Super Lawyer

Blog

  • “The ability to understand new industries, learn continuously, and adapt legal thinking to new realities will make a significant difference.” – Riddima Sharma, Partner at ADP Law Offices.

    “The ability to understand new industries, learn continuously, and adapt legal thinking to new realities will make a significant difference.” – Riddima Sharma, Partner at ADP Law Offices.

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

    Today, with almost a decade of experience behind you, looking back, what first drew you to law, and how did your undergraduate years shape your interest in intellectual property and allied fields?

    My journey into law was less of a direct calling and more a process of discovery. Back then, I was more defined by the career paths I was closing the door on, and law felt like a world of opportunity. I treated my classes as an exploration, searching for that one area that would genuinely resonate with me. That moment finally came late in law school when I was introduced to Intellectual Property. As a still-developing field, it felt exciting, but what really captivated me was the unique space where creativity and legal protection meet.

    That curiosity turned into a passion during my first internship with Mr. Ameet Datta, (formerly a Partner at Saikrishna & Associates) now the Managing Counsel at ADP Law Offices. As I watched technology evolve and brands become more valuable, I realized just how vital IP is as a shield for innovation, ideas, and expression. It was that realization that truly set my career path.

    You went on to pursue an LL.M. at the Munich Intellectual Property Law Centre, one of the most respected programs in the world. What motivated you to choose this course, and how did studying in such an international academic environment broaden your understanding of IP law? Could you also share how aspiring candidates can enrol in such a prestigious program?

    You know, it’s funny, I was getting really into IP law, but I kept feeling like I was seeing everything through a keyhole. All the thinking, all the cases, were from my own country’s perspective, and I just had this nagging feeling that I was missing the bigger picture.

    MIPL stood out because it is uniquely focused on IP and brings together expertise from leading institutions such as Max Planck and the University of Augsburg. The program offered not only academic rigor but also the opportunity to learn alongside peers from across the world, each bringing their own perspective and experience. This international exposure was invaluable, as it gave me a broader view of how IP is understood and applied across jurisdictions.

    For aspiring candidates, I would say the most important step is to build a strong foundation in IP during undergraduate years and to engage actively with research and writing in the field. The selection process is competitive, but genuine interest, clarity of purpose, and prior work or academic contributions in IP can make a strong application.

    Alongside your studies, you published articles on significant IP issues such as copyright royalties, broadcasting rights, and the recognition of “well-known” marks. What inspired you to explore these themes, and how do you see academic writing contributing both to your professional practice and to the wider discourse on IP law?

    During my course (thanks to MIPLC), I realised that writing is one of the best ways to discipline one’s thoughts and meaningfully contribute to discussions in this field. As students, we are often trained to see issues from a purely academic perspective, where outcomes are framed as either right or wrong. What MIPLC taught me instead was that in law, nothing is absolutely right or wrong . Rather, it is the reasoning and interpretation that lends weight to a position. That shift in perspective stayed with me. At the time, I chose to write on subjects like copyright royalties, broadcasting rights, and well-known marks, not only because I was working on them closely, but also because they had direct implications for creators and businesses. Over the years, I have come to value writing even more as it contributes to the collective understanding of the profession and, at times, can influence how laws are read and applied. For me personally, it became a bridge between academic study and real-world practice.

    You began your professional career with Saikrishna & Associates, where you grew into the role of Senior Associate. Could you share some defining experiences from this phase whether in trademark prosecution, IP litigation, or consumer protection that played a key role in shaping your growth as a lawyer?

    My early years at Saikrishna & Associates were deeply rooted in IP litigation, where I had the chance to work on matters that were both complex and high-stakes. Most of my focus was on IP disputes, and I was fortunate to work alongside some of the sharpest minds in the field. Those years gave me invaluable exposure from the intensity of courtroom practice and the rush of filings, to client interactions and my own growth as a lawyer. 

    Another significant phase of my career was in consumer protection, where I was entrusted with leading a team for a leading mobile manufacturer. The role required me to think beyond just the legal arguments, it was about strategy, execution, and making sure the client’s interests were protected at every stage. What stayed with me from that experience was not just tackling the legal issues, but also learning how to manage a team, set direction, and maintain consistency across multiple jurisdictions. That combination of leading people while steering complex matters was a real turning point in my professional journey and continues to shape the way I approach cases even today.

    Over the years, you have gained exposure to diverse domains such as trade regulatory compliance, consumer law, employment disputes, and arbitration. How has this multidisciplinary experience been beneficial to handle complex, multi-jurisdictional matters for global clients? What sector-specific challenges have you faced while dealing with arbitrations for international clients?

    My experience across these different domains has taught me that client issues rarely fit into neat legal boxes. What I have found, especially with complex, multi-jurisdictional matters, is that an issue that begins as a regulatory query can quickly intersect with consumer law or have employment implications. Having that broad background helped me to connect those dots early on. Instead of looking at a problem from a single perspective, I can anticipate how it might evolve and build a more resilient strategy for the client, which is essential when you’re navigating different legal cultures.

    In arbitration, I have seen how sector-specific challenges can shape the course of proceedings. For example, in matters involving international clients, aligning the expectations of different legal systems with the procedural framework of arbitration requires careful navigation. There are also cultural and commercial nuances that need to be factored in, since what is persuasive in one jurisdiction may not resonate the same way in another. Learning to manage these differences while keeping the client’s broader objectives in mind has been an important part of my journey.

    In your current role, what inspired your transition, and how are you approaching the leadership responsibilities of managing large-scale IP litigation campaigns and advising clients across multiple industries? What essential qualities do you look for when building your team?

    The transition into my current role has been quite recent, so in many ways it is still a process of learning, adapting, and growing into the responsibilities that come with it. What inspired the move was the opportunity to work more closely with clients on a larger scale, not just on individual disputes but in shaping their overall IP strategy and helping them navigate complex litigation campaigns.

    When it comes to leadership, especially on these large campaigns, my philosophy is pretty simple: give people a clear map and a good compass, then trust them to navigate their part of the journey. My main job is to make sure everyone understands the ‘why’ behind what we’re doing, the client’s ultimate goal. Once that vision is shared, I find the best results come from giving talented people the autonomy and support they need to truly own their work. It’s about guiding the strategy without micromanaging the execution.

    As for building a team, a strong resume is just the start. I look for a certain mindset. I want people who are naturally curious, the ones who are always asking “what if?” because that’s how you stay ahead in a field like IP. I also look for a deep sense of accountability, where people treat a client’s problem as if it were their own. But above all, I look for a genuine collaborative spirit. A high-stakes litigation campaign is a team sport, and you need people who instinctively pick each other up and push each other to be better, especially when the pressure is on. That’s the kind of team that truly succeeds.

    Looking back on your journey from law school to partnership, what key values have remained constant? What advice would you give to young lawyers aspiring to build a career in intellectual property especially when it comes to balancing deep subject expertise with the ability to adapt to rapidly changing technological and regulatory landscapes?

    Looking back, the values that have remained constant for me are sincerity, consistency, and respect for the profession. No matter the stage of my career, I have found that showing up prepared, being thorough, and treating people with fairness has gone a long way in building trust with clients, colleagues, and even opponents in litigation. These values have shaped not only the way I work but also the way I lead. For young lawyers interested in IP, my advice would be to build a strong foundation in the subject while also remaining open to change. IP is deeply linked with creativity and technology, both of which are evolving faster than ever. The ability to understand new industries, learn continuously, and adapt legal thinking to new realities will make a significant difference. At the same time, it is important to stay grounded in the basics, because strong fundamentals are what allow you to adapt with confidence. If you combine deep subject knowledge with curiosity and flexibility, you can find a very rewarding path in IP law.

    Get in touch with Riddima Sharma –

  • Blending Advocacy, Strategy, and Technology in Modern Litigation – Kunal Sinha, Independent Litigation and Dispute Resolution Counsel.

    Blending Advocacy, Strategy, and Technology in Modern Litigation – Kunal Sinha, Independent Litigation and Dispute Resolution Counsel.

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

    With over eight years of experience appearing before the Supreme Court of India, the Delhi High Court, and various tribunals, you have had a diverse legal journey. Given all that, when did your interest in law first develop? What inspired you to choose this field, especially considering that law was not always a highly sought-after career?

    Yes, absolutely. I think if I have to go back in time, it is around my high school and why I chose law. I had a keen sense of justice. I wanted to do the right thing, stand up for what’s right. More than anything, I was also, I believe, influenced by a lot of novels and movies. It would instill a lot of pride in me when I saw a lawyer really fighting for justice on screen, you know, things like those.

    So those were the points which sort of nudged me in this direction to explore more about it. Later on, I always had an inherent attraction towards psychology. I used to read a lot of Sigmund Freud and criminal psychology and other things, just out of interest. And somehow, at that time, I think especially around the time when I was graduating high school, things were really looking up. A lot of law schools were opening. Especially, what really I think made a difference in my life personally is that around that time Jindal Global Law School really came up, and I was really in awe reading about it. And so Jindal sort of pulled me in this direction.

    I also cleared the CLAT exam. I hope it’s the same exam now. And so I cleared one of these NLUs. And you know, the first week I was like, no, I’m going to drop out of law, because it brought me back to the things which I hated the most: monotony. The way it was taught there in the government institution was a lot of just reading out things. The professor would come and everybody would start taking notes, and I was like, what is happening? Why can’t we just share the notes online or come to what’s important?

    Maybe talk about law. Talk about how you apply law instead of just everybody copying the exact same thing which the professor narrates. I found it extremely useless, the way of teaching, the traditional way of teaching. Then I moved to Jindal Global Law School, and I was really impressed by the way they were teaching.

    It was a lot of hypothetical, research-oriented, open-book examinations, no note-taking. Notes were up to you, how you wanted to take them. There would be slides shared after class, so you already had everything that had been taught to you. So a lot of technologically advanced ways of teaching, which I think mirrored a lot of universities abroad, and we had a lot of faculty from abroad as well. So it was just all those mixes of things which made me understand law, and that initial attraction happened, that pulled me into the career. It wouldn’t have been possible if it wasn’t for my alma mater.

    And especially the way technology was used, and the break from monotony of just remembering case laws, citations, or sections. I mean, we had open-book exams, so all the questions were very hypothetical. I would just conclude this by saying that it’s a mix of a lot of legal dramas I saw in movies, novels, inclination towards criminal psychology, and a contribution of the university. All of them played a role.

    Strictly from a point of view of going to university for a job, I think that wasn’t my intention. I really liked it. And my family, we come from a sort of background where engineering plus MBA is equal to an IT job, something like that. So it was a tried and tested path for success. You try to do IIT, then IIM, and then you get a great job, then you move to the US, and you settle. That was sort of the ladder in which my family saw success. So this was really a breaking-tradition sort of thing for me to do law.

    From breaking traditions at home to experiencing a diverse environment in your law program, do you think this influenced the diversity in your practice as well? When you interact with peers or colleagues and notice the differences in approach or understanding, how do you encourage and motivate yourself in such situations? Additionally, how have you brought the learnings from your alma mater into your practice, and how have you implemented these experiences in running your own law firm?

    Again, it’s very difficult to word it in a few sentences, but I would say it’s a contribution of a lot of things. Let’s say, the first limb of your question about my colleagues, I would say that all my colleagues have been extremely, extremely smart, winners of different moot courts and all when we were in university.

    So, a lot of friends and everything. I think the difference which I saw was that they had a more structured way of growing in their profession. And a lot of structured internships, a lot of structured interviews to get a job and everything.

    Well, I wanted my early twenties to be about exploration. So, that way I differentiated from my friends. It’s definitely better to have more structured planning and a more concrete way of progressing in a career than just going out there in the world and just seeing what comes your way.

    So definitely, I think when I was just in law school, I think every year, like the first year I would want to be a corporate lawyer, second year I would want to be something else. So I could never really have a static thing in my mind. What happened was during the internships, I interned with IndusLaw, ITC, different places in different capacities.

    And I enjoyed the Patiala House Court trial matters the most. While talking to you, I think a lot of self-reflection is happening. And I think, again, the answer is monotony. So every day you end up learning something new, interacting with newer clients.

    So that way I got pulled towards litigation. It wasn’t my first preference in law school because I wanted to get a more stable income career and everything. So a lot of good fortune to have landed in chambers where I was not treated just like a junior or just like a person who does research.

    All the seniors I have met were very, very good mentors. And I think spending time as a mentee during those formative years is so important and depends on your luck as well to fall in these kinds of chambers. But that person can really pull you up and teach you a lot, or you can just do a dedicated task every day.

    And you may not grow at the same speed as somebody whose mentor really wants to help. So what I really realized is that a lot of your growth is not just merit, it’s a lot of relationship building. How you come across to your mentor, how much trust he has in you. So this trust starts from very basic things, like if your senior has asked you to come to court at nine and you are there at 8.45 every day, every time, you never miss a date. Little things really make a big difference. And then they start trusting you with bigger cases, start telling you to handle clients yourself. So a lot of my experience and confidence came because of my seniors who handheld me in different areas.

    So that being said, while you were establishing your career, how soon did you decide that you would go for independent practice? Because there is a lot of planning that goes in, even when you are working with or for someone, you start planning for that. So what was that particular reason or maybe what kind of thought went into deciding this factor so early in your career that you wanted to have your independent practice?

