess India’s legal framework in comparison to internationally accepted norms? What are the major compliance challenges businesses in this sector face?
India’s legal framework for online gaming is evolving but remains fragmented compared to more cohesive international models. The 2023 amendments to the Information Technology Rules introduced self-regulatory bodies and defined permissible real-money games, but the overlap between central guidelines and varied state laws continues to create compliance uncertainty.
Major challenges include regulatory ambiguity, inconsistent licensing processes, complex tax structures, and an aggressive enforcement climate. In contrast, many global jurisdictions offer streamlined, centralized regulation that promotes industry growth and investor confidence.
To align with international standards, India needs a unified national policy that reconciles state and central regulations and provides long-term clarity. In this landscape, lawyers play a key role in helping businesses navigate legal risks, ensure compliance, structure operations, and engage effectively with regulators.
You regularly advise foreign clients on Indian legal matters, especially in high-stakes, cross-jurisdictional transactions. How do you navigate the differences between the legal systems?
Advising foreign clients on Indian legal matters, particularly in complex, cross-border transactions or disputes, requires more than just a knowledge of Indian law. It involves simplifying the law, explaining the procedural nuances, and often, the practical vagaries of the Indian legal system. A lawyer’s job in this context is not only to identify the risks but to provide clear, actionable solutions.
Foreign clients and firms come to us for results, not just analysis. I make it a point to move beyond theoretical advice and focus on pragmatic, commercially viable strategies. Over time, I’ve built strong rapport with several international clients and counterparts, owing to my problem-solving approach and my ability to communicate local complexities with clarity and confidence. That balance between legal insight and practical execution is what truly makes cross-jurisdictional work successful.
Given your work with India’s leading e-commerce platforms, what are the recurring legal challenges these platforms face regarding intermediary liability and content removal, especially amid changing digital regulations? How effective are current mechanisms in resolving these disputes?
E-commerce platforms in India operate under increasing regulatory pressure, particularly concerning intermediary liability and content takedown obligations. While the IT Act provides a “safe harbour” to intermediaries, the practical enforcement of this protection remains inconsistent.
Many courts across the country are still hesitant to extend timely protection under the safe harbour principle, which creates urgency in seeking relief. Given how time-sensitive these issues can be, I often find myself moving quickly between courts in different parts of the country to secure interim protections and maintain operational continuity for clients.
A key challenge lies in navigating overlapping obligations, balancing compliance with evolving IT Rules, addressing takedown demands, and mitigating exposure to reputational and legal risks. Current mechanisms such as self-regulatory bodies and grievance redressal structures help to an extent but lack uniform enforcement and often do not provide swift remedies.
From a strategic perspective, it is essential for intermediaries and e-commerce platforms to establish clear internal protocols, escalation frameworks, and litigation preparedness. As counsel, we do not just advise on what the law says, but help clients anticipate regulatory action, build proactive compliance systems, and craft legal strategies that ensure effective and timely results.
Could you share your experience handling one of the most challenging cases you’ve come across? How do you approach such complex matters, from research to strategy and how do you manage the pressure in high-stakes situations?
I cannot single out one particularly challenging case because my work spans a wide range of complex matters. I regularly handle commercial and contractual disputes, shareholder and joint venture conflicts, domestic and international arbitration, banking fraud, insolvency, white-collar crimes, gaming laws, regulatory compliance, and public law issues. Many of these cases require creative thinking and tailored strategies, which clients expect from us.
I focus on extracting detailed information from my clients because as lawyers, we often find solutions or key documents that laypeople might miss. Asking questions, and then asking more, is essential. Clients appreciate this thoroughness over time. One important lesson I have learned from senior colleagues is the power of asking the right questions. An eye for detail makes all the difference.
My approach starts with deep research and understanding of both legal and commercial aspects. I develop dispute resolution strategies that combine pre-litigation efforts with litigation or arbitration while always aligning with the client’s business goals. Managing pressure in high-stakes matters requires discipline, preparation, and staying calm under uncertainty. Working across courts, tribunals, and regulatory bodies, I rely on meticulous planning and teamwork to navigate complex situations and deliver effective results.
This broad exposure has helped me develop a flexible mindset and problem-solving skills to meet clients’ needs even in the most challenging matters.
With rapid developments in data privacy laws and digital regulation, how do you foresee the legal landscape in India evolving over the next few years? Are there any trends that businesses or legal professionals should be particularly mindful of?
India’s data privacy and digital regulation landscape is evolving rapidly and is expected to become much more robust in the next few years. The upcoming comprehensive data protection law will impose stricter requirements on how businesses collect, process, and transfer personal data, emphasizing user consent, data security, and cross-border data flows. This will push Indian companies and foreign investors to enhance their compliance frameworks and technology safeguards.
Regulators are likely to increase scrutiny, focusing on transparency, accountability, and enforcement against violations. Cybersecurity norms will also tighten, and there will be closer coordination between data privacy laws and sector-specific regulations like finance, healthcare, and telecom.
As a lawyer advising clients in India, I focus on helping them understand these evolving rules in practical terms, not just the legal text. This means guiding them through data audits, compliance program design, and risk assessments, while also preparing them for potential regulatory investigations or breaches.
I work closely with clients to build proactive strategies that balance legal requirements with their business realities, helping them stay compliant while minimizing disruption. This client-centric, solution-driven approach is critical given how fast and complex the regulatory environment is becoming in India.
Is there a guiding principle or professional motto that you’ve followed throughout your career? What advice would you offer to young law graduates aspiring to build a career in litigation and dispute resolution?
A guiding principle I’ve followed throughout my career is to be practical, business-friendly, and bold in representing my clients. While developing strong legal arguments are important, often the most effective solutions come from understanding the client’s commercial realities and crafting strategies that balance legal rigor with practical outcomes. When a brief comes your way, defend your client like a warrior — with full commitment, clarity, and confidence.
Also, keep saying YES. Even when it feels daunting or you feel unprepared, step forward and volunteer. Some of the most defining moments in my journey came from saying yes to opportunities I wasn’t sure I was ready for.
For young law graduates aspiring to build a career in litigation and dispute resolution, my advice is to develop not only your legal knowledge but also your ability to think strategically and communicate effectively. Be willing to ask the right questions, dig deep into facts, and understand the context behind every dispute. Litigation or Dispute Resolution is not just about winning arguments; it’s about delivering solutions that work in the real world. Stay bold, stay curious, and never lose sight of the client’s goals. Practicality and fearlessness will set you apart as a trusted advocate.
You maintain a diverse and demanding practice appearing in courts, advising clients, contributing thought leadership, and more. How do you find balance between your professional obligations and personal life, and how do you manage stress in such a high-intensity career?
There is no such thing as work-life balance in law—that’s the honest truth, and I wouldn’t want it any other way. A good lawyer never really stops working; clients’ legal challenges keep coming, and you’re constantly thinking through solutions and next steps. Trust me, all of us in this profession enjoy that challenge.
