Tag: Corporate Litigation

  • “If you pursue the field of litigation over the time span of 15-20 years, the odds of your success are more provided you remain honest, hardworking and dedicated” – Akshat Gupta, Managing Partner at Law Green.

    “If you pursue the field of litigation over the time span of 15-20 years, the odds of your success are more provided you remain honest, hardworking and dedicated” – Akshat Gupta, Managing Partner at Law Green.

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

    Sir, you have extensive experience in civil and criminal disputes, arbitration and various other areas. What initially drew you to law, and how did you develop your specialization in dispute resolution and corporate advisory?

    If I reflect back on my journey as an advocate, I think the initial seeds were sown during my school days at Salwan Public School. Although I come from a science background, I was greatly influenced by my teachers at Salwan Public School who taught me social science and environmental studies during the initial days. At a very young age, I had developed strong views on critical topics such as caste reservation, women emancipation, global warming etc. Later on, Amity Law School propelled me further on my path towards social awakening where law was taught not only as a discipline but as a tool for bringing social change. I was greatly influenced by my professors who taught us subjects like Political Science, Law, Poverty & Justice and Jurisprudence which added fuel to the fire of my curiosity about this fascinating field. The turning point in my life was my internship experience with veteran leader of the Bar, Mr. R.N.Vats, Advocate, and time that I have spent in his chambers just kept sucking me into the field of law like a black hole even though initially I started my career in the corporate field as a management professional but eventually since my calling was always law so I went back to his chambers to master the essentials, understand the rudiments and get a solid foundation. As far as developing specialization in dispute resolution and corporate advisory is concerned, destiny has a role to play in it. It is a rule that if a lawyer’s diary permits, he must not say no to any brief which calls upon him. Following this principle and given my prior corporate experience and extensive network owing to my IIM roots, I started getting a lot of work initially in corporate advisory through my colleagues and friends. I was also lucky to get support from like-minded, hardworking, accomplished and brilliant colleagues from the Bar like Dr.Amit George & Mr. Sushant Singh, Advocate, who recognized and acknowledged my talent at an early stage of my life and entrusted me with complex briefs which required meticulous preparation and attention to detail which helped me develop my specialisation in dispute resolution over the time.

    After completing your law degree, you transitioned into management and HR leadership with prominent organizations before returning to law. What motivated these career shifts, and how have these experiences complemented your legal practice?

    Although, I always had a strong inclination towards the field of law but my curiosity and desire to explore other walks of life, while I was still young, led me to pursue the field of business management, when the life presented me with an opportunity to specialise in human resources from the Indian Institute of Management Ranchi. My experience at IIM Ranchi was a game changer for me, giving me much needed corporate and international exposure.  

    Interdisciplinary studies and holistic view about different areas of human knowledge is essential in shaping world view as law is a field which requires an open mind not having a myopic view. Very often the written code and precedents may blind us and seemingly show a dead end, but creative interpretation is necessary to do justice while at the same time respecting the code. This is why law is such a dynamic field and poses intricate challenges before jurists and lawyers all the time. The underlying motivation for me was to keep learning and growing my perspective and widen the lens through which I see the world. My experience in leadership roles with prominent organizations has led me to understand and appreciate the bottom-line pressures and regulatory challenges which businesses face while achieving corporate objectives in an ethical and legal way which has in-turn helped me to think more practically about law and regulations rather than focus on theory. My corporate experience and exposure has helped me to find innovative solutions for my clients to resolve business disputes often by way of mediated settlements in a faster way not requiring prolonged litigation. 

    Your practice spans dealing in sectors like FMCG, automobile, construction, and more. What are the major regulatory challenges you encounter today, particularly in the automobile sector, and how do you advise companies to navigate them?

    The automobile sector is one sector which has a strong lobbying with the government when it comes to aligning national policies with domestic interests. Unfortunately, the entire ecosystem and infrastructure, roads etc. are still lacking and not conducive to pave the way for future technologies and international players to enter the market. If we have to provide high class mobility for a billion and a half Indians, our automobile sector needs to buckle up. The world is miles ahead and our automobile sector is lagging behind facing immense pressure from environmentalists and lawmakers. Another aspect is safety concerns on Indian roads and fast changing regulations, emission standards which constantly require upgrading technology to meet the changing demands. There are several sectors aligning closely with automobile sector and dependant on automobiles for survival including spare parts industry, oil and lubricants (where counterfeiting and trademark infringement is rampant), tyres, auto-insurance & loans (our courts are filled with accident claims and cases of loan defaults), e-taxi/cabs services etc. which pose unique legal challenges of their own. The second hand automobile market has its own qualms and now there are new big players in automobile rentals and second-hand sales who have entered the market and disrupted the scene. Second hand sale of luxury/ultra-premium vehicles is on the rise and inter State pricing differential helps in cost arbitrage and savings for the customers due to lower regulatory life of diesel vehicles in certain states. We have seen a rise in the number of consumer disputes against automobile companies. Very often, the contracts with dealers and distributors, service providers etc. are loosely worded without delineating properly the liabilities which arise out of “deficiency in service” beyond standard warranties. Moreover, there are emerging service aggregators who are going to dominate the auto-service sector in the near future and they are likely to plead intermediary immunity in cyber space. From the legal and regulatory standpoint, it is important to have proper demarcation between different business verticals providing connected services, revisit standard warranties and business contracts and implement a robust 100% compliance approach. Litigation is unavoidable in this sector, however, when it dawns it is important to pursue the cases diligently with coherent strategy keeping in mind long term implications in such a dynamic environment. The electric two-wheeler space is buzzing with emerging players and keeping litigation costs low early on is a challenge especially when India is a vast country and finding adequate legal representation in remote areas still remains a challenge as proceedings are dominated sometimes by local language which is a barrier in itself. 

    Balancing a wide-ranging practice that includes litigation, arbitration, advisory work, and pro-bono work, how do you manage competing professional demands while maintaining personal balance?