    So it was just, let’s say, more like a breakfast conversation. One of the designated seniors, now she’s a very good lady lawyer in the Supreme Court, and what she told me was that you can very well be a part of the chamber, we’ll refer you cases, you do that, do my case, and time will fly and you’ll be in your forties and you’ll still be here.

    She said, take the leap, ask your seniors to refer you cases. Open up your thing, and instead of spending time with us, go and pitch to the government, PSUs, or other places. Spend your time pitching and not in the way of asking for a job, but more like getting an empanelment and an association.

    And she said that associations never die. You’ll always be our friend in this community, but what really matters is that you tend to be comfortable. So once you’re comfortable, you might as well reach your forties, and there won’t be a day dedicated like, okay, this day he’s getting independent. So she was like, if you’re just waiting for that spark or that amazing muharat or something like that, that day is not going to happen, and you just take the leap now. And the best time to take a leap is when you have certain savings, I think.

    So you have a little bit of savings, you know you can survive for the next six months. Take the leap. Most likely, in six months, you won’t be that profitable. But these things only start coming into action when you really go independent. And all these seniors, they were also reminiscing the days they chose to be independent.

    And she said that there were times that she used to cry because she couldn’t pay the rentals or the fees of the clerk. But she held herself strong. She managed, pushed through it. And again, a lot of focus on relationship building, meeting people. Those things are very, very important.

    So it was sort of, let’s say, a cushion which I got from my seniors in the initial days. My best clients, the highest-paying clients, were the referred clients from my senior. I don’t think there was any other way I would have reached these clients if it wasn’t for my seniors. So a lot of trust, a lot of confidence they had in me to have referred to me like that.

    Having such mentors and seniors is also very good luck because it is not easy to find one. In very early stages, like when you started, even before that, you worked with several companies and a variety of law firms, both nationally and internationally, in different capacities. What was the most valuable learning that you had during that time? How did that learning shape your understanding not only about the foundation of the law but also to pave the way for the foundation of your independent practice as well? How has that worked out for you, other than your seniors and mentors being in the picture?

    Right, with respect to that, especially, I think the younger you are, it impacts you a lot more, like your first jobs would impact. The first year of working has a lot of impact and then it just gets routine.

    So there is a very significant impact in the initial years. And I think I was working in Toronto with a barrister there, and a lot of things which I incorporated in terms of, I don’t know if it is relevant to this question, but I see a lot of transparency.

    There is a lesser senior-junior gap in these law firms abroad, especially in Toronto, the US culture in general. And there is a lot of opportunity to just meet them without that fear of talking to a very senior person, which I see quite visible in the law firms here, or the kind of practice there is in chambers here in Delhi. So as soon as that comfort level is there, a lot of transparency in terms of what a person will be able to do and what he won’t be able to do is there instead.

    And you can also ask doubts. I think that is also one of the issues which I faced in a law firm here, that comfort level is not built where the associate can just go up to the partner and say, I have this doubt, can you clarify? What exactly do you need from me? What output can I give?

    And that person is working to the best of his ability. And there is this gap, this unsaid hierarchy, where you have to put your head down. So that sort of thing, which I did not experience in the beginning, gave me a lot of knowledge and understanding with respect to speaking directly to the senior and really discussing things with the senior. And I wasn’t just like a cog in the machine, if that is the right metaphor, where you are just doing one part and you are just showing up and doing your thing. That freedom, that open-door policy, is something which I experienced early on and I really incorporated that. Other than that, a lot of things like, I think somewhere in India, we have this colonial, British-era, archaic way of writing judgments, or these judgments which are often published and all that.

    It is so complex. It is far away from the comprehension of a layman. And I feel a certain level of clarity and predictability and structure, which I learned there, and I found it missing here. So I tend to incorporate that in whatever I can do at present in my small office.

    I try to incorporate things which I learned of transparency and making your clients understand their petitions and not get swayed away by fancy legal lingo. Especially when discussing contracts and everything, I try to really simplify for the person who is sitting in front of me, for the client, and even how I would present myself in court would also be a lot simpler. I wouldn’t just go around beating around the bush with respect to fancy words and everything. So this is something which I have incorporated.

    You have also been empanelled with the Punjab National Bank and Central Warehousing Corporation, where you regularly handle high-stake commercial and civil disputes. What kind of challenges do you see or face while managing these disputes, keeping in mind that you work for the government sector there? And there are multiple stakeholders who are also involved, so you have to take care of all the sides related to that particular challenge. So in these kinds of disputes, how do you work around them and how do you convince or formulate a strategy for such high-stake issues?

     Like most of the government PSUs I have worked in,  there have been times I’ve been on the other side. I would really think that we have to be very, very pro solution oriented and going through litigation is tedious.  The government doesn’t really want that.

    They want solutions, they want settlements. A person as a lawyer, one’s duty is not to just be very good at presenting yourself in the court. It’s to have that intention, to be solution oriented, to tell the people responsible that this is the realistic judgment.

    This is the realistic order we are about to get or we’ll get in future. And this is where we are.   So why not just try to get to a solution now instead of waiting for the court to take its due time to come to an order. So especially with all these government PSUs, my intention is to have an arbitration clause. 

     Their intention also, it reflects that they want to avoid litigation, they want to go into arbitration. They want to have quick redressal,  and as a lawyer, as their panel counsel, my job is to ensure that  the least amount of litigation happens and we can come to an understanding at the earliest moment.

    Thanks for sharing those insights. So when we started the conversation, you talked about data privacy and other aspects, and your background is also in data protection and privacy management, along with the training in Canada and Europe. How do you see the kind of evolving landscape for the Indian DPDP Act and where do you see that we stand when we compare these kinds of acts, especially the new technology-driven acts around the world and what India is doing? What kind of difference do you see, and how do you make sure that you practice it in the best format possible, keeping in mind your international clients as well?

    Well, I really think our act mirrors and reflects the GDPR, which is in Europe, and a lot of concepts are there. So very, very similar, very progressive. But just coming to the ground reality, I think this conversation should be more reflective of what really happens.

    And in our practice, what I have seen is a lot of sharing of documents within law firms, within lawyers, through WhatsApp, through emails. So one should be really, really careful with all that, about sharing confidential information, even amongst our peers.

    And first, that cultural shift has to be there to really understand that there will be consequences. In general conversations, I see a lot of lawyers talk in the cafeteria, talking about their cases. One has to be very, very careful not to disclose your clients, not to disclose anything personal, or not even say something from which a person can really predict who I am speaking about.

    So that cultural shift has to be there with respect to privacy, and I think that is missing. Also, the way our websites are made, or our shopping websites are made, or any website for that matter, it is not humanly possible to read the cookie, the privacy policy, etc.

    So really, there is a great disbalance. You can take consent from a person on a 300-page document within one second, and a person just has to click OK. It is not humanly possible to read 300 pages before entering a website. So again, regulation has to come from the side of the government or from an authority, which we are doing, because it is not a contract between equals.

    Because if you are one big corporation, you have so much power. You have great lawyers to draft these contracts, and you expect a layman who is buying maybe a golf club, and then he will have to sign these pages, to just click OK. In a way, it is implied consent to accepting their policies.

    So there is definitely a lot of disbalance. And what I have seen is that I go to a shop and they ask for your number so easily, like it is nothing, like I have to give it. They don’t even bother with your consent.

    If you need the bill, you need to give the number. I am like, what kind of a relationship is this? You are putting pressure that if I need the bill, I need to give you the number, and then the number is just available out there, and you will be getting random calls and promotions.

    So where do we draw the line? Why don’t we have that power as consumers to say no, to say to the company that, okay, forget me, erase my data, whatever you have on me? These provisions are there, but to what extent are we really incorporating them and to what extent are we really educating the consumers about them?

    I mean, there is a huge gap. And I think as consumers, we are on the losing end of this battle. The way private data is shared, I think everybody would have experienced talking amongst their friends about a certain product and then seeing the advertisement of that online all of a sudden.

    So who is listening to what? To what extent is our data being shared? There is a lot of gray area in this, and there is absolutely a lack of transparency and a huge imbalance of power between us and the technology, the people out there who want the data. So regulation has to come from the government, from the authorities, so that there is some fear in the people or in the corporations or technology-related companies to be careful with the data.

     So true that we should be aware of our privacy as well as the child’s privacy. Nobody talks about child rights either, which is something absolutely missing from what we are doing, although it is there in the act. But if we are not aware of our own privacy, then how are we going to be inspired by child rights and other aspects.

     Absolutely. I think that it is just that the act, that legislation has to reflect or be incorporated in societal culture. And there’s seriously a big gap when it comes to that.

    Everything, even if you visit somebody’s apartment these days, they need your phone number, data, everything to let you in. And then you have been profiled. And you don’t know who’s buying this profile. How many times have you visited the hospital? Maybe the insurance company is buying the profile.

    So there’s a lot of sharing of data which a person has not expressly consented to. Consent can be skewed in a way that you click okay on a cookie policy or something like that and then, in a way, legally the companies are protected. But is it really a balanced contract?

    I don’t think so. The consumers, the regular people, have been taken for a ride.

    Keeping all this kind of technological advent and the kind of issues that arise with it and the regulations that are required, you have extensively worked in this field as well. How do you keep yourself ahead of the times and learn about all these things? Where do you learn from? What kind of research do you do around this, and what will be your advice to the younger generation who are entering this particular field in this specifically technologically advanced era? Things have changed before COVID and after COVID, the kind of world we are living in. So how do you see yourself, your practice, your firm, and how do you see the young generation learning from it?

     Right at the outset, I would say the old schoolers, the law firms, are hesitant. Even today they are very non-AI, they have these internal policies, but AI is so powerful. It’s not so easy to just reject it outright. The more realistic thing will be to adopt it and regulate it.

    And I think the younger generation, we know that you are using AI, we know that you are using it for research and drafting and whatnot. So there doesn’t have to be shame in it. Be outright. Be transparent with your bosses and professors and say that this is the kind of research you’ve collated, and as long as you’re using a tool, do good work.

    That’s what matters. As long as that tool is not misused to the extent of plagiarism, I think it’s absolutely fine. One should adopt it. I have been using AI tools for my scheduling. So imagine earlier if you typed so-and-so versus the state, versus the case number, et cetera.

    Now I can just, I have this app. I can just update my data, say put it up in my calendar for so-and-so date. So everybody’s using it and younger people are using it. It’s a great tool. So imagine going through a contract of 200 pages and you really want to understand if there are any loopholes, what exactly the termination conditions are.

    For instance, if you just go to the termination clause, there will be clauses talking about termination. But you need to really holistically understand the contract because a lot of times these clauses have a bearing on each other.

    And a lot of times these clauses are extensions of each other. So you cannot read these clauses in isolation. Let’s say one person uses AI to really understand the termination clause, or let’s say whatever period, indemnity clause in totality, and see how it assists you.

    So use AI like an assistant. You wouldn’t put your assistant’s work directly to the client. You’ll ask a paralegal to help you out and then filter things out for you, and then you apply your legal mind to it and then take it ahead. So as long as you’re using it as a paralegal or an AI agent, it’s fine.

    It’s absolutely fine. There’s no shame around it. I know my partners are really upset because of some interns who used AI and found these AI-hallucinated case laws, which do not exist. And this I’m talking about in some tier-one law firm.

    So it is concerning, but use it as an agent. If, let’s say, your intern brings you a case law, you don’t just directly sign it, right? You would go to SCC Online, a more legitimate sort of legal resource, and cross-check it. But, in essence, I would just like to say be adaptable.

    See how the situation is changing. Very soon there won’t be a lot of paralegals. As a job, it may become obsolete. Stenographers may become obsolete. So be realistic. There is an aspect of what’s morally correct and what’s not. Let’s not go there at the moment.

    But what’s real is that yes, jobs are going to move, a lot of clerical jobs will go away. So be mindful of that and use this as an opportunity to do really good legal work. Be better than your seniors because they didn’t have these tools. Now your senior would’ve taken a day to read a contract.

    You can do it much faster and try to do the law analytical stuff because your clerical stuff is taken care of. So use it like you have hired an intern or a junior paralegal and then be the person who vets everything before forwarding it to the court or client.

     Thank you for talking about all these aspects of AI and how to use those kinds of tools for your own benefit and for your work’s benefit. It has been a very enriching conversation with you where you have talked about your understanding and the way your seniors have helped you, all of it hopefully is going to help our learners to understand how they should pave their way in being not only first generation lawyer, but I would say first generation using technology at this level because this is something which is absolutely new for legal fraternity, so thank you for this conversation.

    Just adding one last thing with respect to the AI, it’s bridging the gap. Imagine if nobody has the excuse now that I do not have good professors. I do not have a good education, my college isn’t good enough.

    You have these sources, you can get access to a lot of great sources online, so there is no excuse now. A level playing field has been made because of AI and technology. So you can be anyone, you can be a first-generation or third-generation lawyer. Now the third-generation lawyers have their own challenges.

    Being under the shadow of someone, someone a great lawyer sometimes. So that kind of sometimes limits the third or the fourth-generation lawyer. So a lot of these seniors, which I know, have sent their kids to absolutely different chambers.