To manage stress, I try to make some time for reading non-fiction, playing pickleball, taking family vacations, and catching up with my non-lawyer friends to stay grounded and keep my “other” world alive. But I’d be lying if I said there is any perfect balance between work and life.
Let me start with the most important question, what motivated you to specialize in immigration consulting, particularly in areas like humanitarian and compassionate, medical, admissibility, and other complex matters? And how did Settle Immigration Services come into existence?
Interestingly, this is actually my second career. Back in 2009, I was pursuing Chartered Accountancy. My father is a CA in both India and Canada, and as is often the case in India, the son typically follows in the father’s footsteps.
At that time, immigration consulting was a growing field, and I thought I’d explore it as a side interest. But once I attended my first course, I realized this wasn’t something you could do casually – it’s vast and nuanced. There are so many areas: economic immigration, business streams, enforcement, family sponsorship, and more. So I decided to commit fully. Back then, ICCRC was the regulatory body.
I completed the program, passed the licensing exams, and launched my practice in 2012. In the beginning, I handled every type of case to gain hands-on experience. Over time, I developed deep expertise in certain areas – especially humanitarian and compassionate applications and Procedural Fairness Letters (PFLs).
For context, a PFL is issued when IRCC has concerns about an application. It gives the applicant a chance to respond. Often, the officer may have already made up their mind, but the process demands procedural fairness. We’ve had a strong track record – over 90% success in responding to PFLs in the last 12 years. Most PFLs we deal with are the result of DIY applications, which is why retaining a legal expert is so important.
Settle Immigration offers a full range of immigration services, but my personal focus is on refusal cases, H&C submissions, and family sponsorships.
From almost becoming a CA like your father, you built a successful career in a completely different field and are now Chair of the Board at the Canadian Association of Professional Immigration Consultants (CAPIC). Can you share more about that journey and your responsibilities?
It’s been an interesting and rewarding journey. Initially, without business experience and determined not to rely on my father, I learned the hard way. There were moments when people suggested unethical practices – selling LMIAs, for example – which unfortunately occur in the industry, even among some lawyers.
But I chose integrity. I wanted my work to speak for itself. It took years, but today I’m proud to say our clientele is purely referral-based – 100% word of mouth.
I started with the Finance Audit Committee at ICCRC, which later became the College. I joined CAPIC in 2018 as a committee member, became a board member in 2021, and was elected Chair of the Board in 2024. This would not have been possible without the support of my parents – financially and emotionally.
As Chair, my role includes providing strategic leadership, ensuring CAPIC remains a strong voice for immigration consultants across Canada. I work with the Board to set long-term goals, advocate for policy reforms, and maintain professional integrity. I also attend stakeholder meetings with CICC, IRCC, and CBSA. In fact, I recently co-chaired a meeting with IRCC’s Assistant Director Tammy Lynn on December 18th.
The role allows me to help shape the future of our profession through reforms, continuing education, and advocacy.
For skilled professionals abroad, particularly from India, how do you guide them in immigrating to Canada? What are key considerations?
I start with a comprehensive assessment. I like to call myself an immigration doctor. I diagnose eligibility, identify the right stream (Express Entry, PNP, etc.), and tailor the path to the client’s goals.
People often confuse Express Entry with PR. Express Entry is a system that manages applications under multiple programs: CEC, Federal Skilled Worker (FSW), and PNPs. For FSW, you first need 67 points out of 100. CRS is separate and draw-based.
Many applicants fixate on the IELTS “7778” benchmark, but language is just one of six FSW factors. Job duties – not titles – are critical. Under section 87.1 of IRPR, the applicant must perform the majority of duties listed in the NOC. Even if your title is “Receptionist,” if you perform the duties of an “Administrative Assistant,” your role may be skilled.
We pay close attention to experience letters – ensuring 60% of duties align with the NOC. Many employers, especially large ones, use rigid templates, which can be problematic. If needed, we request alternate letters from supervisors.
Foreign experience letters often lack detail. I advise clients to secure complete, detailed letters before leaving their job. And never copy-paste duties, customization is key.
We’ve never received a PFL for PR applications we handled from scratch in 12 years, that’s our benchmark.
Could you elaborate on Express Entry vs. other pathways, and the common challenges applicants face?
Express Entry gives you a score and lets you create a profile. But eligibility is the first step. The system favors younger applicants; points start dropping after age 29.
Even if your score is low, register. Back in February 2021, there was a draw with a cut-off of 75 – the lowest ever. Profiles are valid for one year, and you can update them if you improve your language scores.
If you’re paid in cash, that’s okay, just document it. Get a letter from your employer, bank statements if available, or tax filings. If income is below the tax threshold, provide an affidavit. If documentation is limited, secondary evidence like supervisor letters can help.
For PNPs, some require job offers and others are draw-based. Applicants inside Canada usually have more options. Some streams like Ontario’s Human Capital Stream, pick you from the Express Entry pool.
If you’re already here, Ontario has pathways for recent graduates and skilled trades. A master’s degree can give you 30 extra CRS points and some PNPs allow direct PR application after graduation.
Alternatively, prepare well for IELTS and French. The French TEF or TCF can boost your CRS by 62 points, and IRCC now conducts French-specific draws. This is often underutilized.
Spending $40K–$70K on a degree might not be necessary if you can reach a higher score through language preparation. That money could go toward a house down payment instead.
What are some of the most common mistakes applicants make?
First, eligibility is misunderstood. Selecting the wrong NOC can lead to refusals. Documentation errors are also frequent, such as submitting the wrong form.
People also fail to disclose past visa refusals, even from other countries. That’s serious – under Section 40, it’s misrepresentation, which leads to a 5-year ban or removal if you’re in Canada.
Always disclose, and always hire a legal expert if unsure. Small errors can lead to big consequences.
How have global events like COVID or regional conflicts impacted immigration, and what does the future look like?
Conflicts in Ukraine, Israel, and elsewhere have led to increased refugee claims and backlogs. Despite claims that AI only assists decisions, we’ve seen refusals issued by automated systems.
Processing times have been affected, though IRCC says they’re using historical and projected data to improve accuracy. With high immigration volumes, economic pressures have led to reduced targets.
Now more than ever, improving your score through language tests, especially French, is critical.
Is there any final piece of advice you’d like to share?
Yes – do not misrepresent. It’s taken very seriously here. Don’t submit false duties or experience. It may seem like a shortcut, but it jeopardizes your future and your family’s future too.
If you want to gain skilled experience, ask your employer to give you those duties first, then apply. The integrity of your application must be protected at all costs.
What inspired you to pursue a career in law? Was there a defining moment or personal experience that influenced your decision to enter the legal field?