    Although we lawyers have the liberty to work from home, from what I have seen in the legal industry, balancing competing professional demands and maintaining personal balance is the biggest challenge in life of all accomplished lawyers and even the senior-most lawyers in the fraternity struggle with this. A healthy mind dwells in a healthy body so maintaining physical health must take priority for anyone who wants to pursue this field with passion. Over the time, I have realised the importance of maintaining balance and spending time with family and pursuing hobbies which although initially is difficult to maintain in this profession but over the time with experience and clever self-management hacks coupled with prioritizing techniques can help solve this problem to a large extent. Having a schedule and following a routine is thus important which helps divide time between competing demands. From what I have learnt from senior members of the Bar, being a lawyer is all about staying in balance which is a constant struggle.

    For young lawyers and professionals aspiring to specialize in litigation and corporate advisory, what key skills, experiences, or interdisciplinary knowledge would you recommend prioritizing early in their careers?

    It is important to develop the skill to question everything and think critically but patience and tenacity are key virtues required in this profession which can be acquired early on by following a spiritual path from the very beginning. Further, reading religious scriptures (without becoming a fundamentalist) also helps in developing virtues of patience and diligence. I recommend reading literature in human psychology and how our understanding of the functioning of the human brain, habits and behaviours is used in modern business landscapes as a marketing and business strategy to advance corporate interests. This coupled with critical thinking is useful in separating truth from lies in this modern world of instant broadcast. Besides, it is absolutely essential to have good command over the English language and develop computer skills which can enhance your productivity and speed in a firm environment. Legal research and drafting are two pillars of litigation that go hand in hand and one complements the other. These are the basics which will give you impetus to start with confidence in your journey.  

    Reflecting on your multifaceted career spanning legal practice, HR leadership, and advisory roles, what guiding principles or lessons have shaped your success, and how would you advise the next generation to approach complex legal and organizational challenges?

    There are certain guiding propositions which I strongly believe in which have helped me carry on and prosper in this profession. The most important is that when I took the decision to enter litigation, I strongly believed and I still do, that there is no Plan “B”. I will not turn back at all and I will die as a lawyer. This approach has helped me stay firm to my resolve to pursue litigation even amidst personal adversity. 

    The second principle which I strongly believe in is that if you pursue the field of litigation over the time span of 15-20 years, the odds of your success are more than the odds of failure provided you remain honest, hardworking and dedicated to learning from mistakes. I have seen lawyers struggling with even basic English language in the beginning but over the time span of 5-6 years they have mastered the ability to navigate court systems and procedures with ease and that’s only because they kept on going. 

    The third most important principle is to remain content with steady progress and growth. Very high ambitions can soon turn into disappointment. As they say Courts are not meant for unjust enrichment but only compensation for loss, similarly litigation being the profession which commands highest standards and respect can help you earn a decent livelihood but if you want to become rich then go do some business or take up some other career path. With time though, sincere and dedicated lawyers do become rich but their motivation is not to earn money which is rather a natural consequence which flows from being a trusted advisor. 

    As far as approaching complex legal and organizational challenges is concerned, my advice would be to sit, live and breathe with files as long as you can and just keep going at it till the complexity dissolves. In the early stages of my legal career amidst the hustle, I specifically made time to read and analyse case files in silos which helped me in understanding the facts properly and then apply legal principles to a given set of facts. It is important to take charge and lead the brief from the front. 

    There is nothing which you can’t do or understand. If others can do it, you can also do it, you just need to believe in yourself and keep your confidence high. When you are genuinely stuck just reach out and seek help from your mentors and seniors at the Bar. Bar is a very resourceful asset and my experience has been that members of the Bar are not competitive rather co-operative. I have learnt how to tackle complexity extensively from fellow colleagues and senior advocates over morning walks, informal discussions etc. but most importantly from court room experiences. There’s a saying in courts that if you absent yourself from courts for more than three consecutive days, then a lawyer is considered dead. So, make it a habit to visit courts daily and interact with members of the Bar where the maximum learning happens.  

    Get in touch with Akshat Gupta –

  • Global Perspective, Local Roots: Shaping Law, Leadership, and Impact – Yashasvi Tripathi, Corporate Associate at Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, United States.

    Global Perspective, Local Roots: Shaping Law, Leadership, and Impact – Yashasvi Tripathi, Corporate Associate at Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, United States.

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

    As a dual qualified lawyer, we would love to start from the very beginning. How and when did you decide to pursue law, and how did you end up deciding that it was the right time to move on and do your LL.M. as well? We would love to understand your journey, challenges, and how you built your road to excellence.

    I’m from Benares. I did my schooling there, and my father has a business and is also very active in social work. Back then, when I was in school, he used to write letters to authorities on various legal issues, troubles, or policy changes he thought were required for businesses in India. I used to take an active interest in what he was writing, and sometimes he would ask me to draft those letters. I think that’s how writing and my early interface with law and business began at home.

    When I was faced with the question of what I wanted to do, looking back now, I find it quite funny. There were many doctors in my family, so the obvious choice seemed to be medicine. But when I said I wanted to be a doctor, everyone at home said, “Oh no, we already have too many doctors, you should become a civil servant.” So, I initially wanted to become a civil servant, and that’s why I went to National Law University, Delhi. I thought, in Delhi we have everything, all the coaching, and law was considered a great subject for IAS aspirants.

    But when I started studying law, even before entering college, while preparing for CLAT and AILET, I fell in love with it. I used to read The Indian Express and The Hindu daily in Benares. I joined online coaching with Career Launcher because law wasn’t a very well-known option there at that time. This was back in 2012, and now it feels like history. Those days of reading newspapers and following legal developments made me fall in love with law. I realized that after studying law you could do everything a civil servant or even a politician could do in public interest litigation, fighting for the rights of disadvantaged people, becoming a corporate lawyer, anything was possible. The sky was the limit. So, I decided I wanted to stick with law.