    Far away from their chamber so that they learn to stand on their own feet. I see a lot of LinkedIn posts about first-generation, second-generation differences. It’s not as rosy as people think to be a third-generation lawyer or a fourth-generation lawyer. One always has to show merit and everybody, in a sense, is a first-generation lawyer.

    This is not like a food business or a restaurant that, okay, it just came to you. Everybody has to show merit. Everybody has to show their skills to really last in this profession. So, in essence, now that AI is there and other technology, which makes it easier to navigate cases, easier to do research.

    One should learn all that and this is a great time to be a lawyer in a way that now you have a level playing field, you can go against the best.

    Get in touch with Kunal Sinha –

  • “AI is certainly going to play an important role in compliance and investigations, but I don’t see it as something that will completely take over.” – Guneet Gudh, Principal Associate at Panag & Babu.

    “AI is certainly going to play an important role in compliance and investigations, but I don’t see it as something that will completely take over.” – Guneet Gudh, Principal Associate at Panag & Babu.

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

    You have built a distinguished career as a Financial Crimes & Corporate Governance Lawyer. What initially drew you to this specialisation, and how did your academic background shape the perspective you bring to your practice today?

    I grew up around conversations on business and decision-making, so questions of accountability and systems were never abstract for me; they were part of daily life. That naturally drew me toward financial crimes and governance, because I could see how one weak link could impact an entire organization. My academic journey from JGLS to experiences at LSE and Augsburg University gave me the global perspective I needed. It taught me to look at compliance and governance not just as rules to follow, but as tools to build trust and resilience. That mix of early exposure and academic grounding still defines the way I practice today.

    In your experience across developed and emerging markets, what are the most striking differences in investigative and compliance strategies? Which international best practices could be effectively localised for India’s evolving landscape?

    I would challenge the notion that the differences in compliance approaches lie solely between developed and emerging markets. In my experience, the real distinction is not geographical; it stems from the ethics, priorities, and compliance mindset of an organisation’s leadership. When leadership is genuinely committed to integrity and transparency, even jurisdictions with evolving regulations can foster proactive and effective compliance. Conversely, where leadership is indifferent or evasive, even the most advanced regulatory systems can be rendered ineffective.

    That said, India can certainly benefit from selectively adopting global best practices, such as strengthening internal controls, conducting sharper and more independent compliance audits, and leveraging technology-driven tools for real-time monitoring. However, these mechanisms only achieve their purpose when reinforced by strong leadership and a well-equipped legal and compliance ecosystem that recognizes compliance not merely as a shield against penalties, but as a foundation for building sustainable trust.

    Looking toward the next decade, how do you envision the fusion of technology, governance, and cross-border regulation reshaping compliance practice, especially with the rise of AI and digital investigation tools?

    AI is certainly going to play an important role in compliance and investigations, but I don’t see it as something that will completely take over. The human element, the judgment, experience, and ethical grounding that specialists in this field bring, remains irreplaceable. Complex financial crime matters often involve nuance, intent, and context that no algorithm can yet fully grasp. It will take AI time to reach that stage.

    That said, I view AI as an additional strength in the lawyer’s toolkit. It can help sift through vast volumes of data, spot unusual patterns, and accelerate processes that once took weeks. But at the end of the day, AI is a supporting hand, not the lead investigator. The control, the strategy, and the interpretation still rest with the human professional.

    Right now, there is a tendency to overstate AI’s capabilities, almost treating it as magic. But in reality, it is just another tool, powerful, yes, but still a tool. I compare it to how Microsoft Office transformed law practice in the 1990s. Back then, it didn’t replace lawyers, but it fundamentally changed how we worked and made us more efficient. I believe AI will do the same; it will make us sharper and faster, but it won’t replace the human expertise at the core of the legal practice.

    The surge in online fraud, cyber-enabled financial crimes, and digital payment scams has created new challenges for regulators, corporates, and law enforcement alike. From your perspective, what gaps still exist in India’s current framework to address these threats, and how can legal practitioners play a proactive role in combating them?

    Online fraud is one of the fastest-growing risks, not just for individuals but for corporates and financial institutions. The sheer speed and cross-border nature of these crimes often outpaces traditional investigative and regulatory tools. While India has made strides with measures like the RBI’s fraud monitoring systems and the CERT-In framework, the ecosystem still faces gaps in coordination, reporting, and accountability.

    One of the biggest gaps is siloed response—banks, fintechs, law enforcement, and regulators often act reactively and in isolation. A more integrated framework, with real-time intelligence sharing, is urgently needed. Another issue is underreporting; many organisations hesitate to disclose fraud incidents out of fear of reputational damage, which only perpetuates vulnerabilities.

    Lawyers in white-collar practice can contribute significantly here: by advising corporates on robust fraud-prevention policies, ensuring compliance with reporting obligations, and guiding internal investigations that meet both legal and regulatory standards. Beyond that, we can help bridge the gap between technology and law—working with forensic experts, fintech players, and regulators to shape practical frameworks that keep pace with evolving digital threats. 

    As an established lawyer in governance, investigations, and white-collar matters, how do you mentor the next generation? What skills or tools do you recommend for them to thrive in today’s rapidly shifting regulatory and technological terrain?

    Mentorship, to me, is first and foremost about giving young lawyers the confidence to keep going and ensuring they don’t give up when the work feels overwhelming. This is a demanding field, and in the early years, it’s easy to doubt yourself. Sometimes the best role a mentor can play is simply to reassure them that discipline, consistency, and patience will carry them through.

    Beyond that, I see mentorship as preparing young lawyers not just for today’s challenges but for tomorrow’s uncertainties. I encourage them to cultivate adaptability, strategic thinking, and clear communication, because in white-collar practice, clients look to you as a trusted advisor, not just a lawyer. I also urge them to embrace technology – mastering data analytics, digital forensics, and regulatory tech platforms is no longer optional.

    Most importantly, I remind them that tools and trends will keep changing, but ethics, resilience, and statutory grounding never go out of fashion. Regulatory landscapes will shift, but if you stay curious, disciplined, and grounded in the law, you’ll be equipped to thrive at the intersection of law, business, and technology.

    Finally, what is your long-term vision for your practice as a Financial Crimes & Corporate Governance Lawyer? And how do you manage the demands and pressures of such an intense field while maintaining personal well-being?

    For me, discipline always tops the list. Without discipline, nothing else really sustains. Over time, discipline creates habits, and those habits make it easier to do the workday in and day out. In the early stages of your career, when you’re putting in long hours and truly immersing yourself, that consistency shapes you into a stronger professional. It’s like practice in any field—the more you repeat, the sharper you get.

    I also believe the right mindset matters just as much. Keeping the outlook of a leader, taking ownership, thinking ahead, and combining it with the endurance of an athlete helps you enjoy the journey rather than just endure it. This is not an easy profession, but when you bring discipline, habits, leadership, and endurance together, the work becomes something you grow with, not something you burn out from. That’s what keeps me motivated and makes the practice rewarding.

    Get in touch with Guneet Gudh –

  • “As I tell young lawyers, both prosecution and litigation have something to offer and embracing both helps you become better at each one.” – Nithya Somasundaram, Advocate Patent Agent at R K Dewan & Co.

    “As I tell young lawyers, both prosecution and litigation have something to offer and embracing both helps you become better at each one.” – Nithya Somasundaram, Advocate Patent Agent at R K Dewan & Co.

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

    You have been practicing IP law for over 17 years, covering trademarks, patents, copyrights, and design protection. Looking back, what initially drew you to intellectual property, and how has your passion evolved over time?

    I am on the path I am today because of my guru, Professor P. Vanangamudi, whose initial guidance and mentorship shaped me into who I am now. I started my career with internships in criminal law and also experimented with some LPO work, but in 2005 I developed a fascination with intellectual property. I found patents particularly interesting because they connected back to my own scientific journey. On the first day of my internship, during a project with my learned mentors Adv. Surya Senthil (Ex-Technical Member – Copyrights) and Adv. Lakshmidevi Somanath (Ex-Technical Member – Trademarks), I was asked to draft an abstract for a patent application. That day proved to be a turning point, as it revealed how the law is deeply intertwined with scientific and innovative activity in very concrete ways. I was also fortunate to have Shri P. S. Surana (Co-founder, Surana & Surana International Attorneys) as my guide and mentor, whose constant encouragement to pursue IP and litigation drew me to focus on this field from that time onwards.

    In February 2009, I joined R.K. Dewan & Co., 82 years old IP boutique Firm that provided me with the right platform to grow my passion into a career. This is where my interest in IPR grew even stronger. I had the opportunity to learn, practice, and handle the next level of IP under the guidance of the luminary Dr. Mohan Dewan and the powerhouse of RKD, Dr. Niti Dewan. Their mentorship shaped much of what I am today at R.K. Dewan & Co. Prosecution had always been my comfort zone, and I was initially hesitant to step into litigation. My senior colleague, Advocate Balaji, through his guidance and strategic approach, inspired me and gave me the confidence to embrace litigation alongside prosecution.

    Over the years, what started as a fascination with patents grew into a much deeper dedication to all that is IP. I have come to see how trademarks, copyrights and designs are powerful strategic assets that promote innovation, branding and commercial growth beyond just legal rights. That evolution of seeing IP as a bridge between creativity, technology and commerce still inspires me everyday, even after 17 years of practice. 

    You pursued a B.A., B.L. (Hons) at the School of Excellence in Law, followed by a B.Sc. in Physics and an M.L. in International Law and Indian Constitution. How has this diverse academic background shaped your analytical approach and influenced your career in IP and litigation?

    I became a Registered Patent Agent due to my science background, which helped me navigate the technical side of patents. That history has been useful all along, especially when dealing with inventors or dealing with hearings with other parties and explaining their ideas.

    What really added value in my practice was my M.L. in International Law and Indian Constitution. I was given the big picture and scope of international and cross border cases that covered aspects of filings, prosecution rights and parties limitations. I worked at the Chennai firm of R. K. Dewan & Co., and worked on a few general civil litigation cases, as well. I always appreciated having a solid constitutional and international background, I could be exposed to the nature of the dispute while identifying where parties would have rights, an obligation (if there were any), and jurisdictional issues.

    Having appeared before the Trade Marks Registry, Patent Office, Intellectual Property Appellate Board, and Madras High Court, could you share the most memorable cases that significantly shaped your expertise in IP litigation and prosecution?

    Novartis vs Cipla – 3003/CHENP/2004, Chennai Patent office:

    One of the most formative experiences in my journey as an IP litigator and patent professional was the privilege of assisting and learning from Dr. Mohan Dewan during the landmark Novartis pre-grant opposition hearing before the Patent Office, Chennai. This case, which revolved around Application No. 3003/CHENP/2004 for “Inhibitors of Tyrosine Kinases,” stands out not just for its legal complexities but for the many lessons it imparted about the nuances of Indian patent law, especially around amendments, inventive step, and sufficiency of disclosure.

    The case centered around Novartis’ application (No. 3003/CHENP/2004) for a new class of tyrosine kinase inhibitors molecules with critical relevance in cancer treatment. The pre-grant opposition, filed by Cipla under Section 25(1), challenged the patent on multiple grounds, including obviousness (Section 25(1)I), insufficiency of disclosure (Section 25(1)(g)), and questions under Sections 3(d), 10(4), 57, and 59 of the Patents Act.

    I experienced first-hand the intensity of argument and the importance of deeply understanding technical details and strategic legal arguments in a high-stakes Patent opposition. The proceedings, which saw formidable representation from both Novartis and the opponent, Cipla Ltd., brought several procedural and substantive issues into sharp relief. 

    I took part in examining prior art, dissecting the detailed claim amendments, and debating whether the reversal of an amide bond (and the resulting molecular changes) amounted to a non-obvious inventive step. The discussion on the sufficiency of disclosure was equally instructive particularly the Controller’s emphasis that, for new chemical entities (NCEs), it is the supported utility that matters most at the filing stage, not retrospective efficacy data, unless Section 3(d) is directly invoked.

    This case underscored practical lessons in legal drafting, oral advocacy, and the handling of amendments under Section 59, where every narrowing of claims must remain anchored in the original disclosure. The Controller’s decision ultimately dismissed all opposition grounds, recognizing the inventive nature and adequate disclosure in the application, and allowed the patent to proceed. The clarity and logic with which the order dealt with the inventive step set a new benchmark in my understanding of patent jurisprudence in India.

    I have personally argued over 400 patent matters before the Indian Patent Office, and have also actively conducted matters before the erstwhile IPAB, the Madras High Court, the Karnataka High Court, and various District Courts. Handling exhibits, preparing briefs, and formulating technical arguments in these cases has reinforced the critical importance of precision, clarity, and a comprehensive understanding of both law and technology. This experience has been a defining milestone in my practice, affirming that thorough preparation, strategic advocacy, and meticulous attention to detail are essential qualities for any successful IP litigator.

    As an Advocate & Patent Agent at R K Dewan & Co., you handle brand advice, design protection, and IPR consultations. What are the biggest challenges brands face when entering the Indian market, and in India’s evolving digital and tech-driven IP landscape, what common pitfalls do innovators encounter? How can companies proactively protect their IP from an early stage?