I wasn’t always drawn to law. As a child, I was more interested in creative pursuits, exploring stories and ideas rather than legal principles. But over time, I found myself captivated by how law shapes society and protects individuals. One pivotal moment was when I witnessed a close family friend navigate a complex legal issue. Seeing how the right legal guidance could change someone’s life made me realize the profound impact of this field. That experience planted the seed of curiosity, and the more I learned, the more I saw law as not just a set of rules, but a way to advocate, solve problems, and create meaningful change. What started as a passing interest grew into a true passion, and today, that commitment to justice is what drives my legal career.
Early in your career, what experiences significantly shaped your understanding of legal practice? Could you share any pivotal moments or cases that contributed to your growth as a trial lawyer?
Early in my career, I was fortunate to be mentored by Senior Advocate Mr. Ajay Burman after graduating in 2011. Under his guidance, I learned the nuances of trial advocacy—everything from drafting precise pleadings to developing effective courtroom strategies. His mentorship provided an invaluable foundation, shaping my approach to legal practice and reinforcing the importance of meticulous preparation.
When I started my independent practice in 2013, it was a turning point in my journey. Representing clients across district courts, High Courts, and tribunals across India sharpened my ability to handle diverse procedural complexities. Each case brought its own challenges, but those experiences pushed me to refine my skills and deepen my understanding of the Indian legal system. Whether it was navigating intricate statutory interpretations or advocating for clients in high-stakes matters, those years played a crucial role in shaping me as a trial lawyer.
As Nelson Mandela once said, “I never lose. I either win or learn.” That philosophy has resonated throughout my career—every challenge, every case, and every setback has been an opportunity to grow and refine my craft. The lessons I’ve learned early on continue to guide me, shaping the way I approach advocacy and justice.”
What led you to establish your own practice, RDB Associates? What vision drove this decision, and what challenges did you encounter during the process?
The decision to start RDB Associates in 2022 wasn’t just a career move—it felt like the culmination of everything I’d learned and cared about as a lawyer. After years of working independently across different courts and states, I kept thinking, What if I could build a firm that doesn’t just handle cases but truly fights for people? I wanted a place where strategy and empathy weren’t buzzwords but the foundation of every case. That’s how RDB Associates was born—a team built to tackle tough legal battles while keeping clients’ voices at the center.
Funny enough, the name “RDB” wasn’t part of some grand plan. Back in law school, friends and professors started calling me that as a nickname—almost like a joke! But over time, it stuck. By the time I started my practice, clients would say, “We’re going to RDB for help,” and I realized it had become part of my identity. When I launched the firm, using that name felt right—it carried the trust I’d earned and the scrappy, personal approach I’ve always believed in.
One case early on shaped everything for me. A client came to me completely broken by a legal battle—they’d almost lost faith in the system. I remember sitting with them, hearing their story, and thinking, This is why I do what I do. We worked day and night, dissecting every angle, and when we won, it wasn’t just about the judgment. It was about watching them walk out of court with their heads held high again. That moment crystallized my philosophy: Law isn’t just about arguments in a courtroom; it’s about restoring people’s dignity.
Building the firm hasn’t been easy. Finding the right team—people who genuinely care about clients as much as winning—took time. Scaling across states while staying true to our “human-first” approach? That’s still a daily balancing act. But every time we take on a tough case or hear a client say, “You made this feel possible,” I know we’re on the right track. For me, RDB Associates isn’t just a firm—it’s a promise to turn legal battles into stories of resilience, one client at a time.
You’ve been at the forefront of medical ethics and healthcare litigation, especially during the COVID-19 crisis. Based on your experience, what legal reforms are essential to better safeguard the rights of patients and healthcare providers in future public health emergencies?
During my time working on the front lines of the COVID-19 pandemic—advising hospitals, patients, and government agencies on everything from vaccine mandates to life-and-death resource allocation decisions—I saw firsthand how our legal frameworks struggled to keep pace with the chaos of a public health crisis. Those years weren’t just about interpreting policies; they were about sitting across from exhausted ICU directors wondering if they’d face lawsuits for triage decisions, or patients’ families begging for clarity on why loved ones couldn’t access treatments. Those experiences convinced me that we need fundamental reforms to protect both caregivers and communities when the next crisis hits. That’s the exact reason why I enrolled in the Postgraduate Diploma in Medical Law & Ethics (PGDMLE) at NLSIU Bangalore. I realized I couldn’t just rage at the system’s flaws; I needed the tools to rebuild it. Studying the ethics of triage protocols, patient autonomy, and distributive justice gave me language for the moral vertigo I’d witnessed. But it also hardened my resolve: we must do better next time.
A few priorities stand out to me. First, we have to address the legal gray areas that left healthcare providers paralyzed by fear of liability. I’ll never forget a Zoom call with a rural hospital team who’d reused PPE against normal protocols because they had no other choice—they spent more time worrying about lawsuits than patient care. We need laws that shield providers acting in good faith during emergencies, so they can focus on saving lives, not second-guessing every choice.
Second, patients deserve more than vague promises during crises. Early in the pandemic, I worked with families who couldn’t get straight answers about vaccine access or ventilator allocation. That confusion eroded trust. We need enforceable rights to transparency—clear, legislated standards for how hospitals communicate priorities and allocate scarce resources. It’s not just ethical; it’s practical. Trust is the currency of public health.
Third, the pandemic exposed how rigid regulations can stifle rapid response. I saw hospitals delay adopting telehealth because reimbursement rules weren’t updated, or scramble to interpret conflicting state/federal guidelines. We need “emergency mode” compliance frameworks—agile, pre-authorized systems that let providers adapt quickly without drowning in bureaucracy.
And finally, telemedicine isn’t going anywhere. But its legal foundation? That’s still catching up. I advised dozens of clinics on privacy and licensing hurdles when they pivoted to virtual care overnight. We need durable laws that secure telehealth’s role in equitable care, not just temporary pandemic fixes.
These lessons didn’t come from textbooks—they came from late-night calls with nurses, tense meetings with regulators, and too many conversations with grieving families. If we want a healthcare system that’s both compassionate and resilient, we have to build these reforms into its DNA now. Because the next crisis isn’t a matter of if—it’s when.
As technology continues to reshape the legal landscape, how do you foresee cyber law evolving in India over the next few years, particularly with advancements in AI, increasing concerns over data privacy, and the rise of digital defamation cases?
When I think about the future of cyber law in India, I’m struck by how rapidly technology is outpacing our legal frameworks. We’re at a pivotal moment where innovation and regulation must collaborate to protect citizens while fostering growth. Let me share my perspective on the key areas shaping this evolution.
The Rashmika Mandanna deepfake incident last year was a wake-up call for me. Seeing how easily AI can manipulate reality made me realize how unprepared our laws are. I’ve spent hours discussing with peers: Who’s liable when a deepfake ruins a reputation? The creator? The platform hosting it? Right now, it’s a gray area. I strongly believe India needs AI-specific laws—or amendments to the IT Act—that enforce transparency and hold both developers and distributors accountable. Without this, misinformation could erode trust in digital spaces altogether.