    You don’t necessarily have to be a public lawyer, or a corporate lawyer, or any one thing you can carve your own path. That’s when I firmly decided to become a lawyer. Initially, I thought I would practice in the Supreme Court of India. I never imagined I would go to the US. My frame of mind was always to practice in Indian courts.

    By God’s grace, I was selected for National Law University, Delhi, with an All India Rank of six, and I was the first person from Banaras to enter that institution. For a long time, I think I was the only one from my city there. My parents were very supportive, and Delhi gave me tremendous exposure. One thing I learned is that if you work hard, you will succeed.

    I had no legal background, and I didn’t know where I would end up after five years. So, I focused on exploring. I did about 21 or 22 internships in college, which was one of the highest numbers in my batch. I never went back to Banaras during vacations I stayed in Delhi and kept interning. I was not sure whether I wanted to go into the private sector, NGOs, or litigation, so I tried them all.

    Eventually, I realized that I am guided by two principles: hard work and being the best version of myself. When I thought about how to achieve that, I felt pursuing an LL.M. would help me grow further. I also felt my education was incomplete without it. So, after all the internships and hard work in college, I decided to pursue an LL.M. I wrote my SOPs, appeared for exams, and went through the application process, which eventually led me to New York University.

    But more importantly, I want law students, especially those from smaller cities, to know that anything is possible. I consider myself from Banaras, which back then was not a Prime Minister’s constituency or the sought-after city it has become today. I am happy to see its growth now, but at that time it was still considered a small city. I want students from such places to believe that if you work hard and your aim is excellence, you can reach wherever you put your mind to.

    From being in one of the top universities in India to one of the top universities in the world. So how was your journey and the transition? There must be a lot of difference between the academia of NLU Delhi and New York University School of Law. While you were pursuing, what did you do and how did you make sure that your hard work paid off in the US as well? And what was your challenge over there, or maybe whatever you felt was very different and how you approached it differently with all your diligence and hard work. We would love to hear that story as well so that students and learners can understand that for a person who has done 22 internships in NLU Delhi and ended up at NYU, she has made a name for herself. How have you done that?

    It should be near 22, 21, or 25. I’m not sure of the number now. You can check my LinkedIn and I’m not even sure if I put all of them there. But anyway, I would want current students or current law students to take the LL.M. not only as an academic pursuit, not only as an academic course. I want them to take it as a professional pursuit as well. Since it involves a lot of investment, I don’t want students to just go and study. Of course, those who can afford it and who have academic inclinations or want to pursue academia should, by all means, go and do that. But many students fail to understand that the LL.M. is also an opportunity to pursue professional opportunities, and for that they have gone to the US. So utilize the LL.M. for networking opportunities, for exposing yourself to different careers and career professionals.

    I don’t want current NLU students or any law students who are in their fifth year to think they will just study as much as they can in one year when they’re going to the US, London, or Singapore. They should have a balanced course, take the minimum number of credits required, and then start learning outside of college and the classroom as well.

    You have conferences every day. You meet professors, you go to law firms, attend their networking events, and learn what the profession really is. That is very important. This is something students should start thinking about when they are in their fifth year of law school.

    This is one takeaway that I had. And to answer your question, the difference between NYU and NLU Delhi was that at NYU, it’s a totally Socratic method of education. No one is going to check if you are studying or not. You have to guide your own education.

    You have to pick your own subjects, you have to guide your own education, and you are fully responsible for your future, like any adult. So I think an LL.M. or Master’s should be done by an adult who knows what he or she is doing, and what he or she wants to pursue. If you are not sure about that, I would say work a few years in India before going to NYU or doing any LL.M. for that matter. At NYU, I had amazing faculty members who were already great and accomplished professionals. Even in the classroom, we were getting both theoretical and practical knowledge, how you would actually do something in a law firm or in court. That’s what makes the LL.M. different. That’s why it is a Master’s.

    And again, landing a job in the US was very difficult. As Indian citizens, we have to get H-1B sponsorship.

    You have to qualify through a lottery, then you have to get H-1B sponsorship, and you have to qualify the bar exam. Again, if you want, I can elaborate on the subject of how to land a job in the US, but that itself is a different conversation.

     We’d love to understand that also because obviously the people or the students who would like to maybe see how they can plan it. Like you have explained that these are the processes, it’ll be very, very helpful if you can talk a little bit about this aspect as well. How to actually land a job, because that is another struggle. The first struggle is to reach there, and then the second struggle is to find a better job where you can stay and work as well.

    Sure. So when we are in LLM, first of all, we are outside of our shelter. We have to start managing our food, our household, and it’s a foreign country. You are away from your family. It’s new people, plus it’s the pressure of finding a job. It’s a lot of things. So I always tell students to prioritize their wellbeing.

    Give full hundred percent to your education because, at the end of the day, all employers are going to look at your transcript. So you should be very sure not to overburden yourself and not to take extra credits just for your academic satisfaction. Take those kinds of credits which will help you land jobs in the US.

    Like if I’m a corporate lawyer, if someone wants to be a corporate lawyer, they should take mergers and acquisitions, securities, business law, contracts drafting, subjects like this, which make you eligible to sit for the bar exam and which make you a good candidate for the law firms over there. First take only those kinds of subjects. This can be a very controversial thing that I’m saying, don’t do subjects for your academic interest, but to each its own.

    And if you have been there with a lot of financial difficulties and with a lot of struggles, you want to make sure that you get the best opportunity when you are out of that college. I speak with several students from India and all they want is a job in the US after doing LLM because they have put in that kind of resources to get selected for an LLM to go there.

    So I would say, manage your academics well. Don’t overburden yourself and do well in academics. Start networking outside of your law school, inside your law school, network with your law professors. And networking is a long process. Like everyone says, network, network, network. But what is it? First, I would say it’s a sport.