    India is an incredibly diverse and fast-moving market, with great buying opportunities but also very real issues for brand owners. Cost competition is high, squeezing brand owners’ margins, while the threats of counterfeits and infringement can damage brand owner’s reputations and market share. The complexity of regulations and enforceability adds to the pressure, and many companies, especially small to medium enterprises, fail to allocate the necessary budget or focus to protect their IP. However, many larger companies are becoming more proactive, and have dedicated IP divisions and in-house counsel to drive better IP management.

    One of our clients had encountered issues while attempting to register their brand on the Government e-Marketplace (GeM), as this Govt platform intensified scrutiny on IP registrations, requiring comprehensive documentation to ensure authenticity and protect genuine brands. This was a strong reminder that the scrutiny of IP rights is more rigorous than ever. This is particularly relevant as online marketplaces keep expanding, requiring mandatory registration of IP as procurement authorities seek to verify authenticity. Too often, we see innovators engaging with their IP reactively, addressing infringement only after it happened, which is not an effective strategy in the digital and fast moving world we live in.

    In short, companies entering the Indian market must recognize IP protection as a foundational business priority. A proactive approach to IP management, conducting searches, timely registration, and ensuring robust confidentiality protocols, will not only take away the pressure of challenges such as counterfeits or cost pressure, but will maximally enable commercial exploitation of innovation in a dynamic market.

    You are a member of the INTA Brand and Innovation Committee. How has this international exposure influenced your perspective on global brand protection, and what emerging trends do you see shaping the future of trademarks and IP innovation worldwide?

    Serving as a team leader of the Product & Counterfeit Technologies group within the INTA Brand and Innovation Committee has been an invaluable learning experience for me. In that capacity, I have been able to work with international Attorneys from different jurisdictions as we tracked global brand protection challenges, discussed emerging issues, authored articles and suggestions, and facilitated education webinars and roundtables. 

    This experience allowed me to see the highly variable way IP practice is conducted across countries, as it is shaped by the differing needs and differing levels of proactivity in IP practice. For example, while the US, Europe, and the United Kingdom have long-standing comprehensive infrastructure and practice in IP, I saw exciting and impressive development and, in many countries like South Korea, China, Japan, India, and Singapore, there is rapid growth and increasingly sophisticated practice in enforcement and justice in this area of innovation. 

    This has helped me to better appreciate that IP strategies for protection will require a more robust, adaptable, and technology-driven approach. I have also observed that emerging trends like the use of AI and other advanced technologies to combat counterfeiting are shaping the future of trademarks and IP innovation worldwide, demanding greater collaboration, vigilance, and creativity from brand owners and IP professionals alike.  

    Technology commercialization and contractual agreements have been a significant part of your practice. How do you navigate the complexities of IP licensing for both startups and established enterprises, and what are the key challenges involved?

    In my opinion, guiding startups or medium sized businesses through the maze of IP licensing can justly be viewed as a balancing act based on knowledge and communication. One of the major challenges I see more often than not is the general lack of awareness (or desire to comprehend) responsible IP rights and licensing agreements. This is particularly true of startups. The case examples are pretty minimal, primarily because many new ventures receive limited or zero direction and experience managing and structuring these kinds of agreements. 

    Using a Academia-Industry partnership adds to the challenge, particularly for the commercialisation of technology and associated contracts. Parties need to specify who owns what, how the IP can be used, what will be the method of profit sharing. They also need to ensure how the confidentiality of the parties is preserved. Having the interests of all parties aligned would be preferable. 

    Startups may face some of these challenges given their limited resources and less power to negotiate, while established companies can face IP portfolio management challenges, as well as competitive edge protection challenges. We all know this is made even more challenging when one tries to facilitate developing constructive, industry specific, strategies for clients, as the true potential of their IP is unlocked and allowed to flourish, whose value could easily be compromised.

    Your career started with internships and junior associate roles in IP and civil litigation. What early experiences have helped you navigate complex IP disputes and establish yourself as a trusted advisor?

    I think my development as a practitioner was really shaped by the formative early years. I started out doing internships and then as a junior associate, and I was lucky to experience two very different but related areas of law, civil litigation and intellectual property litigating. During that time, I was not merely learning about the law in theory. I was sitting through hearings, helping to draft pleadings, and seeing the approaches that senior advocates took in court in deciding how to strategize.

    My best experience was being able to balance both prosecution and litigation. So on the one hand, I had actual experience with patent drafting, oppositions, and trade mark filings, which I think taught me a very technical, detail-oriented framework, while on the other, I had the experience of working with seniors on IP enforcement issues before the Madras High Court and the erstwhile IPAB. 

    I learned two things: that preparation and details are very important when working with complex disputes; and then also, I learned the importance of having trust and a good flow of clarity with clients. Because when a client comes to you, they are looking for more than a lawyer. They need someone who can sort through technically complex, high-risk disputes and return clear, readily manageable solutions. Over the years, that aspect is what made me credible and established me.

    Having managed multi-faceted IP portfolios and brand strategies, how do you foresee the convergence of AI, digital platforms, and global trade impacting IP enforcement and commercialization in the next five years?
    I visualize the next five years will see the intersection of AI, digital platforms, and international commerce, which will dramatically reshape enforcement and commercialization. Regarding enforcement, brands will increasingly rely upon AI-based monitoring systems to identify infringement, monitor supply chains, and detect misuse on e-commerce and social media platforms. Furthermore, we are already seeing the implications of the power of data analytics and image recognition methods to detect infringement much faster than traditional efforts allow. 

    With respect to commercialization, AI will start to re-use and re-imagine the notion of an asset, not only as a tool. Whether it is through AI-generated content, predictive analytics to inform research and development, or digital licensing platforms, businesses are increasingly going to understand that intellectual property is not merely a shield, but can also be used as a mechanism to create financial value.

    For us as professionals, this means transitioning away from the strictly enforcement-based position to advising the business more strategically. We will need to align legal protection with technology adoption, but also to align the business’ global strategies. In short, the practice of intellectual property will necessitate more and more a combination of legal skills, technology adoption, and commercial insight.

    Finally, what advice would you give to young lawyers and professionals aspiring to specialize in IP law, particularly in balancing litigation and prosecution on a global stage?

    As I tell young lawyers, both prosecution and litigation have something to offer and embracing both helps you become better at each one. The IP practice in India has also expanded tremendously; it is no longer a “road less taken.” The competition in this domain has intensified, and the number of practitioners is now greater. Moreover, IP is not a one-stream subject; it has many distinct subfields like trademarks, patents, copyright, designs, and geographical indications, all of which require different expertise. Young practitioners should consider specializing in these subfields and develop a focus area, while retaining a broad understanding of the other sub-disciplines.

    The rivalry among young lawyers has reached unprecedented levels, particularly due to the surge of private institutions producing law graduates every year. On the positive side, this generation is skilled in the use of technology and AI tools; however, I would advise them not to use these platforms at the expense of other more dependable methods. The core of any law practice is undertaking thorough legal research, reviewing original texts, statutes, case law, and recognized commentaries.

    Get in touch with Nithya Somasundaram –

  • “Currently, India’s renewable sector is full of promise with scalability, strong government push, and growing global investor interest.” – Varun Chauhan, Partner at Luthra and Luthra Law Offices India.

    “Currently, India’s renewable sector is full of promise with scalability, strong government push, and growing global investor interest.” – Varun Chauhan, Partner at Luthra and Luthra Law Offices India.

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

    What initially drew you to specialize in banking and finance, given that they are such niche fields? Was law always your first choice, or did your interest evolve over time, and how did your experience at law school shape that journey?

    Law was always my first career choice after school, though I did take a 2.5-year break post-graduation to prepare for the civil services exams. During that time, I also enrolled in a regular post-graduation program in Corporate Laws and Management, which kept me connected with my subjects. While not getting selected did dampen the morale, I always had a stronger plan B to practice law. Banking and finance, however, happened by accident. I was inclined toward corporate laws, and during my first corporate internship I realized I enjoyed advisory work and project finance diligence more than litigation, which eventually set me on this path.

    In the early phases of your career, you worked with various law firms. What were the key learning experiences that laid the foundation for your practice and deepened your understanding of these niche fields?

    I started my career with a boutique law firm where my seniors gave me the right guidance and also the personal space to grow. That early trust helped me take ownership of matters in the project finance space. It gave me vast exposure in banking and finance and laid a solid foundation for my practice.

    Over the past decade, you have advised several leading financial institutions and banks. From your perspective, what are some of the most common challenges clients face in large-scale finance and infrastructure deals, and what is your approach resolving them?

    The most common challenge clients face is aligning their business targets with regulatory procedures and the internal legal processes of multiple lenders before disbursement. My approach is to simplify the legal risks, break them into practical solutions, and ensure the documents reflect clarity for all stakeholders. This balance builds trust and helps achieve timely closures.

    Project finance and structured finance transactions often involve multiple stakeholders across jurisdictions. What have been the most significant challenges in managing the interests of various parties, including cross-border entities?

    The most significant challenge is reconciling different regulatory and legal regimes while keeping the transaction commercially viable. Coordinating with foreign law counsel and managing across time zones often adds another layer of complexity. Clear communication and early identification of friction points help me act as a bridge between parties without compromising legal safeguards.

    Renewable energy financing is emerging as a key driver of India’s growth. Based on your experience advising on large solar and hybrid renewable projects, what do you see as the biggest opportunities and challenges in financing India’s clean energy transition?

    Currently, India’s renewable sector is full of promise with scalability, strong government push, and growing global investor interest. In recent years, I’ve also seen foreign banks gearing up for the Indian renewable market. The major challenges, however, lie in evolving regulations, land/title issues, and tariff uncertainties.

    Having worked extensively on both real estate and infrastructure finance matters, what are some of the key differences and unique legal considerations that distinguish these two sectors?

    While both real estate financing and infrastructure financing (like roads, ports, hotels, etc.) follow a broadly similar financing structure, real estate deals revolve heavily around title diligence of land and immovable properties. There are also RERA-specific nuances, particularly in the working of escrow accounts, which operate very differently from a standard infra sector financing deal. Each comes with its own unique risks, and navigating them requires sector-specific expertise and tailored solutions.

    Looking back at your career so far, what has been the most rewarding or intriguing high-value transaction or case you have worked on, and how did you navigate its challenges?

    Some of the most rewarding matters for me have been InvIT financing deals, which often involve complex funding structures at the InvIT level and on-lending to multiple SPVs. These transactions require balancing the interests of lenders with the operational realities of the SPVs. Navigating those complexities through clear structuring and negotiation has been both challenging and extremely fulfilling.

    Considering the demanding nature of your work, how do you strike a balance between professional commitments and personal life, and what practices help you avoid burnout?

    I believe it’s equally important to spend time with friends and family. I am also lucky to have a life partner who understands the demands of this profession, and she is truly a blessing. We follow a strict rule of avoiding work on weekends. Of course, there are times when the team has to deliver under strict timelines, and being there to support them with execution and strategy is non-negotiable. I also try not to over-commit to clients—discussing timelines with the team beforehand ensures realistic commitments and gives them a sense of inclusion.

    What has been your guiding philosophy throughout your career, and how has it helped you grow and manage challenges effectively?

    My guiding philosophy has been to stay curious, adaptable, and solution-oriented. Law is dynamic, and no two transactions are alike – embracing that mindset has helped me grow and navigate challenges. I believe consistency and integrity go a long way in building lasting professional relationships. Looking ahead, I see every transaction not just as a legal exercise but as an opportunity to learn, collaborate, and contribute to India’s evolving financial and infrastructure landscape. For me, the real reward lies in building lasting relationships and helping clients achieve their goals with clarity and confidence.

    Finally, what advice would you give to young lawyers aspiring to build a career in banking and finance law, particularly those who wish to specialize in real estate finance? What resources would you recommend?

    My advice would be to first build a strong foundation in contract and corporate law, and stay updated on RBI and sectoral regulations. This profession demands patience and consistency, so juniors should avoid being impatient and focus on diligence. Stay curious and never hesitate to ask questions, don’t let the fear of being judged stop you from clarifying crucial aspects of the practice. Practical exposure through internships and resources like legal commentaries or transaction-focused case studies are invaluable.

    Get in touch with Varun Chauhan –

  • Inside the practice of a First generation Litigator & Supreme Court AOR – Gagan Narang, Partner at Triumvir Law.

    Inside the practice of a First generation Litigator & Supreme Court AOR – Gagan Narang, Partner at Triumvir Law.

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

    Let’s start with your remarkable, successful career of being an Advocate on Record and partner at Triumvir Law. Looking back, what was the initial motivation behind pursuing the career in a law and was there any specific driving factor that you chose this field?

     So to start with, my parents, my family is a family of professionals and that is where the work ethic or the drive to be a professional.  Both my parents are doctors. Having said that, I was always into multiple different domains. I was always multifaceted, having multiple interests. Was involved in quizzing, debating, in fact was involved in the equity markets, had an interest in the equity markets in very early years as well. And that is where somehow the journey towards law shaped in, because I understood law to be a profession wherein you’ll get exposure to all kinds of environments, all the kinds of businesses, all the kinds of different facets of the world where every case in the legal field is a new case. Every case is unique in its own way, and that is the advantage that the legal profession gives. It keeps  things interesting, it keeps things fresh. That’s how my career shaped towards law in the first place.

    Also, I was kind of a rebel as a kid, did not wanna get into medicine because of those reasons as well.