The DPDP Act of 2023 was a milestone, but I’m not convinced it’s enough. Take the Aadhaar breaches—these aren’t just technical failures; they’re systemic risks. In my research, I’ve noticed smaller companies often lack robust compliance frameworks. We need stricter audits, sector-specific rules (like for healthcare or finance), and real consequences for breaches. Personally, I’d advocate for a public awareness campaign too. People deserve to know how their data is used—and how to fight back when it’s misused.
Last month, a friend’s startup was nearly derailed by a viral false review. It reminded me how fragile reputations are online. While free speech is sacred, I’ve seen too many cases where social media platforms hide behind “neutrality” to avoid accountability. My take? We need specialized cyber tribunals to resolve defamation cases faster. And intermediaries should be legally nudged to act responsibly—maybe by mandating takedown mechanisms for verified slander.
The Air India data breach shook me. It wasn’t just about stolen passports—it exposed how vulnerable critical infrastructure is. I’ve spoken to cybersecurity experts who stress that reactive measures won’t cut it. Proactive steps like mandatory audits for utilities, ethical hacking certifications, and cross-border collaboration are vital. Frankly, if we don’t treat cyberattacks as acts of war, we’re leaving the door open for chaos.
The RBI’s cautious stance on crypto is understandable, but ambiguity breeds risk. I’ve met young investors who don’t realize their crypto gains could be taxable—or that scams have little legal recourse. We need clear laws on fraud prevention, taxation, and consumer rights. Blockchain itself isn’t the enemy; it’s the lack of rules. Let’s regulate smartly, not stifle innovation.
To me, cyber law isn’t just about rules—it’s about building trust in a digital India. Yes, laws must evolve faster, but collaboration is key. Lawyers, technologists, and policymakers need to sit at the same table. If we get this right, India could become a global model for balancing innovation and justice. And honestly, that’s what excites me most about working in this field.
Your fluency in Japanese is quite rare among Indian legal professionals. How has this cultural and linguistic proficiency influenced your work with Japanese clients and impacted your approach to international legal matters?
Learning Japanese started as a quirky lockdown project—honestly, I never saw it becoming part of my legal career! While most people mastered Dalgona coffee recipes, banana bread recipes or binge-watched entire seasons of TV shows, I decided to shake things up—I learned Japanese.
Here’s the thing: speaking Japanese isn’t just about translating words. For Japanese clients in India, it’s about catching the quiet stuff—the pauses, the unspoken hesitations. In Japan, communication is layered. You don’t just say what you mean; there’s a dance to it. I remember one case where a corporate client kept avoiding direct answers in emails. When I switched to speaking Japanese in our meeting, their relief was instant. Suddenly, we weren’t just talking at each other—we were problem-solving together. That trust? You can’t Google Translate that.
There’s a saying in Japanese: “Kotoba yori kimochi”—feelings matter more than words. I’ve seen this play out in messy cross-border disputes or even delicate family cases. Once, in a tech contract negotiation, a tiny phrasing mismatch in English drafts nearly blew up the deal. But because I could explain the legal nuances in Japanese, we untangled it over a 10-minute call. The client joked afterward, “You’re like a legal diplomat with a dictionary brain.”
Sure, it’s fun to surprise people when I switch languages in meetings, but the real win is this: law isn’t just about arguments. It’s about making someone feel heard, especially when they’re far from home. Whether it’s a corporate fraud case or a criminal defense matter, speaking Japanese lets me bridge two worlds. I’m not just their lawyer—I’m someone who gets why a bow matters more than a handshake, or why silence sometimes speaks louder than a contract clause.
Funny how life works, right? A lockdown hobby became the tool that lets me turn legal headaches into human connections. And honestly? That’s the part of my job I love most—not just winning cases, but making sure no one gets lost in translation.
You’ve built strong collaborations with international law firms. How have these alliances strengthened your ability to manage cross-border disputes, and what are some of the key challenges in reconciling international legal standards with Indian practices?
One of the most rewarding parts of my career has been working with international legal teams—especially those involving Japanese stakeholders in tech, healthcare, or fraud cases. My fluency in Japanese and understanding of cultural nuances aren’t just “skills on paper.” They’ve been lifelines in building trust and untangling disputes that span borders. Let me give you an example: early in my career, I worked on a cross-border corporate fraud case where a Japanese tech firm was navigating a joint venture dispute with an Indian partner. The legal stakes were high, but so were the cultural ones. Being able to draft documents in Japanese, interpret subtle cues in negotiations, and explain the “why” behind India’s regulatory frameworks helped bridge gaps that might’ve derailed the case.
These collaborations have taught me that cross-border work isn’t just about knowing the law—it’s about weaving together perspectives. For instance, working with EU teams on healthcare compliance, I saw firsthand how GDPR’s strict data privacy rules clashed with India’s evolving digital health policies. By pulling insights from both sides, we crafted hybrid strategies that satisfied regulators in Brussels and Mumbai. It’s like being a legal translator—not just of language, but of intent.
But let’s be real: harmonizing international standards with Indian practice isn’t a tidy process. I remember a case where a Japanese client insisted on arbitrating a dispute in Tokyo under Japanese law, while the Indian counterpart demanded litigation in Delhi. The tension wasn’t just about “choice of law”—it was about pride, precedent, and perception. We navigated it by framing arbitration in Singapore as a neutral middle ground, but getting there required hours of candid conversations about what each side truly feared losing.
Procedural differences can be landmines too. Once, during discovery in a U.S.-India fraud case, I realized the American team’s aggressive document requests were seen as invasive by the Indian witnesses. We had to recalibrate—explaining the “why” behind U.S. discovery rules to our clients, while gently pushing the U.S. team to respect local discomfort with overly broad requests. It wasn’t in any textbook; it was about empathy as much as strategy.
And enforcement? That’s where theory meets reality. I’ll never forget the scramble to enforce an arbitral award from London in an Indian court—only to hit roadblocks because of a missing stamp paper. It felt absurd in the moment, but it taught me to sweat the small stuff and see the bigger picture: global rulings mean nothing if you don’t understand local procedural quirks.
At its core, this work is about more than legal frameworks. It’s about asking questions like: How does a Japanese CEO’s expectation of “consensus” align with India’s more hierarchical corporate culture? Or Why might a German tech firm balk at India’s approach to interim injunctions? Those human, cultural layers are what make cross-border work so messy—and so fascinating. Every case is a crash course in humility, creativity, and finding common ground when the rulebooks disagree.
Your pro bono work reflects a strong commitment to legal inclusion and social justice. What fuels this dedication, and how do you envision the broader role of legal professionals in expanding access to justice for marginalized communities?