    The more you do, the better you become at it. And it’s going to be a two-way process. Like mentoring, you are going to be a mentee to someone, but again, just don’t be entitled to anyone, don’t just walk up and say, I need a job. You have to learn from their experiences.

    You have to invest time with them so that the people you are speaking with in the US, who you are networking with, should understand that this person is worthy of mentoring. Become mentees to some good professionals in the US. Learn from their experiences. Follow them, genuinely follow them, genuinely learn from them.

    And it’s a two-way street. Everyone knows when you’re speaking with them that you’re looking for a job. So at the end of the day, if they find an opportunity, they will let you know. And you have to keep talking to multiple people, reach out on LinkedIn, email people.

    That’s what I did and that’s how I got a job. And that’s how law students from India who have no connections or who don’t have a background in law, have to make their own connections and that’s how they land a job. But it’s all about hard work and perseverance. It’s not about how smart you are to get a job in the US, it’s about your perseverance and your hard work.

    While in the US, when you started your LLM and began working, you were also a Legal Research Analyst with Jethmalani & Nallaseth PLLC. After that, you were associated with Nishith Desai Associates as well, in the US itself. So how did you plan it? Why did you decide to join these institutions? And how did your internships or the kind of work profile you had in India help you understand the working environments of India and the US, because there is also a huge difference? Also, how did you adjust, and what kind of strategies did you follow to make sure you adapted well, and obviously worked as hard as you always do?

    I started my professional journey, I would say, in the US. I did all kinds of internships in India, but I never worked professionally there. I went directly for my master’s. But I worked with two institutions, as you named: Jethmalani & Nallaseth and Nishith Desai Associates, whose headquarters or main offices are in India. So I have worked with Indian institutions, I would say. And then I went to Dechert, which is a big law firm. After that, I went to Davis Wright Tremaine, which is also a big law firm.

    As you said, it’s different. But I always wanted to be a New York lawyer, a US attorney, and I was in New York, so I wanted to be a NY attorney when I was doing my LLM. As I told you initially, I have always been driven by hard work and by striving to be the best, at least persevering for the best where I am.

    When I was in LLM, I understood that being in the US and getting employed there is very difficult. You have to be hardworking, strong academically, good at networking only then can you land a job in the US. So that became a challenge for me, and whenever I’m faced with any challenge, I am motivated to tackle it.

    I had to come back to India after LLM, but I thought, “Oh no, this is very challenging. Only the best of the best, apparently, can do it.” But after these many years of experience, I can say it’s not about the best of the best, it’s about hard work and perseverance.

    Then I told my father, “Dad, why not pursue a few years of employment in the US? I want to get a job and then I’ll come back.” I felt my education in the US was not complete without a few years of professional experience. He said, “Okay, go.”

    Back then, I started looking for opportunities. As I said, I had no professional experience from India, so I went directly from NLU Delhi to NYU. So landing a job for me was very difficult. That’s why when I speak to current LLM students who have a few years of experience, I tell them, You are already at an advantageous position compared to what I was.

    I started with the first opportunity I got, which was an immigration law firm. It was not a corporate law firm. My employer was Mr. Anil Jethmalani at Jethmalani & Nallaseth. He still continues to be my mentor. He was very kind to give me my first job. He saw that I was genuine. I had interned, but had no professional experience. He sponsored my visa, and I started working there very diligently as an immigration attorney.

    We don’t have immigration practice in India, of course it is outsourced, but it’s not established there. I started working there, but I was always interested in corporate law. So I used to network, network, network. Before going to the office to do my job, which, you know, was paying my bills, I would go to different law firms, attend conferences, meet people, write to folks on LinkedIn, and request coffee chats or informational interviews. That’s how I moved to Nishith Desai Associates.

    Again, Mr. Vaibhav Parikh of Nishith Desai Associates, the head of the US offices, has been amazing and a great mentor. This was my first corporate law job. I didn’t have a corporate law background from India. I was interested in pursuing something else, but when I was exposed to different things, having done all my internships, met people, followed the news I gradually decided what I wanted to do next. I had no fixed plan initially.

    Then I decided I wanted to be a corporate lawyer, and I decided on this in New York. Some people plan it beforehand: they want to be a corporate lawyer, then do an LLM, then get the job. I decided this after finishing my LLM. Mr. Vaibhav Parikh saw potential in me, thankfully, and offered me my first corporate law job in New York. At Nishith Desai Associates, I also worked very diligently, and I hope they felt the same. I worked there for almost one and a half to two years.

    At Nishith Desai Associates, the work involved practicing Indian law. We were co-counsels with foreign law firms, doing work for US clients who wanted to have Indian operations. So essentially, we were practicing Indian law for US clients or US law firms. Having done my LLM in New York and cleared the bar exam, I wanted to be part of even bigger global law firms, working on more complex deals. That’s how I shifted to big law, to Dechert. This required a lot of networking and meeting people, and then I came to Davis Wright Tremaine, where I am currently.

    Here, I’m practicing US law as a US attorney, focusing on M&A. The clients I work for and the cases I handle are very complicated and high-profile, and I thoroughly enjoy working on them. It has been a very enriching and challenging journey so far.

    Moving from an Indian law firm to a US corporate law firm, which is one of the biggest over there, what was your way to transition? How did you make that transition so easily or with a challenge, with your hard work? Also, the kind of understanding of international jurisdictions is absolutely different when you are practicing in litigation or practicing corporate law in-office, in-house. What is your understanding about that? Also, what prompted you to decide on corporate law, and how have you managed so far?

    So I thought of corporate law and I decided on corporate law because it’s very dynamic and fast-moving, and I’m a person, sorry to say with less patience. So I want fast-moving things or fast results. Litigation takes many years, and the same applies to arbitration.

    I was interested in international arbitration as well, and I pursued a lot of courses in that. I have publications in those areas, but I saw that corporate law is dynamic and fast-moving. I would be counsel to businesses, which was my motivation to be a lawyer in the first place, having seen my father.