    Thank you for openly sharing your decision to not pursue medicine despite your parents being doctors. You made it to Gujarat National Law University that shaped your legal and business acumen? Starting with a top law firm in Mumbai to now leading your own litigation practice in New Delhi, how was that journey? As a first-generation lawyer, what challenges did you face, and how did you overcome them?

     So, let’s put the first generation thing first. Multiple times in the process there have been days when you think that maybe a profession in the medical field would’ve been better because obviously there would’ve been some legacy that I would’ve carried. But having said that, the work ethic that was instilled or the work ethic that was put into me and the way I’ve seen my parents go about their days right from 8 in the morning to maybe 11 in the night. I’ve seen them working and that’s where the idea of hard work that is required in your professional field came into picture, and that is probably what helped in getting into the GNLU, that is Gujarat National Law University as well. 

    Everything basically came in a flow, so I started off at LKS – Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan and it was through the college, got college placement, went to Bombay, did tax advisory for a year or so. Tax was considered to be the toughest field of law that existed while we were in college and even today in practice I see there is a niche that’s been created about tax. And a big advantage that my experience that LKS gave me was that I understood probably what people or what lawyers don’t even want to get into because it’s a very specific, very niche field. A criminal lawyer is still comfortable doing civil law. I’ll not say anything is easy or tough, but with due respect to everyone, there are multiple lawyers dealing in different domains that do not actually want to get into tax.

    Working at LKS gave me that exposure and gave me that understanding that the toughest, probably the perceived toughest facet of law can also be understood, just by applying yourself to it. Something about GNLU, GNLU is one of those unique law schools which allows you to study multiple domains of law. So there is a BBA LLB which I pursued then there is a B.Com LLB that is going on. There is a BSc LLB  as well. There is a BA LLB, normally law schools have BA LLB, BBA LLB so they have multiple facets. Additionally, there are various co-curricular  activities, there are Interdisciplinary schools such as Center for Sports Law, Center for Public International Law. So there were a lot of opportunities that came my way thanks to these centers and thanks to these programs that the college provided. While pursuing all these courses, you always have the option to learn more, to understand more assets and not just understand the law in itself, but understand various domains as well.

    That is where the institute helped me a lot, besides, GNLU is always very proactive in moot court competitions, in debates, in parliamentary debates in MUNs as well. So that is another facet which helped in developing that personality, the exposure was always there. No matter where I was sitting in a remote corner in the Western part of the country, the exposure was always there to learn more and gain more knowledge in the journey.

    You have been representing clients both nationally and internationally in arbitrations, including obviously the cases that you have represented in Abu Dhabi, which was a SAP company in an international arbitration.

    What were some significant challenges that you encountered during those cross- border arbitrations and what unique difficulties do you see while you are doing those cross-border arbitrations and the way you strategize to overcome them?

      Cross-border arbitrations are a unique ballgame. When we understand a domestic arbitration or when we understand the way arbitration is practiced in India, mostly the arbitrators or mostly the tribunals are either retired judges or some significant authoritative figures who know the system that is applicable in a domestic arbitration very well. The system that is the Indian law very well. When you come to an international arbitration, the ballgame shifts completely. First and foremost, the arbitrators mostly, up to a certain extent, are mostly lawyers themselves.

    More importantly, these arbitrators mostly are from neutral backgrounds and neutral jurisdiction. So they per se might themselves not know the procedures that are involved in the applicable procedural law or the substantive law. They might not be privy to the substantive law in the first place.

    It becomes very important for the practitioner, for the council to specify, to take the tribunal along with them in the substantive law and in the procedural law because the arbitrator sitting might not correct in a domestic arbitration. An arbitrator might correct you if you’re going wrong in the procedure at least. An international arbitrator, the arbitrator themselves might be new or might be knowing the substantive legal part of it less, and therefore you need to take the arbitrator along with yourself. The second and more important facet is there is always a language or a communication gap that will exist. There is a specific way in which English is pronounced by us, which is Indian English. When you’re sitting in an international arbitration, the accent changes, the pronunciation changes and the understanding of the accent also changes. So it is very important to not just be clear in what you’re saying or what you’re thinking, but also to articulate your thoughts in a much better and a much simpler manner so that it’s conveyed properly to the opposite party, to the arbitrator, to everybody.

    This becomes an important aspect there. It is very important to be a very good listener in an international arbitration as well, because you have to be on your toes to decide your strategy later on, and for that you need to understand what your opposite party is saying or what is falling from the tribunal as well. These are the three observations that go besides the legal parts of it, but coming to the legal parts.

    The challenges always exist because when you’re doing an international arbitration, the domain entirely shifts. Now, the law that you might be dealing with, the substantive law that you might be dealing with is not the local law of your in-line that you practiced since whenever you started your legal education.

    So what happens is that you need to be very aware, you need to be very thorough and very well researched about the laws that you’re dealing with. So for example, the arbitration that you were talking about, the local law was of Abu Dhabi or United Arab Emirates. Now, a lot of facets came from Muslim law. A lot of facets came from Islamic law, per se, Sharia law per se. And when we initially got on to it we were not very privy to it. It did not come naturally to us, so we also had to go through a lot of details. We had to also go through the law in many details. Had it been a common law country, I would’ve said it still comes naturally because following common law, you know, the flow, you know the logic behind things.

    But when it comes to a country where the procedure, where the substantial law is entirely different from yours, comes, you need to be very thorough and very well researched in that aspect as well. So these are the few challenges that you face now.

    You have an expertise which spans through commercial litigation, international arbitration, as well as white collar disputes, which are often considered very high risk, and obviously confidentiality becomes a very important corner store for white collar crime.

    What kind of key factors do you focus on while you are dealing with these kinds of areas of law, which are not only very, very confidentiality centric, as well as privacy centric , because confidentiality is for the whole case, and privacy is for the parties. So how do you deal with all these?

    What I basically focus on, whichever field it is, is to break it down to the simplest molecule possible, to the simplest form of a thing possible. And when you come to white collar and you try to break it down, as I see there are two elements involved.

    There is one, a business or a company transaction that is happening and a company’s interest that is happening. And the other aspect is basically the criminal laws that are applicable to the same. So when we look at a white collar crime, it is a company doing a monetary transaction wherein the financial interests of the company are involved and maybe some element of criminal law to achieve those financial goals.

    When you are defending a company, or the corporate or the financial transaction, it is simpler because the transaction may be good, may go in your favor, the transaction may go against you but what is at stake is only the monetary aspect of it, which while is important to the company’s interest. Does not paramount the personal interest of the directors or the stakeholders sitting in the company. When you deal with white collars, the parameter expands and the personal aspects become more important because there could be a lifting of corporate will, there are criminal laws involved, so there will always be a liability or a penal liability that can arise in the form of imprisonment, in the form of fines, penalties on the directors, on the shareholders, on key managing personnel as well.

    What is important in the first place is to understand that most of these people, if there is an element or if there is an allegation of a crime that is alleged might not…, the boundaries of law are so thin and so bleak that they might not themselves know when they have actually transcended the boundary.

    Something which might be very obvious or something which might be very simple for someone, that person might have transcended the boundary a bit, and it becomes important in the first place to explain in a very normal, in a very conversational manner, without losing the confidence of the client, that there might be an issue or where the issue first or foremost arises.

    Obviously there will be transactions where there is a willful default and there is a willful transaction. But when there is not, it’s important to explain to the client where that particular transaction has happened. In other transactions, there might just be that there is an allegation, but there is actually no substance to the allegation and it becomes important to explain considering the Indian judicial sphere and considering the pendency in India that there will be light at the end of the tunnel. There will be justice at the end of the day. And these are procedural regulatory issues that will be handed in due course of time just by putting the best foot forward or the most transparent foot forward.

    One more aspect that is important to be understood is.

    Normally when a person thinks of crime, the person automatically becomes defensive. Even  as individuals, when these clients are in front of you, it becomes very important to get the truth or the exact truth out of them. So you need to be very careful with what you ask. Sometimes they’ll not tell you the entire thing because either they want to hide something or they don’t consider it to be important themselves.

    So it is important for you to ask the right questions, to get the right answers, and then formulate the strategy accordingly.

    In addition to all these kinds of legal responsibilities, you also have developed business for yourself, administrative tasks that you have taken up, and you are managing your Delhi office as well.

    How do you manage all of this and over the years, how has your role evolved in each of the segments of the organization? What kind of experiences are there in those challenges that you have overcome and the roles that you have kept on changing over time?  

     The challenge is an everyday thing. It’s still a challenge. It continues being a challenge, and I think it’ll continue being a challenge forever. And that’s the best part of it because every day when you deal with a challenge, you successfully come out of it. You feel you have achieved something which will help you sleep better that night . Having said that, I joined Triumvir Law back in 2021 when it was a smaller organization compared to what we have now, but we were gaining a reputation. The organization was gaining reputation in leaps and bounds back then as well. When I joined, my tasks were cut out very clearly for me, which was to start with making a base for the firm .

    And to also handle the litigation part of it because Anubhav, Akash, my partners were themselves getting overloaded with the kind of work that was coming in that is exactly where Anubhab reached out and asked me to join in, being friends since almost 2015, it was a no-brainer to go ahead. Since I left my firm role in 2018, I had only worked as an advocate. It was more about the legal thing, more about the matters, more about the cases rather than about a firm, rather than about running an organization or rather than about thinking of the business aspect of it. So the first challenge that came into picture and the challenge that keeps on probably repeating every day when I deal with it is to consider it to also be a business, to consider it to also be a profession that you are there to grow, that you’re there to make money, and not just to sit there as an advocate dealing with the legal aspects of it. That’s a dilemma that will always be there because unfortunately in India, what the problem is that legal fees are always considered to be a cost or a liability. So you have to make the client also understand how you become useful to the client in the longer run, and that is the transition that you achieve from an advocate to say a contributing member in a firm and a partner in a firm to bridge that challenge.

    A lot of my time being in courts, being litigating a lot of my time, always went into the court work because that is how court life is. So starting the day at say 10.15, 10 AM or 10.30 in the morning from court, you never know. Your matter might reach in two minutes, your matter might reach in four, six hours at 4:00 PM as well, and a lot of the time is wasted.

    So you have to be very careful how you spend time with increased responsibilities, with the responsibility of building an office, the responsibility of building a base, growing the base in Delhi. Time management has become a key issue. Time management becomes the biggest issue right now, and it’s very important, the way I look at, it’s very important to establish systems for each and everything in place so that almost every exercise is automated to the best possible manner.

    Secondly, it becomes very important to have the right personnel to work with you and develop a team to work with you so that 80% or 60% of your responsibility in one facet is covered by the team. And then obviously you are there to oversee, you are there to manage whatever is required. There will be clients who will always require you to be present on board, but it is important to make the client also understand that the team is good enough or maybe better than yourself to handle the cases themselves as well.

    But you’ll be there whenever you need to be there. Similarly in the administrative part, also in the business development part, it’s important to make the client understand that the primary point of contact will be handy enough and will be a good substitute for me.

    When you have those systems in place, it becomes easier with passage of time and that is what we have seen in bigger firms as well.

    So you have transitioned from so many roles and kept on learning and enjoying every bit of it. While doing so you have also advised on online gaming platforms, obviously, on legal matters and other forms such as digital wallet regulations and RBI licensing.

    Given the kind of nature of the sector and the new challenges that it faces every day, particularly around regulatory compliances, how have you set your agenda of breaking it down again, in your own words to singular molecules and finding those solutions for your clients who are actually involved in these kinds of gaming platforms?

     So sports law or say gaming law is a niche field in law itself, which is still up and coming. Having said that, it’s not something like, say, a tax law, which has entirely a different kind of practice. A sports field or a gaming law field is an interplay of multiple different facets of traditional laws.

    Basically, there will be some element of the company’s law involved there. There will be some corporate advisory involved there. There will be some element of litigation that will be involved there, and there will obviously be regulatory compliances and tax compliances, so on and so forth that are inward.

    For these kinds of transactions when we were handling, the most important part where in the legal bit, the litigation mind came into play was the discourses that the Supreme Court had over a game of chance or a game of skill. So this law had been evolving and is still probably evolving to certain extent, wherein what is considered a game of chance and what is a game of skill, what element of a game of chance will be allowed, what element and to what extent the game of skill will be allowed to say be legalized in a country or be considered legal.

    And there will always be games wherein there will be a mixture of both game of chance and game of skill and the important question to be answered in all of these for all of our clients would’ve been that a particular game that they are proposing mostly and specifically in the online domain.

    Whether that game is a pure game of chance, then obviously the law doesn’t allow it. You have to remove it, you have to either find a way around it or you have to structure it in a manner that there is a level of skill involved. Secondly, if there is a mixture or an interplay of game of chance and a game of skill, then whether that interplay can be put in a manner to state that it is more of a game of skill, and that is why it can be allowed in the country. Having said that, now where the complexity or where the problem becomes multifold is that sports laws or gaming per se, comes into the state list. Now there is a national list, there is a union list, and there is a state list and there are concurrent list.

    So these facets fall under the state list. And every state has different kind of legislations on it. There are states who have legalized or who have allowed certain games. there are states which completely banned even game of challenge and game of skills as well.