Justice isn’t just my profession—it’s a responsibility that defines how I approach the law. While my resume may not explicitly list pro bono hours, my career has been shaped by a conviction that legal advocacy should never be a luxury. Early in my practice, I represented a single mother facing wrongful eviction. She hadn’t slept in days, terrified of losing her home, yet she hesitated to seek help because she assumed the system was ‘not for people like her.’ That moment crystallized for me how deeply fear and complexity alienate marginalized communities from the very institutions meant to protect them. Since then, I’ve anchored my work in dismantling those barriers.
My commitment starts with direct action. I’ve prioritized cases where individuals, like that single mother, lack the resources to fight systemic inequities. Whether it’s negotiating with landlords, defending workers’ rights, or guiding survivors of domestic violence through restraining orders, I’ve learned that access is the first hurdle. Many never reach a courtroom because they don’t know their options. That’s why I partner with NGOs to host free legal clinics in underserved neighborhoods. At one clinic, a teenager asked me, ‘Can the police really do that?’ after facing harassment. We drafted a complaint together, but what stayed with me was his shock that he had rights. It’s not enough to represent people—we have to empower them.
This is where legal literacy becomes transformative. I’ve spent weekends leading workshops in rural communities, breaking down laws into relatable terms. For example, explaining inheritance rights to women through stories instead of statutes, or using role-play to teach villagers how to file RTI requests. When people grasp their rights, they shift from feeling powerless to becoming advocates for themselves and their communities. Technology amplifies this. During the pandemic, I collaborated with a tech startup to create a chatbot that guides users through labor law disputes in regional languages. One textile worker used it to reclaim months of unpaid wages—proof that innovation can democratize justice.
But individual efforts aren’t enough. The legal fraternity must confront systemic flaws. I’ve joined advocacy groups pushing for reforms like simplifying bail procedures for low-income defendants and expanding legal aid funding. Last year, I testified before a state committee about how archaic procedural rules delay justice for rape survivors. It’s frustrating work—progress is slow—but necessary. We can’t fix a broken system without challenging its foundations.
Mentorship is equally critical. I volunteer at law schools to nurture students who see law as a tool for social change. One mentee, now a public interest lawyer, recently texted me after winning a landmark case for tribal land rights: ‘You showed me that justice isn’t just in textbooks.’ That’s the legacy I want—inspiring the next generation to prioritize ethics over billable hours.
Ultimately, justice is about dignity. Dr. King’s words—‘Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere’—ring truer today. When a farmer can’t contest land grabs or a Dalit student faces caste-based harassment without recourse, it corrodes our collective faith in the system. My role, as I see it, is to bridge the gap between the law’s promise and its practice. That means showing up in courtrooms and communities, drafting policies and pamphlets, leveraging tech and tradition.
Yes, the challenges are vast—underfunded legal aid, bureaucratic inertia, and a culture that equates legal success with corporate pay checks. But every small victory, whether it’s a client’s relieved smile or a law student’s spark of idealism, reminds me why this work matters. Justice isn’t abstract; it’s the assurance that the system sees you, hears you, and fights for you. And until that’s a reality for every Indian, I’ll keep pushing—case by case, reform by reform, heart by heart.
As a current member of the Sentence Review Board for the Delhi Government, you help review clemency and early release cases. What are the major aspects you have to keep in mind while making such decisions?
I, though not a member, while assisting the Sentence Review Board, have learned that every case is a mosaic of stories, laws, and emotions. Let me share a few moments that shaped my perspective.
There was a case involving a young man, barely 21, who’d been incarcerated for a non-violent drug offense. His file showed a troubled past—no family, homelessness, and exploitation by a local gang. But over time, he’d transformed. He earned a high school diploma in prison, taught others to read, and even started a small vegetable garden in the prison yard. The warden shared how he’d mediate conflicts among inmates, calling him a ‘quiet peacemaker.’ When compiling his case, I made sure to highlight not just his clean disciplinary record, but the person he’d become. It wasn’t about excusing his crime—it was about asking, Has he earned a chance to prove himself outside these walls?
Then there was the heart-wrenching case of a 65-year-old woman serving time for embezzlement. She’d been a single mother, desperate to fund her daughter’s cancer treatment. Her remorse was palpable in every interview. She’d spent her incarceration stitching clothes for orphanages and writing letters of apology to the victims. But what stayed with me was her daughter, now cancer-free, pleading for a chance to care for her aging mother. I remember sitting with her file late one evening, thinking about the weight of punishment versus redemption. How do you measure justice when regret is so profound?
I also recall a case where victim impact steered the conversation. A man convicted of assault had exemplary conduct in prison—counseling peers, earning certifications—but the survivor, still battling PTSD, feared his release. There were no easy answers. I worked closely with social workers to ensure her voice was central in the report, even including her request for a restraining order. It reminded me that fairness isn’t just about the offender; it’s about holding space for those still healing.
Collaboration is key. Once, a prison nurse flagged an inmate’s terminal illness—a man with months to live, too frail to pose any risk. His brother, a farmer in Punjab, wanted to take him home to spend his final days with family. The medical reports, the brother’s letters, and the quiet dignity of the prisoner’s acceptance of his fate… these details became the backbone of my recommendation. The Board approved his release, and I later heard he passed away surrounded by loved ones. It reinforced why we must never reduce people to their worst mistakes.
These experiences taught me that clemency isn’t about leniency—it’s about listening deeply to the law, the evidence, and the human heart. My job is to ensure the Board sees the full picture: the tears behind the paperwork, the growth amid the grit, and the fragile hope of second chances.
You regularly engage with academic institutions and legal forums. What core principle do you emphasize to aspiring lawyers that you feel is often overlooked in formal legal education? Additionally, what guidance would you offer to young professionals still finding their footing in the legal field?
When I mentor young lawyers, I always start with this: The law isn’t just about books and courtrooms—it’s about the person sitting across from you. Early in my career, I represented a single mother fighting a wrongful eviction. She wasn’t just a “tenant” in a file; she was terrified of losing the home where her kids took their first steps. That case taught me something no textbook ever did: empathy isn’t soft—it’s strategic. You can’t fight for someone if you don’t see them.
Here’s what I wish someone had told me when I was starting out: Stay curious, but stay grounded. The law changes faster than TikTok trends—today it’s AI regulation, tomorrow it’ll be space law! But don’t chase shiny things at the expense of fundamentals. I still rehearse courtroom procedures in my head like a nervous rookie. Why? Because last year, I won a case on a procedural technicality my opponent overlooked. Basics matter.
Words are your secret weapon. Early on, I wrote briefs packed with Latin phrases, thinking it made me sound smart. Then a judge pulled me aside and said, “Counsel, I’ve got 50 cases today—make me care in one page.” Now I write like I’m explaining things to my grandma. Clarity beats complexity every time.
Your reputation isn’t a LinkedIn badge—it’s your currency. Once, a client asked me to hide evidence. I walked away, even though it meant losing a paycheck. Two years later, that same client referred a friend, saying, “You’re the only lawyer I trust.” Integrity compounds.