    I would be their go-to person. I would meet clients from the business community. It’s very fast-paced, dynamic, and logical. You have things in your control. You don’t have to stand in court for hours. You are not in front of any tribunals. If things are in your control and your co-counsel or your peer controls, I am working for my client, and the other law firms are working for their clients. I’m a very collaborative person as well. So we collaborate and give results like we collaborate to merge two companies, acquire, merge, sell, or spin off.

    I wanted to do business law. That’s how I decided to be a corporate lawyer. I’m happy about my choice of law. You can see the results of your hard work in real time, which is very satisfying.

    And how did I prepare for my roles in US firms? I would say there are a lot of similarities. Of course, the working culture is different. In Indian firms, it’s very hierarchical and fast-paced. In US firms, it’s also fast-paced, but there’s less hierarchy. Senior lawyers are actually invested in your development. That’s what I experienced in my law firms, Dechert and Davis Wright Tremaine. My seniors are heavily invested in my mentorship and learning, and that’s what I also pass on to my juniors. I get to learn a lot and also pass on that knowledge.

    It’s high-paced, with complicated cases. At Davis Wright Tremaine, we try to simplify solutions or innovate solutions for complicated problems. For example, something you could do with a 50-page SPA (Share Purchase Agreement) might be condensed to 20 pages. We try to be very efficient for our clients because they’re paying us by the hour. We try to be as efficient as possible and innovate where we can.

    So these are the differences between the two law firms, but again, to each their own. People can do whatever they want in different places, and I got to learn a lot from all of these experiences, for sure.

    What kind of qualities do you look for in candidates? Because that is also a very major part of preparation for any student. And not only qualities the way they act, the kind of etiquette that you see in them, how do you judge them? After all, an interview is just one day, but the person will be with you for a longer period of time.

    So what kind of checklist, or anything, can you share about what you observe while recruiting someone for such a big law firm?

    First of all, this is, again, a very controversial thing to say. I should feel comfortable in that person’s company. Our work hours can at times get very challenging. We have signings and closings; we are rushing, and sometimes it’s fine, but at other times it’s super stressful. So you want to work with a person who is collaborative, who is nice, who can handle tasks independently if I assign them. Of course, it varies depending on the candidate’s year, but being nice and hardworking is key.

    They should be able to take initiative. I should see from that candidate whether they are proactive and helpful, because we all work in teams, and you want people who support each other during stressful hours. Hardworking, collaborative, and nice.

    When you are interviewing with law firms like these, you are already smart. You can only get to these interviews if you are smart. So all the candidates are intelligent. The challenge is to find someone who fits our culture wherever you are. The culture I look for is collaborative, hardworking, independent, and responsible for someone who says “yes” when given responsibilities. These are the things I would look for.

    But again, this is something for law entrants to think about later. First, I would encourage them to have a spectacular CV, to be smart, and to be eligible to reach these places.

    Intern in a lot of places. If you are sure you want to do corporate law, do internships with top-notch law firms in India. Go there, do research associateships with professors during your LLM, and then go for these interviews.

    So at the very end, we would love to understand that with such a demanding professional life, the kind of commitments that you have for something you have worked so hard for, and now that you have reached that particular space, how are you planning to manage a healthy work-life balance along with being a new mom? How are you going to delegate your responsibilities, and how do you see that so far, both with your earlier life and now with being a new mom yourself? So what are your plans for times to come, and how have you managed it so far?

    So far, I think I have managed it well. Not perfectly, but at least I have reached where I am and have managed it fine. I would say strategy is key. You have to be a pre-planner and be strategic about what you’re planning.

    So far, every morning, I make my to-do list and try to prioritize things at the very beginning: what is urgent, what has to be done, what can be delegated to someone else, and what is something that has to be done by me. This is something I have to complete and submit to my seniors.

    Every morning, I do my to-do list and plan accordingly, and I make sure that I have some time for myself for walking, for the gym, or whatever. I do that in the evenings and then have dinner. But at times, you don’t get enough time, given how corporate jobs are. I think strategy, pre-planning, and thinking about the urgency of a matter of what is delegatable, non-delegatable, and what to do in the mornings is very important.

    But honestly, I’m a new mom now. I myself don’t know how I’m going to manage my motherhood, which I absolutely cherish, and I’m thankful to God for this blessing. I am just ending my maternity leave and have to rejoin my law firm job, which I really enjoy and love doing.

    So let’s see how I manage those. I’m sure in my law firm, I have a lot of mothers who are balancing work and family. At Davis Wright Tremaine, we have a very good support system and a strong group of working mothers who have been very kind with their advice. I’m sure I will learn from them. But this is something I should share with you in a few years down the line how I manage my work-life balance after being a new mom.

    Get in touch with Yashasvi Tripathi –

  • “The responsibility of being an AOR is immense as you’re a bridge between the Registry and the Hon’ble Judges, not just in argument, but in procedure.” – Udian Sharma, Advocate-on-Record at the Supreme Court of India.

    “The responsibility of being an AOR is immense as you’re a bridge between the Registry and the Hon’ble Judges, not just in argument, but in procedure.” – Udian Sharma, Advocate-on-Record at the Supreme Court of India.

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

    Coming from a background in Science from Hindu College, University of Delhi, what inspired you to pursue a career in law? How has your technical background  influenced your approach to complex commercial or infrastructure disputes? 

    As a first-generation lawyer, I often say that I did not choose law, law chose me. Growing  up, I was deeply influenced by my grandfather, who fought legal battles for decades to  protect our ancestral land. His relentless perseverance, even against an unresponsive  system, left a profound impact on me. By the time I graduated in Science from Hindu  College, I had already seen how the law could be both an obstacle and a tool for justice.  

    My scientific training gave me a structured way of thinking. In Science, you learn to  analyze problems by breaking them down into fundamentals. That has greatly helped me  in disputes involving infrastructure and complex commercial contracts, where one must go  through technical details like engineering reports, financial data, regulatory compliances,  and present them in a manner that is both legally persuasive and technically accurate. It  allows me to approach my cases not just as a lawyer, but as someone trained to understand  the “nuts and bolts” of technical issues. 