    Now when you are dealing with an online platform, the other thing that becomes important is where do these games actually happen? Or which are the platforms that you go on? So even today, if you see an Android Playstore, you’ll not find a game of skill also on an online platform, a game like, I don’t want name, but let’s take an example of a Dream 11 per se

    or My 11 circle, which is currently the IPL is going on My 11 circle is the sponsor for IPL, Dream 11 has been a sponsor for the Indian team, so definitely the operations that they’re involved in are very much legal, considered to be legal in India. However, still Android Playstore does not have the kind of apps there because there are Android policies or regulatory policies which do not allow Android to have those games on their app store. So that is where the lawyer’s role comes into picture, or our role came into picture to understand what are the regulations? Why are the regulations in a manner, if possible, to make the platforms also understand whether these can be allowed or not, or to find a way around them as well.

    And an interesting element that exists in this field is that the tax aspect of this field is still under question. There was a giant casino company in India that has been called by the tax authorities and has been asked to pay taxes on the entire sum that a person gets as winnings and not just the winning aspect itself.

    And if you actually calculate the tax on the entire sum then probably the platform will be left or the company will be left with nothing to show in their books and they might even go bankrupt.

    So this is an interesting evolving element. We’ll have to see where the Supreme Court takes it or where the laws in India take it, probably, there could be some form of government interference there as well, or the government stepping in to allow certain things. These are the evolving aspects of it, but that is where sports law or gaming law is there.

     In India’s evolving legal landscape like with cryptocurrencies being taxed despite not being legal tender, navigating grey areas is key. With your background in both BBA and law, has this unique combination shaped your litigation practice and business development approach? Do you feel that a business degree like a BBA or MBA offers an edge in understanding the commercial aspects of running a legal chamber?

    Has it helped you in strategizing and scaling your practice over the years? And overall, how has this blend of business and law influenced the way you approach the profession today?

    Okay, I’ll start from a personal example, and I know a lot of my friends in the legal fraternity who have been doing that, and probably this will also be a suggestion for all the upcoming lawyers , especially once they go independent.

    When you start and when you have joined a firm and somebody else is paying you a retainer or a compensation.

    And there is a fixed element to it, it becomes easier for you because all you need to do is tell your one savings bank account details to the person that salary or compensation will be transferred there. However, once you go independent or when you’re starting a firm, all of these things, when you’re doing, now, it becomes important for you to understand how a business runs and understand what is the importance of a current account, what is the importance of different business accounts, to separate, as they say, your personal from your professional. When you’re running the practice at a smaller scale, what happens is these lines get blurred a lot. Just like your time, your time also gets blurred a lot. You’re working at your will, so you’re working probably through 24 hours. Anytime, there is no personal time, there is no professional time demarcated.

    But over time, it becomes important for you to demarcate it and it’s better or the best for individuals to understand it in the beginning, get those compliances sorted in the beginning itself where a BBA comes helpful to that is BBA is basically Bachelor of Business Administration.

    You understand business organizations, business setups, very importantly and very clearly in the first place. When you have a clear cut idea, theoretical idea also what a business organization is and how different business systems work, it becomes easier for you to understand what will work for yourself or what idea can be theoretically good for you, and try and implement that practically as well.

    It becomes further more important for you to help yourself understand the client’s requirements or how the client’s organization works as well. When you have that basic idea of how businesses work. Every business might work in a different way. Every corporate client might work in a different way, but you understand where the eventual goal lies, how they distinguish their profits, how a balance sheet is made. From making a balance sheet to arriving at profits and losses to understand where the assets go, where the liabilities go, once you have sorted that out for yourself, it becomes easier for you as a litigator, as well as a corporate advisor to basically get the hang of it.

    Secondly, it plays even a bigger role when you’re in a corporate advisory sector, so supposedly we are advising on a share purchase transaction or an acquisition. Certain elements of the company’s law are very intricately connected with the finance aspects, the business administration aspect.

    And once you have that basic background, it becomes easier for you to explain to your clients also what different forms of  shares are, what are hybrid securities, all of those. And it becomes easier for you also to implement or structurize those transactions for your clients. So that is where the business BBA knowledge comes into picture and helps you with that.

    Keeping all this in mind, you were talking about when you start your own firm or when you work individually, you tend to work even for 24 hours. I would request you to talk a little bit more about the kind of mental health impact that it gives when you are under pressure while developing your litigation practice or developing your own firm. How have you taken care of that particular aspect, given the fact that your parents are doctors?

    And what is your advice to the new entrants who are so desperate in making it within overnight or something like that, that we just have to make our names bigger?

    Just to clarify, when I said 24 hours, I didn’t mean you’re working 24 hours. What I meant was your professional and your personal timings are blurred. Say a person in a job will actually come home, spend time with family, or do something personal, might go to the gym. They have their set patterns as an individual, especially freshly independent, you’ll not have those patterns.

    Or when you’re working to grow an organization at that point of time, you might blur those lines and those patterns. That is why you’ll be working in different domains and that’s what we have done and that’s what we keep doing at Triumvir Law as well. When a case needs us, when a transaction needs us to work overnight, we will still be working overnight.

    However, the attempt will always be, the aim will always be to reduce that kind of work and to form such systems that will help you in the longer run. As a freshly graduate person, as a person who has started an organization or as a person who has just gone independent, it’s easier to do that in the first place and those blurred lines help you in probably maximizing the results for yourself and to an extent satisfying the clients there. However, these will never be sustainable in the longer run. You’ll have added responsibilities. At the initial phase, your number of clients are also restricted. You can give that amount of time to a client where you can give that attention. Once you have gone a bit ahead in your journey, the number of clients will increase and automatically, if you start being available all the time, it’ll become a problem for everybody. Now, how you tackle it in the first place, you make good systems. I started earlier as well. It’s very important to form those systems so that it becomes easier for you in the longer run.

    Once you go ahead, you get, as I said earlier, you get a good team with yourself who can take away the day-to-day load from your shoulder and your inputs are required only when something new crops up in the middle. So that is where in the longer run, preparing the fresher talent in a manner that they can also independently work. They can apply themselves independently, but the work in the system becomes important.

    And most important advice to everybody will be to choose the people that you work with very properly and very wisely. I am blessed to have the kind of people that I work with, the kind of partners, the kind of team that I work with. They ensure that whenever that break is required, somebody’s there to follow up, somebody there to fill in your shoes so that you can take the burnout break. You can always enjoy that rejuvenation and be back at work while somebody’s handling the work as well. That’s the advice. That’s how I saw it in my family. That’s what I see in my partners. That’s what I see around me.

    All of us have some kind of interests, which are beyond the legal sphere. Always work on your interests. You might say a specific sport, you might not be good at it. You might be very good at it, but play that sport. I heard an influencer say this, and I was very impressed by this dialogue.

    It was actually not an influencer. I don’t remember who but yeah, in a podcast I heard this, especially in your twenties and thirties, go to that concert you wanted to go to.

    Attend that cricket match that you want to see, attend that stand-up comedy show that you want to do, whatever is your interest. Follow that as well along with your work because eventually in life you will have to compromise on that as well. So when you have that kind of time, take time out from your professional life that will help you make your professional life better in the longer.

    And although I’m sure after this answer, my partner will be complaining to me that you do nothing of that, but this is what it is.

    Keeping that in mind, I would request you to suggest or rather talk a little bit about how you have transitioned along with the technology because obviously without technology today we would not be having this conversation.

    How do you see the technology has helped you have a better representation, have better way of learning and the kind of disruptive tech that is happening today, especially AI, IOT, blockchain? How have you equipped yourself with the new understanding of this and where do you see that our legal field is moving towards, along with these kinds of technologies that are infiltrating our law fraternity as well?

    Just a disclaimer, I am very bad with modern technology. When I say very bad, I’m trying every day to adapt to more things, but not at the pace where the generations that are coming ahead will be. Having said that, we are trying to do whatever we can to reduce our burden or to reduce our workloads, and that is probably the whole aim of implementing technologies in your daily life or in your professional life. So how we normally do it or how we are trying to do it, to start with was a big transition from those hefty files to basically an iPad and a cloud account where, all your files, all your devices are scanned and stored, so you don’t need to carry those empty files to courts.

    And in the recent past, we have seen the courts also transcend towards promoting. And I have personally seen in court, in the Supreme court before the former chief justice actually asking senior designated lawyers also to follow a practice of reading the briefs on iPad and not on paper files so they can also transcend towards the newer technologies.

    That’s the basic beginning and we are still trying to harness and maximize that sphere. So that is the first place saving a lot of paper. Obviously with our workload, we are only supposed to carry one iPad now and not the entire set of files, so that is where it helps in the first place.

    Secondly, now thanks to the digitization of all the records. And neutral citations present, like the entire databases shifting to technology based data share bases. We are not required to maintain those libraries that were earlier a compulsion. Now they have over time become a luxury of sorts.

    So it is more of an interest or a hobby kind of a thing to maintain that library. Having said that, thanks to the tools that are available and thanks to technology. It’s become much easier for us to operate on devices rather than those volumes or those libraries.

    Just to add what you are saying, we have incorporated an AI platform with us. We are trying to automate the contracts that we do, to basically reduce the amount of time that we spend on it and to get the regularities sorted. That is how AI is transforming for us as well. The regular stuff is always there where we use whatever AI tools are available for say emails or drafting basic things, but in the longer run we are also looking to incorporate AI outputs into our deliverables as well.

    Get in touch with Gagan Narang –

  • “Being dual-qualified in both India and California, allows me to advise clients navigating regulatory requirements, commercial expansion, and product launches across both legal systems.” – Anuja Shah, Privacy, IP & Tech Lawyer  ant Inventus Law, California.

    “Being dual-qualified in both India and California, allows me to advise clients navigating regulatory requirements, commercial expansion, and product launches across both legal systems.” – Anuja Shah, Privacy, IP & Tech Lawyer  ant Inventus Law, California.

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

    With several years of experience in the legal industry, and an international practice, what initially inspired you to pursue a career in law? What experiences guided you toward specializing in this particular field of IP and Data Privacy, and how did your law school journey shape your career?

    Growing up, I was the inquisitive child in the family, always asking questions like “Why?” “What does this mean?” and “How does this work?”, not to challenge authority, but out of genuine curiosity. So, when it came time to choose a career path, law felt like less of a decision and more of a natural evolution. After all, what better profession for someone who spent their childhood debating dinner table negotiations? Law gave me a way to turn that endless curiosity into something constructive, to ask better questions, find sharper answers, and help others navigate the “whys” and “what ifs” of the world.

    But law was not my first choice. As a kid, I was equally captivated by science and believed I might one day become an aeronautical engineer. One of the defining moments that shifted my perspective occurred while watching Kalpana Chawla on the news during the Columbia shuttle tragedy alongside my father. I remember wondering, What happens when science fails? Who steps in when technology breaks down? That moment planted the seed for a different kind of career, one that still engages with science and innovation, but from a legal lens.

    That curiosity eventually led me to intellectual property law, where science, technology, and legal reasoning collide in wonderfully complex ways. During law school in India, I immersed myself in this area through internships at prominent law firms, gaining exposure to a broad range of IP matters, including trademarks, copyright, technology, media, gaming and gambling, and entertainment law. The ever-evolving nature of IP, driven by innovation, fascinated me. I realized that IP law was not just about protecting rights, it was about fostering creativity, enabling progress, and balancing competing interests in a dynamic, global environment.

    Thus, after graduation, I joined a law firm as an IP attorney to get a deeper understanding of the field, and just as I was getting comfortable, the GDPR arrived and I was hooked. The realization that lawyers have to adapt just as fast as the tech world made privacy law feel less like a compliance checklist and more like a moving target that I genuinely enjoyed chasing.

    Eventually, that passion brought me to the Bay Area, the land of startups and innovation. Studying IP and data privacy here was not just about career growth; it was about being at the heart of change, surrounded by people building the future, and occasionally breaking things that lawyers then have to fix.

    Looking back, my career has been shaped by one simple fact: I never stopped asking “why?” The difference now is that I have learned how to put those questions into memos, and a commitment to helping clients navigate the complex interplay between law, technology, and human creativity.

    Starting your career with a prominent law firm, what were some key learning experiences during the early stages as you were mastering the fundamentals? Given the complexity and constant evolution of Data Privacy Laws, how did you develop an understanding of the field and stay ahead of emerging trends?

    When I first started my career as an IP attorney at a law firm, freshly out of law school, I imagined a steady path through the world of trademarks and copyright. And for a while, that is exactly what I got: think counterfeit sneakers, branding disputes, and the occasional “no, you cannot copyright a concept” conversations.

    But here is the twist no one warns you about in law school, clients do not show up with neatly categorized problems. They often bring you messy, modern dilemmas. And that is how I found myself dipping my toes into the complex pool of data privacy.

    Working with clients ranging from mom-and-pop retailers to Fortune 500 tech giants, I quickly realized that every product launch or branding campaign had a digital component, and where there is data, there is drama.

    Initially, my work was trademark-focused. But adjacent issues kept knocking on my door: copyright quirks, customs enforcement, and eventually, a new breed of question: “Hey, does our app accidentally violate three different international privacy laws?” Spoiler: it often did.

    Slowly but surely, the law kept up to the technological development with the introduction of the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”), aka “the EU’s gift to lawyers everywhere.” The Brussels effect had lawyers and tech enthusiast everywhere scrambling to understand cross-border compliance, and enough acronyms to make your head spin. What fascinated me was not just the law itself, it was the broader question of how we regulate innovation. The boundaries between intellectual property, consumer rights, and data governance began to blur, and I realized, this was the future.