Find your people. I wouldn’t be here without my mentor, Justice Kapoor, who once told me over chai, “Law is 10% argument, 90% listening.” Surround yourself with folks who’ll call you out when your ego’s writing checks your skills can’t cash.
And burnout isn’t a trophy. I learned this the hard way during a marathon corporate trial. By day three, I was running on vending machine coffee and hubris. When I fumbled a simple objection, the opposing counsel smirked, “Tired, RDB?” Now I treat rest like it’s part of the job—because it is.
Winston Churchill once said, “Success is not final, failure is not fatal…” I’ve lived that. I’ve lost cases I should’ve won and won ones I had no business touching. But what sticks with me isn’t the verdicts—it’s the client who hugged me after reuniting with their child, or the retiree who whispered, “You gave me hope again.”
At the end of the day, great lawyering isn’t about being the smartest in the room. It’s about being the one who notices—the trembling hands, the unasked question, the quiet victory hidden in a compromise. Master that, and you won’t just practice law. You’ll change lives.
The field of law is intellectually stimulating but undoubtedly comes with its own set of challenges. What initially inspired you to pursue a career in law, and what continues to drive your passion for this profession?
During my school days, even though I was a backbencher, I was deeply committed to my studies and consistently ranked among the top five students. In 12th grade, my sole focus was to score well in the board exams. At that stage, I didn’t have the right exposure or mentorship to guide me through structured career entrances like CLAT, so I missed that opportunity. But in hindsight, I believe everything unfolded as it was meant to.
My journey into law began soon after, and it felt like a natural progression. What initially inspired me was the intellectual challenge the field presents—law requires critical thinking, structured reasoning, and a constant engagement with real-world issues. I was drawn to its power to bring order, resolve disputes, and protect rights.
What keeps me passionate today is how dynamic and impactful the profession is. No two matters are ever the same. Whether I’m drafting arguments, interpreting statutes, or strategizing for a client, there’s always something new to learn and contribute. The sense of purpose that comes from knowing my work can help individuals, shape policies, or uphold justice is incredibly fulfilling. Law constantly challenges me to grow, not just as a professional but as a person. That’s what keeps me inspired every single day.
After completing your law degree, what motivated you to pursue a Master’s in Corporate and Business Law from Gujarat National Law University? Why did you choose this particular specialization and institution?
Before pursuing my Master’s, my journey as a first-generation lawyer was rooted in curiosity and a hunger to learn through experience. With no mentors in the field, I gravitated naturally toward litigation. My first internship was under Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aniruddha P. Mayee, who was then an Advocate-on-Record at the Supreme Court and is now a sitting judge of the Gujarat High Court. Observing his sharp advocacy and structured thinking left a lasting impression on me. It was there I discovered the energy and depth of courtroom practice, and I knew litigation was my path.
Being a hands-on learner, I expressed a desire to continue training under him. He encouraged me to first build a strong foundation at the trial court level, and referred me to a boutique litigation firm in Jangpura. For nearly three years, I balanced my law school schedule with intensive training at the firm, gaining invaluable exposure to real-world practice.
Later, I decided to pursue a Master’s in Corporate and Business Law from Gujarat National Law University. Having missed the NLU experience earlier, I was determined to learn in that ecosystem. GNLU’s academic rigor and national stature gave me the perfect platform to complement my practical litigation background with a solid corporate legal framework.
In the early stages of your legal career, what were some formative experiences that deepened your understanding of the law? How significant do you believe was the role of mentors or seniors during this phase?
In the early stages of my legal career, what truly deepened my understanding of the law was being exposed to its ground-level application. Working closely at the trial court level, I learned that law is not just about theory or interpretation; it is about people, timing, and precision. I saw firsthand how a strong cross-examination or a well-crafted written submission could influence the outcome of a case. This practical immersion gave me a sense of how justice is pursued step by step.
One particularly formative experience was learning to draft under tight deadlines in live matters. I understood the value of clarity, accuracy, and urgency. No classroom could have replicated that intensity.
Mentors played a critical role during this time. Their guidance was not limited to legal advice; they taught me how to carry myself in court, how to listen, when to push, and when to hold back. Their trust in giving me real responsibilities early on helped build my confidence. Being corrected in real time and then being encouraged to do better was more valuable than any textbook. These early lessons laid the foundation not just for my knowledge of law but for how I practice and perceive it to this day.
You have represented constitutional writ petitions involving sensitive issues, such as the rights of transgender and sexual minority prisoners. What inspired you to take on such complex matters? How do you approach the legal, ethical, and emotional dimensions of cases that receive widespread media attention?
Yes, I’ve always been deeply driven by causes rooted in social justice and constitutional values. My journey into such complex and sensitive matters began in 2020, when I filed a PIL in my own name before the Delhi High Court, seeking protection of attorney-client privilege in virtual communications during the COVID-19 pandemic. The court issued directions to the Bar Council of India, following which the BCI requested the government to specify secure apps for confidential communications. That experience showed me how a focused legal intervention can protect fundamental rights, even in emerging digital contexts.
Shortly after, I was approached by a legal correspondent who brought to my attention a disturbing gap, the complete absence of data regarding transgender in the NCRB’s prison statistics. This struck a chord with me. I filed another PIL arguing that in a system where transgender persons are neither acknowledged on paper nor provided with basic facilities in jails, their dignity and identity are systematically denied. I sought urgent judicial intervention to include “third gender” as a separate category in national prison statistics.
The Hon’ble Court took serious note, and the Union Government committed to including transgender persons in future jail data reporting.
Cases like these require more than legal knowledge, they demand empathy, courage, and a strong ethical compass. I approach such matters with humility and responsibility, knowing that they affect real lives and attract public scrutiny. My role is not only to argue persuasively but to uphold the dignity of those whose voices often go unheard. Media attention never distracts me, it reminds me of the greater duty I carry as a lawyer committed to constitutional values and human dignity.
After working with various Advocates-on-Record and Senior Advocates, what led you to establish your own independent practice? What were some of the initial hurdles you encountered, and how did you navigate those challenges?
I was fortunate to work under some of the finest legal minds in the profession, who not only sharpened my understanding of the law but also instilled in me the discipline, ethics, and confidence essential for courtroom practice. The exposure I received, whether through detailed research, complex drafting, or closely observing strategic litigation, made me realize the kind of advocate I aspired to become.
Eventually, I felt the urge to take ownership of my own matters and arguments. I believed that building an independent practice would allow me to grow beyond execution and step into strategic thinking, decision-making, and direct client advocacy. It was not an easy transition.
One of the biggest hurdles was earning the trust of clients without the backing of a senior’s name. I had to prove my capability in every brief and every appearance. There were also financial uncertainties and administrative pressures that come with running your own practice. But I overcame them through consistency, networking, and staying deeply committed to every matter I took up, big or small.
The challenges were many, but the sense of professional growth and personal fulfillment that comes with independence has made the journey deeply rewarding.