    It has been an interesting journey, from solving arithmetic problems and arriving at ‘LHS  = RHS’ to addressing complex questions of law and concluding with ‘Hence, this SLP’. 

    In the early stages of your career, you worked with various senior judges and  advocates. How did these experiences shape your approach, and which lessons from  that time have had a lasting impact on your professional philosophy? 

    I had the privilege of clerking with Justice A.K. Sikri at the Supreme Court and Justice Siddharth Mridul at the Delhi High Court. Observing them up close taught me two  invaluable lessons: the importance of clarity, and the importance of compassion. Justice  Sikri had an extraordinary ability to simplify the most complex constitutional questions,  and Justice Mridul always emphasized the human element in adjudication. 

    Later, when I began working with senior advocates and counsels at the Supreme Court, I saw how preparation and integrity defined good lawyering. One lasting lesson I carry is that courts are not swayed by theatrics- they are swayed by sincerity and substance. These  experiences shaped my professional philosophy, that law is not just about winning cases, but about ensuring justice is meaningfully served. 

    What motivated you to establish an independent practice, and what hurdles did  you face while launching your chambers during COVID? How did you overcome  them, and what was your vision for the practice? 

    The decision was born partly out of necessity and partly out of conviction. During COVID, the legal profession itself came to a halt. Many colleagues struggled, and I realized that if I wanted to carry forward my vision of a client-centric and socially conscious practice, I  had to build something of my own. 

    I started my chambers quite literally from one room in my home (with immense gratitude  to my parents who allowed me to turn it into an office) with files stacked in the boot of my car. The hurdles were immense, no physical hearings, clients uncertain about the future, and the financial strain of running an independent practice in such times. But adversity also  brought clarity. I invested in technology, conducted virtual hearings, and slowly built a  team that shared the same values of hard work and service. My vision was, and remains to create a Chambers that combines courtroom advocacy with policy thinking, and where  every matter, whether commercial or public interest, is handled with the same dedication. 

    You have handled complex commercial disputes and arbitration, including cross border infrastructure matters and international arbitration, across areas such as  employment law and customs law. Can you share some major challenges you faced in  a complex arbitration case and the unique difficulties it presented? 

    One of the most challenging arbitrations I handled involved a cross-border infrastructure project. The difficulty lay not just in the scale, but in the diversity of the issues, technical  construction delays, regulatory clearances, and overlapping jurisdictional laws. 

    The unique challenge was coordinating with multiple stakeholders, engineers, financial  experts, and foreign legal teams, while presenting a coherent case before an arbitral tribunal presided over by a retired Supreme Court judge. It taught me that arbitration advocacy  requires more than just legal arguments, it demands the ability to understand complex  technical data into a persuasive legal narrative. 

    You have demonstrated a commitment to advancing legal discourse and  contributing to scholarly debate. How do you balance active practice with legal  writing and academic contributions? 

    For me, writing is not separate from practice, it is complementary. Courtroom advocacy is about the urgency of the present; academic writing is about reflecting on the future. Balancing both is difficult, but I make time because writing forces me to step back and  critically examine the jurisprudence I am part of. Recently, I have also begun teaching law  to students and interns- a pursuit I deeply enjoy, as it allows me to give back to the fraternity  while shaping the next generation of lawyers. 

    During the pandemic, for instance, I wrote extensively on the importance of impartiality in arbitrations and timelines in insolvency laws. These writings later informed some of the  arguments I made in court. In a way, legal writing sharpens my practice, and practice keeps  my writing, whether it’s articles, blogs, or pleadings, grounded in reality. 

    Clearing the Advocate-on-Record exam on the first attempt is a remarkable  achievement. What were your preparation strategies, and what primary  responsibilities come with being an AOR? 

    The AOR exam is as much about discipline as it is about knowledge. I prepared with the  belief that procedural law is the backbone of effective litigation. My strategy was simple:  treat every question as a live brief. I wrote my answers as if I were filing in court or briefing  a Senior Advocate. That practical approach helped me clear the exam on the first attempt. 

    The responsibility of being an AOR is immense. You are the face of your client before the Supreme Court and a bridge between the Registry and the Hon’ble Judges, not just in  argument, but in procedure. You are responsible for ensuring filings are correct, deadlines are met, pleadings are true and that clients receive the highest level of professional care.  It’s a trust that must never be broken. 

    How has the arbitration landscape in India evolved over the last decade? With the  advent of technology, what changes do you see in Supreme Court litigation strategies  post-COVID? 

    Over the last decade, arbitration in India has been projected as having matured from an  ‘alternative’ mechanism to the preferred mode for commercial disputes, with a legal framework aligning with international standards.  

    However, the ground reality is far more complex. Arbitration has, in practice, become less  formal, yet more vulnerable to judicial intervention at almost every stage. In one matter I argued before the Supreme Court, the Arbitral Tribunal, the Single and the Division Bench  of the High Court, each gave separate findings every time a cross appeal was filed by the  parties, resulting in six different outcomes before the case finally reached the Supreme  Court. This not only delays justice but also makes arbitration extremely costly and  cumbersome. Increasingly, I see my clients preferring to opt out of arbitration clauses  altogether, choosing and trusting Courts as their primary forum for dispute resolution,  driven largely due to the greater efficiency brought in through the Commercial Courts Act. 

    Post-COVID, technology has changed Supreme Court litigation in profound ways. Virtual hearings, digital filings, and e-briefs are now routine. This has enhanced accessibility and opened new opportunities. Lawyers today can complement their oral advocacy with strong  digital advocacy, while clients too can easily attend and witness hearings in real time from  anywhere in the world, ensuring greater transparency and participation. 