    What started as a curiosity has become a cornerstone of my practice. Privacy isn’t just a hot topic, it is a critical lens for understanding the intersection of innovation, ethics, and law in the digital age.

    To stay updated and ahead of emerging trends, I rely on a well-balanced mix of strategies: regularly reviewing regulatory updates and key case law, tuning into insightful podcasts and panel discussions on evolving privacy topics, and subscribing to a few carefully curated newsletters. I have also joined privacy book clubs where we regularly discuss upcoming privacy regulations and challenges faced in the field. 

    So, while I did not imagine a career in the intersection of IP, privacy, and consumer protection, I am glad it happened. And for all the challenges this field throws at us, one thing is for sure: Privacy law is never boring.

    After over four years at a law firm, you chose to pursue a Master’s degree at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law, specializing in Technology Law, Privacy Law, and Intellectual Property Law. What inspired you to focus on these areas, and how did your studies shape your understanding of data privacy laws on a global scale? Additionally, as a Research Assistant to Professor Sonia Katyal and an active member of the Women in Tech Law team, what other activities did you engage in, and how did these experiences influence your professional growth and development?

    After over four years of tackling trademark disputes and navigating the growing tide of data protection concerns, I realized I wanted more than just answers. I wanted to understand the bigger picture. I was curious not just about what the law said, but why it was evolving the way it was, especially in response to rapidly shifting technologies. 

    Berkeley felt like the perfect fit: world-renowned faculty, cutting-edge tech-law curriculum, and if the future was being built in Silicon Valley, then Berkeley Law was clearly where it was being legally translated.

    Immersing myself in this environment gave me something invaluable: perspective. Studying privacy law under experts who were helping shape legislation (rather than just interpret it) helped me move beyond the black-letter law mindset. I began to think more critically about regulatory intent, policy trade-offs, and the delicate balance between innovation and accountability.

    Courses like Social Media Law and Computer Crime Law sharpened my understanding of how existing legal frameworks are being pushed by new technologies. Learning about Hollywood contracts one day and GDPR enforcement actions the next made me see just how interconnected everything is in this space, and how important it is for lawyers to be adaptable, tech-savvy, and a little creative.

    Beyond academics, working as a Research Assistant to Professor Sonia Katyal was one of the most formative experiences of my time at Berkeley Law. Her work sits at the crossroads of technology, IP, and civil rights, and being part of a research project examining how copyright and trademark law intersect with identity and digital expression expanded my understanding of what the law can do, not just what it should do. It also refined my analytical skills, deepened my research capabilities, and taught me how to connect theory to real-world legal challenges.

    As part of varied organizations such as Women in Tech Law and journals such as Berkeley Technology Law Journal, I had the opportunity to engage in real conversations about the future of the profession. One standout moment was interviewing Professor Jennifer Urban, Chair of the California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA). That conversation gave me unique insight into the inner workings of a regulatory body and offered a front-row seat to the evolution of U.S. privacy enforcement. 

    These experiences, taken together, significantly shaped my professional growth. They helped me transition from being a subject-matter practitioner to a more holistic legal thinker. They taught me to approach problems from multiple angles: technical, ethical, regulatory, and commercial. Most importantly, they reaffirmed my passion for working at the intersection of law and technology and gave me the tools and confidence to lead in this space.

    Berkeley did not just deepen my legal expertise; it expanded my entire outlook on the role lawyers can play in shaping the future. 

    As a student researcher at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Northern California, you worked on the Digital Rights Project, focusing on policy research related to consumer data protection and compliance with California privacy laws, including the CCPA, CalOPPA, and the Song-Beverly Credit Card Act. How would you compare the data protection frameworks in the U.S., India, and Europe, particularly with your certification in these areas?

    My time at the ACLU of Northern California’s Digital Rights Project offered invaluable insight into the nuanced and often fragmented landscape of U.S. privacy law. Unlike the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or India’s newly enacted Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDP), both of which adopt comprehensive, centralized frameworks grounded in fundamental privacy rights, the U.S. continues to follow a sectoral and state-by-state approach, creating significant variability and complexity in compliance.

    One of the most interesting projects I worked on involved analyzing the privacy implications of QR code-based restaurant ordering systems. What initially appeared to be a straightforward user interface turned into a multi-layered compliance exercise involving the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), California Online Privacy Protection Act (CalOPPA), and the Song-Beverly Credit Card Act. It served as a powerful reminder that even the most routine consumer interactions can involve intricate legal considerations, especially when sensitive data such as payment or behavioral information is collected and stored.

    This experience strengthened my ability to assess data practices through a multi-jurisdictional, multi-sectoral lens, reinforcing the importance of understanding not just the legal frameworks involved, but also the underlying technical architecture of products and services. A lawyer’s ability to offer sound advice increasingly depends on their understanding of how data flows through systems, where risks lie, and how those risks intersect with evolving legal standards.

    A key difference I observed between U.S. privacy laws and the GDPR lies in the scope and rigor of compliance requirements. The GDPR is both strict and expansive, there is no minimum threshold for applicability. Any company, regardless of size, that collects personal data from even a single EU resident is subject to the law. It is a deeply consumer-centric regime, with limited room for flexibility.

    In contrast, while U.S. state laws like the CPRA, are also robust, they do provide some flexibility for companies, especially smaller entities and startups. Most U.S. privacy laws include applicability thresholds, based on revenue, number of consumers affected, or volume of data processed, before the obligations kick in. This approach allows smaller businesses a bit more breathing room to implement privacy compliance during their early growth stages, aligning legal obligations with business maturity. That said, it remains critical for startups to incorporate privacy-by-design from the outset, as crossing the threshold can happen sooner than anticipated. In short, the GDPR prioritizes consumer rights at every level, while U.S. laws attempt to strike a balance, offering strong consumer protections without stifling innovation and scalability.

    This comparative analysis between the EU, India, and U.S. frameworks highlighted a fundamental truth: privacy compliance is not one-size-fits-all. It demands not only legal fluency but also a contextual, practical understanding of industry, technology, and jurisdiction. This foundational experience continues to shape my approach to privacy law, grounded in strong legal analysis but always mindful of the evolving global and technological landscape.

    Being admitted to both the Indian Bar and the State Bar of California, how has your dual qualification benefited your practice? What advice would you give to aspiring legal professionals aiming to clear the California Bar Exam?

      Being dual-qualified in both India and California, two jurisdictions that are home to some of the world’s most dynamic and disruptive startups, has significantly enhanced my ability to provide cross-border legal counsel, particularly in the areas of intellectual property and data privacy. This dual qualification allows me to advise clients navigating regulatory requirements, commercial expansion, and product launches across both legal systems. Where Indian law is rapidly evolving through legislative reform, California’s legal landscape is shaped by a combination of statutes and robust regulatory enforcement. Understanding these contrasts enables me to craft nuanced, business-oriented legal strategies that are tailored to the specific jurisdiction and sector.

      As for the California Bar Exam, its reputation as one of the most challenging in the U.S. is well-earned, but not insurmountable. My advice to aspiring legal professionals is straightforward: treat it like a full-time job. Success requires consistency, discipline, and a well-structured study plan. I truly believe that the exam does not test intelligence, it is more about mastering the method, developing exam endurance, and performing under pressure. If you can commit to the process fully, passing the exam is absolutely achievable.

      Ultimately, the effort is well worth it. Being admitted in California has opened up exciting opportunities to work at the intersection of law, technology, and innovation on a truly global scale.

      Throughout your distinguished career, what strategies have you employed to maintain a healthy work-life balance? What guidance would you offer to others striving to manage both professional ambitions and personal responsibilities?

      Let’s be honest, achieving work-life balance in the legal profession is often more aspiration than reality, something everyone talks about, but few actually manage to pin down. The nature of our work is demanding, high-stakes, and often time-sensitive. But over the years, I have learned that if you do not actively protect your personal life, your professional life will quietly take over every corner of it.

      One mindset shift that has served me well is this: Don’t make work your life, make it part of your life. Law is what I do; It is not all of who I am. I have come to believe that you cannot be a high-performing professional if you are constantly running on empty. As the saying goes, you can’t pour from an empty cup! 

      For me, this means setting clear boundaries where possible. I carve out non-negotiable time for things that replenish me, whether that’s exercise, travel, sports, time with family and friends, or even just reading something that has nothing to do with legal theory. I also try not to romanticize the hustle. Being available 24/7 does not make you indispensable, it often just makes you exhausted. And, let us be candid: no matter how good you are, you are replaceable to your workplace, but not to your health, your loved ones, or yourself.

      My advice to younger legal professionals is that ambition is important, but so is sustainability. If you are building a long-term career, you need to treat your time, energy, and wellbeing as strategic assets. Learn to say no. Take breaks without guilt. Celebrate small wins outside of work. And most importantly, define success on your own terms, not just by billable hours.

      At the end of the day, being a fulfilled person makes you a better lawyer!

      Get in touch with Anuja Shah –

    1. “Litigation is not a one-time choice; it’s something you must choose every single day despite the distractions and difficulties.” – Yashwant Singh, Advocate -on- Record at the Supreme Court of India.

      “Litigation is not a one-time choice; it’s something you must choose every single day despite the distractions and difficulties.” – Yashwant Singh, Advocate -on- Record at the Supreme Court of India.

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

      Growing up in Siliguri, far from the conventional legal hubs, what influenced your decision to pursue law, and how did your years at Chanakya National Law University shape your early perspective on the profession?

      Growing up in Siliguri and studying at Don Bosco School shaped me in many ways. At home, the environment was always encouraging. I was an average student in academics, but active in debates, quizzes, and other co-curricular activities. With the benefit of hindsight, those experiences built my confidence- something I still consider as my biggest asset. Initially, I was preparing for a career in engineering, but somewhere along the way, I realized it wasn’t something I could truly be passionate about. My parents stood by me wholeheartedly. It was then that I decided to choose law.

      My years at CNLU were truly defining. Coming from a younger NLU, we were always conscious that we had to work harder to stand out. A new institution brought with it both challenges and opportunities, and much like our university, we were eager to carve out our own space in the larger scheme of things. Those 5 years taught me the importance of taking ownership of one’s plans and seeing them through. Most importantly, CNLU gave me the final clarity that litigation – with all its pros and cons- was the path I really wanted to pursue. That conviction has guided almost every professional decision I have made thereon.

      In the initial phase of your career, you worked closely with the litigation team for over four years. What were some of the most formative experiences during this time, particularly in handling matters related to taxation, constitutional, and regulatory law?

      I began my career with the litigation team at PDS Legal, New Delhi, under Mr. Tarun Gulati. I had interned there during law school and was fortunate to receive a pre-placement offer in my final year. As someone new to both the city and the profession, I found tremendous support from my team and colleagues, who helped me settle in and grow.

      The foundation of my advocacy was built at PDS Legal- right from drafting and preparing a matter to eventually presenting it in court. If there is one lesson I particularly carry from those years, it is that effort alone is not enough; planning and organisation are equally critical. Clients and colleagues alike value a professional who is methodical in approach. My seniors were patient and supportive, and my peers were always helpful, which kept the momentum going in what could otherwise have been a daunting phase. Looking back, my time at PDS Legal not only gave me the skills but also the confidence and clarity to eventually venture out and establish my independent practice.

      Transitioning from a structured law firm environment to establishing your independent practice in 2021 must have been a pivotal moment. What motivated this move, and what were the initial challenges and learnings in setting up on your own?

      I had always wanted to establish my own practice. The satisfaction of building something of your own is unparalleled, and that desire kept me motivated. At the same time, my early days in litigation taught me that there is only so much you can prepare from the sidelines – you have to take the plunge, start from scratch and build gradually.

      The switch was not easy. Coming from a law firm where I was constantly working on heavy matters to suddenly having only a handful of briefs was a stark contrast. It is natural to have doubts and question your decision. But if you ask me, the real trick is to hang in there. Independent litigation is a choice you make every single day, despite the distractions and the reasons that may tempt you to leave. In the end, this profession rewards perseverance and patience. If you stay the course and keep developing yourself, things do fall into place.

      Since then, you have handled a wide spectrum of commercial, criminal, and civil disputes. Could you share one of the most challenging cases from your independent practice that significantly strengthened your confidence as a litigator?

      It is difficult to pinpoint a single case that became the fulcrum of my practice. For me, it has been a series of moments that reassured me I had made the right choice in setting up independently. One such matter was when a doctor’s license to practice had been suspended by a High Court in a contempt proceeding. I had the opportunity to lead the matter in the Supreme Court, and we managed to secure the desired relief. That case gave me something invaluable at that stage- acknowledgment, financial stability, and, most importantly, confidence as a litigator.

      Another turning point was when I first started handling criminal matters. Having had little exposure to criminal law during my time at the firm, those cases initially felt daunting. But they also reinforced a simple truth: in litigation, effort makes all the difference. If you are willing to put in that extra bit of preparation, you will eventually find your footing. Both these experiences strengthened my belief that perseverance pays, and that independent practice, though challenging, was the right path for me.

      In 2025, you achieved the distinction of becoming an Advocate-on-Record. What inspired you to pursue this qualification, how was your preparation journey, and in what ways has the AoR title impacted your practice and professional opportunities?