As an AOR you represent both private and government clients, particularly in matters under the Electricity Act. What are some recurring legal or procedural challenges you face in this domain?
As destiny would have it, my exposure to electricity and regulatory law began early in my career at one of the offices I worked in, where I had the opportunity to assist on matters for a panel representing electricity distribution companies before the Delhi High Court. That experience sparked a genuine interest in the regulatory framework under the Electricity Act. I gradually took on more responsibilities, working closely on drafting, strategy, and regulatory filings. Recognizing my growing familiarity and aptitude for the subject, the panel encouraged me to formally associate and handle matters independently. That marked the beginning of my journey in this specialized field.
Electricity law is a unique blend of legal, technical, and regulatory dimensions. One recurring challenge is navigating the procedural overlaps between forums such as the State Commissions, the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission, and Appellate Tribunal. Each has its own timelines, jurisdictional nuances, and compliance obligations. Another frequent hurdle is the technical complexity of issues, including tariff computations, grid code compliance, and power purchase agreements, which often require a detailed understanding of engineering and finance concepts.
To overcome this, I make it a point to engage regularly with technical experts and stay updated on evolving regulatory guidelines and judicial precedents. Whether I represent government utilities or private players, I approach each matter by balancing legal strategy with technical clarity. This intersectional understanding is what helps deliver real value to clients in this challenging yet intellectually rewarding area of law.
What has been one of the most challenging cases you’ve handled so far? Could you share insights into how you prepared for it and managed its complexities?
There have been several challenging cases in my journey, and each one, whether a high-stakes regulatory dispute or a sensitive constitutional matter, has tested my legal acumen in different ways. What I’ve learned is that no case is “simple” once you delve into its details. Every matter demands thorough preparation, a clear strategy, and a deep understanding of both law and facts.
I approach complex cases by breaking them down systematically, starting with exhaustive legal research, understanding procedural nuances, and aligning the facts with the most persuasive legal framework. Often, the real challenge lies in navigating unpredictability, whether it is evolving judicial trends, stakeholder expectations, or tight timelines.
Support from peers and mentors, along with constant self-discipline, has been critical. I believe the ability to remain calm under pressure, think logically, and communicate clearly both inside and outside court is what ultimately helps turn legal complexities into opportunities for impactful advocacy.
What advice would you offer to young lawyers starting their careers? Are there specific habits, mindsets, or resources that played a key role in shaping your professional journey?
My advice to young lawyers, especially those stepping into litigation, is to embrace patience and perseverance. This profession doesn’t offer immediate rewards but it promises lasting growth for those who are committed. In the early years, it’s easy to feel disheartened when you see peers in other fields earning more or progressing faster. But law, particularly litigation, is a long game. The knowledge, credibility, and client trust you build over time compound into something far more meaningful than just a paycheck.
One habit that shaped my journey was showing up consistently, even when the work felt repetitive or unrewarded. Staying curious, reading beyond case files, and learning from seniors helped me sharpen both my understanding of the law and the courtroom. I also found it crucial to remain humble. This field rewards those who are open to learning every day.
Litigation tests your character before it builds your career. But if you remain focused, disciplined, and honest in your work, the profession will eventually give you more than you imagined. There’s no shortcut, only the steady climb. And that’s what makes every milestone worth it.
Being an AOR and balancing a demanding legal practice with personal life can be challenging. How do you manage your professional responsibilities while also making time for yourself? What do you do to unwind and stay focused?
Balancing a demanding legal practice as an Advocate-on-Record with personal life certainly has its challenges, but I’ve come to believe that balance isn’t about doing everything; it’s about doing what truly matters with focus and intention. I’ve learned to manage my schedule by prioritizing what needs my attention most and creating small pockets of time for myself, no matter how busy the day is.
To unwind, I rely on simple but grounding routines: spending time with loved ones, going for long walks, and staying physically active. I also make it a point to disconnect from screens and step away from work conversations when I’m off duty. That break, however brief, allows me to return to work sharper and more focused.
For me, it’s not about achieving a perfect work-life balance every day, but about being present in whatever I’m doing, whether I’m in court or at the dinner table. That mindset keeps me centered. Over time, I’ve realized that sustaining a successful legal career isn’t just about how hard you work; it’s also about how well you care for your own well-being along the way.
Coming from a commerce background, what inspired you to pursue a career in law? In what ways has your academic foundation in commerce complemented your legal journey, particularly in corporate or commercial legal matters?
While I began my journey in commerce, my deeper purpose was always rooted in empowerment—especially through education. I saw law as a transformative tool, not just to resolve disputes but to elevate people’s understanding of their own rights. That vision pushed me to transition into the legal field.
During my B.Com, I worked as an Internal Stock Auditor and Stock Researcher. That experience grounded me in the practical workings of the corporate world—from compliance intricacies to financial accountability. It didn’t just teach me numbers; it taught me how businesses breathe. So when I entered law, especially corporate and commercial law, I wasn’t looking at statutes in isolation—I understood the business realities behind them. This dual perspective has helped me serve clients with both strategic insight and legal precision. At every step, law has enabled me to blend purpose with profession—using my legal acumen to educate, empower, and break barriers, whether it’s through my professional practice or through initiatives like BLU.
How was your experience pursuing an LL.M. in Intellectual Property Rights and Information Technology? What drew you to this specialization over others, and how has it shaped your perspective on law and innovation?
Growing up as a millennial, I witnessed the Internet evolve from dial-up modems to streaming platforms, memes, and digital marketplaces. That transformation fascinated me. I was always curious about how technology shaped communication, expression, and even identity. At the same time, I was a budding writer—scribbling short stories, blogging, and researching how books get published. That’s when I stumbled upon the concept of Intellectual Property. It felt like unlocking a new superpower—realizing that ideas, like inventions or writings, had legal lives of their own. Back when I was in law school, IP wasn’t yet the buzzword it is today. But I could see its future relevance—how creativity and innovation would increasingly become the currency of our generation. That foresight, combined with my natural curiosity for tech and content, made IPR and IT Law a very intuitive choice for my LL.M. Pursuing this specialization gave me a profound appreciation of the balance between innovation and regulation. It shaped my ability to not only advise creators and tech companies but also advocate for ethical, accessible, and inclusive innovation. Today, whether I’m working on a deal, mentoring students through BLU, or speaking on digital rights, my perspective is shaped by that early blend of passion, foresight, and learning.
In the early phase of your career, you were drawn to academics. What were some of the key experiences during that time that deepened your understanding of law and the subjects you taught? What eventually motivated your transition from academia to law firm practice?
I’ve always had the heart of an academician. Even while pursuing my Master’s, I found myself teaching, mentoring, and constantly questioning the “why” behind every legal principle. That dual role—as both a student and a lecturer—helped me look at law from both sides of the lens: as a learner and a guide.