    What has been the most challenging matter you have handled, and how did you  navigate it? You have also worked extensively in animal welfare, environmental law,  and public interest litigation. What motivates you to take up these cases? 

    One of the most challenging yet fulfilling matters I handled was Jaggo v. Union of India, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3826, which I argued before the Supreme Court on behalf of the  Appellant. The case involved a woman Safai-Karamchari, who had been working with the  Central Water Commission for over two decades, as a so-called part-timer. Despite her  long service performing essential duties, her plea for regularisation was rejected not only  by her employer but also by CAT and the Delhi High Court. To make matters worse, she  was illegally terminated, even though she was the sole breadwinner of her family, surviving  on a meagre salary of just ₹4,000 per month. 

    I decided to take up her case pro bono, moved by her plight and the larger issue of systemic exploitation of temporary workers. The challenge was immense, not only did I have to  defend her against three concurrent adverse findings, but I was also pitted against the office  of the Additional Solicitor General (ASG). But the Hon’ble Supreme Court heard me  patiently, and it was deeply encouraging to see the Court give weight to every argument  raised by me in Court. 

    Ultimately, the Supreme Court held that such long-standing service warranted regularisation rather than termination, and that arbitrary dismissals without cause, violated natural justice. Drawing from constitutional principles under Articles 14 and 16, as well as international labour standards and comparative jurisprudence, the Court delivered a  landmark judgment that has since been widely relied upon across the country to protect the  rights of temporary and contractual workers. 

    For me, this case reaffirmed why I chose litigation. It was an uphill battle against the odds,  but it showed me that with persistence, empathy, and conviction, the law can restore dignity  and transform lives. 

    I’ve also had the privilege of being appointed as amicus curiae by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court to represent victims/ prosecutrix in POCSO cases, an experience that has deepened  my commitment to matters of public interest and justice. 

    How do you balance your personal life with such demanding professional  responsibilities, and how do you manage stress and maintain personal well-being? 

    Honestly, balance is not always easy. The legal profession demands long hours and deep  emotional investment. What helps me is grounding myself in simple things, spending time  with family, unwinding with my office colleagues, catching up with my close circle of  friends, and taking out time to travel with them. These moments keep me centered amidst  the demands of practice.

    I’ve realised balance in this profession is a constant work in progress. The long hours and  high stakes can be demanding, so I make a conscious effort to attend therapy and stay  grounded, whether by taking out time for myself, slowing down when needed, or ensuring  I maintain a non-toxic and supportive environment around me. 

    I try different ways to manage the stress that inevitably comes with the job, but what keeps  me going is focusing on the parts I truly enjoy, being on my feet in Court. That’s where I  feel most alive. After all, we lawyers live to hear the three words, ‘Issue Notice. Stay’.

    Get in touch with Udian Sharma –

  • Navigating Complexity From Corporate Law to White Collar Investigations with Trust and Insight – Varij Sharma, Founder and Partner at Gravitas Legal.

    Navigating Complexity From Corporate Law to White Collar Investigations with Trust and Insight – Varij Sharma, Founder and Partner at Gravitas Legal.

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

    You have worked with a Fortune 50 company and have over 17 years of experience across sectors like corporate and commercial law, white-collar crime, and investment fund-related issues. What has been your motivation behind pursuing these sought-after niche fields, and how do you make them simpler for people who are often uncomfortable discussing them? How did you build your name in this niche of the niche, and what continues to drive you?

    Initially, when I started off as a lawyer, my concentration in fact was that whatever I do, I must do it in the best manner possible. As a young lawyer, that was my motivation. And while growing up, every day, it was almost as if going to a warfront, if I can put it that way, facing new challenges.

    And as a corporate lawyer facing new queries, dealing with different and new expectations every day. But one thing that remained constant was that I used to set my own milestones and my only motivation was that I wanted to be the best at what I could be and first test myself.

    I used to set those expectations for myself. As far as trying to be a general corporate lawyer or a decent enough general corporate lawyer, since the very beginning, I never thought of compartmentalizing myself or restricting myself to a particular field. I think that was also because of my upbringing at Dua Associates and I must take the name of my first mentor, Mr. Salil Gulati, who himself was a general corporate lawyer and I used to report to him. The way he nurtured and mentored me, and made me understand the concepts of law in terms of how they are supposed to be applied, was invaluable, because typically what we do in colleges is much different from what you actually end up applying, or rather how you end up applying.

    Of course, academic education or being good at academics is very important, but at the same time, one should know how to apply it. So since day one, I feel that I had a great mentor and he was the one who inculcated this fact, or rather this idea in my mind, that we don’t need to be specifically focused on a particular practice area.

    As a general corporate lawyer, we are capable enough of advising on all aspects of a company, of a business generally. Progressing from that, when I started Gravitas, beyond simply following the general corporate trajectory, we started two new spaces for ourselves, litigation and corporate strategy. Over a period of time, what had also happened and what I also started realizing was that when you advise companies, when you advise businesses, as a lawyer, you hold a position of great trust and confidence. And when anyone actually approaches you, they don’t approach you with a specific task, at least an Indian client doesn’t. They don’t approach you for a specific task.

    It always tends to evolve into something more. So my concentration always was that I should hold that position of trust and confidence so that people would be able to talk to me about all of their issues, not just a specific project or a particular transaction, but whatever other troubles or problems they are facing.

    So over a period of time I also tried to develop a conversationalist in myself. And today, when I speak to my interns or juniors, I try to make them understand the value of conversations and how, by having those conversations, you can develop trust, and how other people may also see what sort of knowledge you carry and the different aspects you can actually advise people on. Slowly, taking from there, when I deal with our foreign clients or institutions, it so happens that ultimately all of these clients also tend to look for something more than just legal advice from their lawyers. They would want that if there is a project, then there should be something more that a lawyer actually brings to the table, be it project knowledge, financial knowledge, and so on and so forth.