      Becoming an Advocate-on-Record was always a clear goal for me once I started my independent practice. Practising in Delhi makes you realize very early how competitive the profession is, and that the Supreme Court is the final stop for matters from across the country. When you pitch for mandates in the Supreme Court, the first question often asked is- Are you an AoR? If your answer is no, it does have a bearing, especially with clients outside Delhi. Qualifying the exam, therefore, gives you that foot-in-the-door and instills an additional layer of confidence in clients.

      Preparing for the exam definitely demands seriousness. Like most who clear it, I had to balance practice with study, which sometimes may get a bit difficult. I was fortunate to have friends and seniors who supported me—whether with study materials or helping me manage my matters. But I believe one thing must be acknowledged: preparing for the AoR exam is in itself an enriching experience. Irrespective of the result, you come out a better professional.

      Alongside your practice, you often engage with law students through moots and guest lectures. How do you view the balance between active practice and mentoring the next generation of lawyers?

      I genuinely enjoy interacting with students- there’s always a fresh perspective and a new learning to take away. Having been on that side of the spectrum myself, I know how good it is to have people from the profession engage with you. Judging moots or delivering guest lectures is also a great way to sharpen my own legal acumen, whenever you discuss an issue, you inevitably end up learning too. Balancing it with active practice is not always easy, but whenever I get the opportunity, I truly enjoy taking it up.

      Looking ahead, with your growing independent chamber and experience across varied domains, what vision do you hold for your practice over the next decade, and what advice would you offer to young lawyers aspiring to build a career in litigation?

      For me, every professional is a brand in himself, and the journey is really about improving that brand each day. My vision over the next few years is to evolve as a reliable practitioner and to build a team that is known for being effective and dependable in the legal community. Reputation in this profession takes years to build but can be lost in a moment, so the aim is to grow steadily, sincerely- and also to enjoy the process along the way.

      I don’t think I am in a position to give advice, but I can share my story. If there’s one thing I have learnt, it is that this profession rewards patience, perseverance, and planning. At the same time, litigation is not a one-time choice; it’s something you must choose every single day despite the distractions and difficulties. And while doing all of this, it is equally important to have fun and enjoy the process- because that’s what makes the journey worthwhile.

      With new legal developments and judicial precedents emerging almost daily, how do you keep yourself updated on the latest trends and ensure that your practice stays aligned with the evolving legal landscape?

      For me, curiosity and social consciousness are an asset in this profession. A lawyer should always be curious about the things happening around him, both inside and outside the courtroom. I genuinely enjoy reading, and I feel any lawyer who enjoys reading will always have an edge. We live in an age where information is power, and with technology, access to that information has become much easier than it used to be. There are plenty of platforms today that help us stay updated with what’s happening around.

      But beyond books and screens, our courts themselves are exciting places to learn. I’ve often found that indulging in conversations in the corridors, sometimes over a simple cup of coffee, leaves you walking away with more insight than you bargained for. That in itself sounds like a good deal ! 

      Get in touch with Yashwant Singh –

    2. “The confidence that I gained as a lawyer, coupled with a structured and organized approach has shaped me as an entrepreneur today.” – Shruti Gupta, Independent Law Practitioner and Hospitality Entrepreneur.

      “The confidence that I gained as a lawyer, coupled with a structured and organized approach has shaped me as an entrepreneur today.” – Shruti Gupta, Independent Law Practitioner and Hospitality Entrepreneur.

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

      Having built an impressive legal career spanning over seven years, and continuing your practice today while also excelling as a hospitality entrepreneur, what first inspired you to pursue a career in law?

      I was the kid who always sought logic for everything and anything and asked a zillion questions. Growing up, the world of contracts, negotiation and consequences attracted me and I was drawn to the idea of transactions and their intricacies and would pester my father who is a businessman to know more about how things worked.

      I grew up in a relatively conservative city of Kanpur in Uttar Pradesh, where females did not have it easy and small things had to be bargained and negotiated.  All of this led me to admire people who could negotiate, resolve disputes with clear communication and well-reasoned logic. This also drew me to  law as a field where I could advocate for others and use my communication skills to bring about meaningful change.

      When I pursued higher education at Shri Ram College of Commerce and later at Campus Law Centre from where I pursued my LLB, I got fascinated with litigation. The fast paced dynamism and the strategy of litigation drew me in and I got hooked. I was very fortunate to have a fabulous mentor in my senior, Mr. Gaurav Pachnanda, Senior Advocate and Barrister at Fountain Court Chambers. Working with him introduced me to complex commercial arbitrations and was one of the best foundations that someone can ask for. My academic journey, which eventually took me to Cambridge University for my Master of Law, only deepened that conviction.

      You began your professional journey practicing before some of the highest courts and tribunals in India before transitioning into hospitality entrepreneurship. What motivated this shift, and how did your legal acumen prepare you for the challenges of running and expanding a business?

      After practising litigation full-time for several years, during the pandemic I got an opportunity and I made an unconventional road into the world of hospitality. At the time when the world was dealing with covid and everything underwent lockdown, one of our hotel’s in Dehradun was undergoing renovation. Being the foodie that we both are, we, (Abhishek, my husband and co-founder of the restaurants) decided to start a small pizzeria called Coco Osteria to introduce Neapolitan pizzas to Dehradun in a space that vibed with us. We started small, more like a passion project than a commercial venture, and in a short span of time, Coco took off and how.

      The hospitality business is fast paced every day is a new challenge. It requires one to be dynamic in decision making, in pivoting and adapting to the changing environment. The skills and mindset I honed through law like critical thinking, problem-solving, and resilience in high-pressure situations will always be in my DNA and they have proved invaluable in building and growing my restaurants.

      Your work in litigation, arbitration, and corporate advisory has honed skills in analysis, negotiation, and risk management. How have these shaped your approach to strategic business decisions and navigating compliance, contracts, and negotiations?

      My background in litigation and arbitration has taught me how to assess risks and outcomes before taking any business decisions ensuring that all business decisions at LP Hotels, Coco Osteria, or Monsoon are backed by clarity and are not left to chance.

      My legal acumen has taught me to have a structured yet flexible approach to decision-making in hospitality. All skills come in handy and help me in the hospitality industry whether it is navigating the compliances and regulatory frameworks or negotiating leases or vendor partnerships or dealing with my team.

      The confidence that one gains as a litigation lawyer is unparalleled. We are constantly juggling between different contracts and industries and have to be adept at keeping up with whatever is handed out to us. The confidence that I gained as a lawyer, coupled with a structured and organized approach has shaped me as an entrepreneur today. All of this helps to make decisions that balance innovation and sound business policies.

      Based on your experience, what are some of the most common legal pitfalls first-time entrepreneurs overlook, and how can they proactively avoid them?

      One of the most common legal pitfalls entrepreneurs (whether first timers or experienced) face is entering into business arrangements without formal, well-drafted contracts. Many rely on verbal agreements or generic templates, which can lead to disputes over responsibilities, revenue sharing, or exit rights.

      Another overlooked area that entrepreneurs often overlook is protection of intellectual property whether it is trademarks, logos, or proprietary content.  Another gap I often come across is that of compliance with local regulations  from licenses to labour laws. This I have realized is a big issue especially in industries like hospitality or F&B, where health and safety standards are stringent.

      To avoid these, I recommend that all entrepreneurs should invest early in legal groundwork. They need to get the basic things in place, nothing fancy. They should ensure that all contracts are vetted, register necessary IP’s, and get help to ensure compliance with regulatory frameworks. Even if budgets are tight, seeking basic legal advice at the outset saves significant costs and risks later. I believe that maintaining proper documentation is equally important so that there are no issues later when the company grows.

      In leading operations, branding, and strategic development, how does your legal background influence your leadership style and problem-solving approach?

      My legal background has a profound impact on my leadership style and my approach to decision making. I am thorough more often than not, I am able to anticipate problems and issues before they materialize which gives me an edge in dealing with them.

      Also, true to my legal profession, my leadership style is proactive, detail-oriented, and solution-driven. One thing that I learnt through my legal career was to listen and to be empathetic. This is one of the biggest advantages that I may have learnt because hearing out people is crucial to building relationships and solving issues. A lot in this hospitality industry is driven through relationships, with guests, partners, and teams and the ability to balance firmness with empathy has been invaluable.

      I encourage my team to think critically, ask questions, and to become creative in finding solutions. Ultimately, my legal background gives me the confidence to take bold decisions because they are thought out and calculated decisions.

      Having studied at globally reputed institutions like the University of Cambridge and Stanford Graduate School of Business, how have these experiences broadened your perspective on integrating legal thinking into entrepreneurial growth?

      My time at University of Cambridge and with the Seed Programme of  Stanford Graduate School of Business has truly been transformative, not just academically but also in shaping how I think.

      At Cambridge, the rigorous legal training gave me a broader perspective and taught me to analyze issues and to look at both risks and opportunities within the framework of the law, and to value precision in reasoning. Stanford, on the other hand, offered a completely different lens, one that emphasized innovation, design thinking, and growth-oriented leadership. The programme at Stanford helped me understand business and how to chase growth in business. It taught me that calculated risks are crucial for success in business.

      Together, my academic pursuits have given me a unique blend of these perspectives that  helps me to approach hospitality entrepreneurship with both caution and creativity. I can safeguard the business legally while also pushing boundaries to introduce novel concepts like Monsoon’s regional food journey or Coco Osteria’s award-winning dining experience.

      It is these learnings that led me to introduce Neapolitan pizza’s to Dehradun through Coco Osteria, to launch its first ever craft cocktail bar called CinCin, to introduce a regional Indian restaurant that brings together a menu inspired by our travels across India in Monsoon or to start the Dehradun Food Literature Festival, that ignited meaningful conversations about food, culture, and storytelling, reinforcing the need to preserve and celebrate India’s diverse culinary heritage.

      In my experience, my academic experiences reinforce my belief that law and entrepreneurship are not at odds, in fact they complement each other. Legal thinking provides structure and resilience, while entrepreneurial learning fosters vision and adaptability. Bringing the two together has been central to how I build and grow ventures in a way that is both sustainable and forward-looking.

      In a constantly evolving business landscape with shifting regulations and compliance requirements, how do you ensure you remain informed, adaptable, and ahead of the curve?

      On the legal side, I regularly track regulatory updates, attend professional workshops, and rely on peer networks to interpret how new laws might impact operations. In hospitality, adaptability is equally critical so I work closely with consultants and subject-matter experts to stay compliant while also ensuring innovation is not stifled.

      In this dynamic world and ever evolving hospitality industry, I make it a point to stay ahead through constant learning and innovation. For example, after introducing Coco Osteria, we (Abhishek and I) travelled to Italy and took classes to learn the art of pizza and pasta making. We also ensure that our team attends professional workshops regularly to keep up with the industry. Apart from this, I make it a point to keep myself informed through constant engagement with industry networks.

      We keep and encourage a positive and agile mindset at work. Our team has also imbibed the same and this helps us be proactive with changing dynamics and to align our work model.

      Looking back, what advice would you give to lawyers considering a transition into entrepreneurship or leadership roles in business?

      To any lawyer considering entrepreneurship, I would say while your acumen and ability to analyze, negotiate, and anticipate risks will be your biggest advantage, be open to new learnings. Business, unlike law, requires a certain risk taking ability, to take quick decisions and to adapt when things don’t go as planned.  

      My advice would be to be willing to “unlearn” bits. As an entrepreneur you have to be quick and not over analyse all decisions. A lot of decisions that you make as an entrepreneur are driven by intuition and practicalities rather than what seems logical.

      As lawyers, we are very independent but to grow in business, one has to have a good team and has to rely on the power of collaboration so it is important to build a good team.

      Entrepreneurship comes with its own challenges that one doesn’t encounter as a lawyer, so it is important to keep grounded and to focus on what is important.

      How do you balance the demands of your legal practice with your entrepreneurial ventures, and what do you gather from it on maintaining work-life harmony?

      Balancing a legal practice with entrepreneurial ventures has certainly been one of the most challenging yet rewarding aspects of my career. Law teaches discipline, structured thinking, and the ability to compartmentalize, and these very skills I have carried forward into managing hospitality operations. I rely on clear prioritization: when I’m working on a case, my focus is entirely on the matter at hand, and when I’m at the restaurant or with my team, I’m fully immersed in the business. I am truly present in whatever task I am involved with.

      This dual role has also taught me the importance of delegation and as I have mentioned previously on building strong teams. Neither law nor hospitality is a solo pursuit, and having people I can trust allows me to shift roles without feeling overstretched. On a personal level, I’ve learned that balance doesn’t mean dividing time equally every day, but ensuring that over the long run, each aspect of my professional and personal life receives the attention it deserves.

      I derive joy from the intellectual rigor of my law practice as well as from the creatively driven world of hospitality. I truly believe that when a career is driven by passion and when one enjoys what they are pursuing, it does not feel like a chore or a burden.  While I still practice law, I find the same sense of purpose and challenge in hospitality, making both careers deeply fulfilling in different yet complementary ways.

      Get in touch with Shruti Gupta –

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

      Every hiring goes through a lot of vetting.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

      One thing I would like to add in the end.

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

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

      Get in touch with Nilanshu Shekhar –