Among all the subjects I engaged with, Contract Law left a lasting imprint. It’s one of those timeless areas of law—centuries old yet constantly evolving. No matter how advanced technology becomes or how industries pivot, contracts remain the language through which businesses and individuals build trust. Teaching contracts made me realize how theory and practice often diverge, and that’s when the spark was lit—I wanted to experience how these doctrines come alive in boardrooms, negotiations, and deal-making. That desire to move beyond the black-letter law and engage with the real-world intricacies of business is what eventually drew me to law firm practice. I wanted to see how contracts function under pressure, in dynamic sectors, across jurisdictions—and how I, as a lawyer, could bring both legal integrity and commercial sensibility to the table. Even today, that academic lens hasn’t left me. Whether through social work or mentorship, I continue to teach—but now with the added richness of my experience and applied insight.
Transitioning to an in-house counsel role marks a significant shift in a legal career. You’ve worked with some of the biggest names in the media and entertainment sector. How have these roles differed from one another, and could you share one of the most challenging cases you encountered along the way?
Having worked both at a law firm and as in-house counsel, I’ve come to realize that the shift isn’t so much about a change in career—it’s a shift in perspective. In a firm, you operate as a specialist—often brought in to solve a specific legal problem. But as an in-house counsel, you’re a strategic partner. The role demands that you understand the pulse of the business, anticipate risks before they arise, and offer solutions that don’t just check the legal box, but help the business move forward with confidence. What’s unique about the media and entertainment sector is that it may appear as one unified industry, but it’s actually a convergence of many touchpoints—IP, contracts, advertising laws, digital platforms, privacy, broadcasting compliance, and more. Each company I’ve worked with has had its own rhythm—some with a strong content-first approach, others more tech-driven or distribution-led. Understanding the nuance of each business model has been essential, because legal advice isn’t one-size-fits-all; it needs to be context-aware and commercially sound. As an in-house lawyer, I see my role as that of an enabler—ensuring the legal function supports innovation, protects creative vision, and helps the business build sustainable value while staying compliant. That blend of law and business strategy is what makes this role both challenging and deeply fulfilling.
As in-house counsel, how do you navigate the ever-evolving legal landscape especially with regard to content licensing, intellectual property, and digital media regulation in a fast-paced, highly regulated industry?
Law, by its very nature, is in a constant state of evolution. Even as we speak, it’s shifting—adapting to new technologies, redefining old principles, and responding to societal and business needs. As a legal professional, evolving alongside it isn’t optional—it’s essential. In an industry like media and digital content, where disruption is the norm, my approach has been to be informed. I don’t believe in simply forwarding the latest update or echoing headlines. For me, it’s about pausing, reading deeply and asking—what does this mean for our business? That habit of consciously engaging with the law, not just reacting to it, helps me filter noise from relevance. It ensures that when I advise on licensing structures, IP risks, or platform regulations, the counsel is not only current but also considered. The joy is in doing the work, not just knowing the jargon.
Ultimately, being an in-house counsel is about bridging change with clarity—guiding your team through uncertainty, while staying rooted in both principle and practicality. Your expertise spans IPR, media, and technology laws, with a focused interest in data privacy. In your view, what steps can India take to strengthen its data protection regime and bring it closer in alignment with global frameworks such as the GDPR?
India’s journey toward a comprehensive data protection framework is both necessary and timely. As the world’s largest democracy with a rapidly digitizing population, our approach must be inclusive, scalable, and rooted in our constitutional values. Frameworks like the GDPR have certainly set global benchmarks, and there is much we can be inspired by—particularly in areas like user consent, accountability, and transparency. But our legal and societal landscape is distinct, and that calls for a framework that is uniquely Indian in its design and delivery. One key difference lies in the scope of government exemptions. Our law, in its current form, allows certain leeways for the State in matters of data processing. While this reflects the need for governance flexibility, it also places a greater onus on transparent implementation and robust oversight. As citizens, we must remain aware of our rights and engage in the legal process, so the law can evolve to reflect the democratic ideals it’s built upon. Ultimately, the goal isn’t to replicate GDPR—it’s to build a framework that works for India, encourages digital trust, and empowers every citizen in this data-driven age. And I believe we are well on our way to achieving that.
As an author and a mentor deeply engaged with the next generation of legal minds, what gaps do you observe in contemporary legal education? How does your initiative, Basic Law Understanding(BLU), aim to bridge the gap between academic theory and practical legal application?
We often say that the next generation is tech-driven—and that’s a wonderful strength. But in a world shaped by AI and automation, we need to ensure that not just GenAI is well-trained, but also that Gen Next of professionals are trained to think independently, apply critical reasoning beyond just algorithms.
BLU is not just a knowledge exchange—it’s a purpose-driven initiative to empower. It is designed for the masses—to bridge the gap not only between classroom and courtroom, but between citizens and their rights. Whether it’s a student understanding broadcasting rights or a citizen decoding consumer rights. The aim is to be ‘Aware’.
Having actively contributed to grassroots activism, corporate legal affairs, academic publishing, and mentoring while also leading social initiatives, how do you maintain a balance between your professional responsibilities and personal well-being?
For me, the idea isn’t to chase balance—it’s to create blend. I don’t see my life as separate compartments of “work,” “passion,” and “personal time.” Instead, I try to design my day—and my purpose—in a way that all these facets flow into one another. But at the core of it all is one intention: to use law as a tool to empower.
This blend helps me stay connected to what I do and why I do it. I’ve learned that personal well-being doesn’t come from disconnecting from work—it comes from doing work that is aligned with your values, surrounded by people who believe in impact over optics. Of course, I have my “DND” moments too—where I switch off, read something that has nothing to do with the law, or spend time with the people who keep me grounded. But I don’t put pressure on myself to perform a balance like a checklist. Instead, I remind myself: if what you do fuels you, then you’re already living in alignment. Whether it’s Gen Z finding their calling or seasoned professionals reinventing their role, I believe the future of law lies where empathy, and empowerment coexist naturally.
What advice would you give to aspiring lawyers at the beginning of their careers? Are there any key habits, mindsets, or resources that you found particularly helpful in shaping your own path in law?
My biggest advice? It’s that idiom
“Jack of all trades, master of none, but better than being stuck mastering just one.”
Law is a vast and layered field, and the more you expose yourself to its different shades—be it contracts, litigation, dispute resolution —the clearer your own voice and direction will become.
In the early years, don’t rush to define your niche. Explore, assist, volunteer, write, question. “The legal profession isn’t a linear path—it’s more like a mosaic. Each experience, even the smallest one, adds depth to your understanding.” It’s okay to not have all the answers at the start—curiosity will take you further than certainty ever can.
What helped me most was following what intrigued me.
And finally, stay rooted in empathy and purpose. Read beyond the law, fuel your hobbies. Listen to voices outside your echo chamber. Do something that connects you to yourself the most.
Your journey is your own, so don’t fear the unconventional. Walk it with awareness, and you’ll find not just success, but meaning.
*All views and responses mentioned here are personal.*