    So I kept on, and I still am, looking at avenues to learn more and develop my knowledge—more holistic knowledge, touching upon not just legal aspects of a deal or a business, but also all other aspects which would otherwise impact a particular scenario.

    Be it a transaction, a project, or generally just a legal query. That perspective also actually helps you in providing the right answer to a problem from the perspective of your client. Because sometimes what happens is we lawyers tend to go into too much detail of legal aspects and ultimately we just sort of go around in circles and probably don’t answer a query that requires a practical solution. So yes, that also enabled me to understand, answer, and respond to queries in a much more effective manner, I would say.

    In India, lawyers often focus only on legal aspects, but clients frequently trust us with personal or even psychological concerns. How have you managed this balance while maintaining professionalism and ethics, especially with international clients who often rely heavily on their lawyers? Additionally, how do you guide your juniors in handling such situations, and what strategies have you found effective?

    Sure. Thank you. So, see, like I said, it was also a drive. I mean, when I started realizing the true meaning of becoming a lawyer, that it is not just hidden in a particular opinion that we give or in a document.

    Regardless of whether you are talking to institutions, there is always a human behind that institution also. I always try and spend time on that human aspect. I give people time. I try to understand where the people are coming from. Sometimes, I would say not just sometimes, most of the time, things are not how they appear to be. I always had the zeal to constantly look behind the curtains. Let me just put it that way. I always wanted to understand where this aspect was coming from, rather than just treating a query or a requirement that our clients would send to us, treating it just on the face of whatever was being sought.

    I would always spend time on that query, and I would just think, you know, okay, fine, if someone is asking me a particular question, where is this coming from? Why is this question being asked? I would spend time on that aspect, and when I would try and answer that query—and of course, this happened much later in my life because initially, the concentration, or rather the focus, always used to be just to be a lawyer.

    You know, one would just be overwhelmed with the fact that this is a job and ultimately I have to do well at it and all of that. But over a period of time and later in my career, and especially this transition actually happened when we started Gravitas Legal.

    We wanted the firm to have a structure. We had thought about what we want, how we want our clients and other people to see us, people who approach us for any sort of assistance. How do we want them to see us? So, it was the drive, I would say it was the drive. And I constantly kept on looking for those behind-the-curtains or behind-the-scenes reasons of why and what was emanating. At the same time, I realized that position of trust and confidence that I was just talking about—everybody seeks that. I don’t think it matters whether it is an Indian client or a foreign client, an individual client, or a small, medium, or large business. They would always want their counsel, their lawyer, to gain that position of trust and confidence.

    And that position of trust and confidence, no matter how sound we are as a firm ethically, or what sort of name we have, generally how people know us, that position of trust and confidence is always reserved for the individual you are interacting with. For our clients, that position of trust and confidence will always be with the individuals they are actually interacting with. So when I interact with my juniors, my ex-juniors also, whenever I have interacted with them on these aspects, on these lighter or rather subtler aspects of relationships, I have always tried to tell them that when your client is actually approaching you, there is always something more. Try and strike friendships.

    Try and strike deeper relationships with them so that they can open up to you—deeper professional relationships, of course—where they are able to speak and open up to you to give you a more holistic picture of where the problem actually lies. It has happened so many times that people who have been representatives of my corporate clients have also ended up approaching me for their personal issues, and I have been more than happy to assist them, of course subject to there being no conflict. But at the same time, I think my ultimate win has always been that people are able to give me that position where they think they can actually rely on me and come and discuss those aspects with me.

    The last thing I would like to add is that I have been a very open communicator with my clients. If I have not felt—and look, a general corporate practice is actually quite different from other corporate practices because we are exposed to many more dimensions of a corporate than other, I would say, focused practices—so with general corporate practice, what tends to happen is that when you get that sort of exposure, you also inevitably get into those wider aspects.

    You get that exposure and you try to make the best out of it. And also when you are getting that exposure, I feel we should not hold ourselves back. We should be able to communicate very clearly what we as trusted counsels believe that a client is exposed to. Sometimes I have seen that people shy away from it—that if someone has asked me a question on the Companies Act, I will just answer that query. But I have never been that. Frankly, I can say one thing that I am very happy about myself as a professional, as a lawyer, is that I have never stopped myself from advising my client and being that voice in their ears saying this is right and this is wrong. And when something is wrong, I would never shy away from saying this is wrong.

    So, yes, that is again something that I have worked on and tried to focus more on.

    When handling internal investigations or whistleblower matters, how do you strike a balance between transparency, compliance, and protecting the reputation of the organization, while also managing sensitive internal information? Additionally, how do you maintain your own mental well-being during this process?

    I will give you some sort of an insight on how investigations, rather whistleblower investigations and white collar crime actually proceed and what tends to go into the process. I mean, everybody knows exactly what it means, but what tends to happen in the process, right?

    See, what happens is that when complaints such as this come through, we are supposed to act independently of the complainant as well as the organization and also probably the group of people who may be the potential accused.

    What tends to happen is that when you enter that arena, no matter who may have appointed you, everybody is just looking at you with a lot of anxiety, let me put it that way: what exactly are they going to find and what are they going to do with that knowledge?

    So you have to develop a very, very focused approach with very clear objectives in mind: what are you exactly here for? It’s very easy in such a situation, and let me tell you, when people actually start in such sensitive situations, when people start talking to you, there will be people ranging from the lower managerial positions right up to the top of the organization whom you have to interview and speak to. You may be required to go through thousands of documents to decipher and understand what exactly has happened, and whether ultimately what is being complained of has actually occurred or not.

    So in such situations, when you sit down and start talking to these people, and again they could be 25, 50, or 100 people that you’re talking to over a very short span of time, once again people open up, and your best case scenario, I mean, if you want to decipher something, it is all about whether these people are going to actually trust you and open up to you.

    Because that’s what you’re relying on. These are people who are actually working for an organization and they know that organization much better than you. It’s very easy to conduct an investigation which is absolutely objective, based on documents and policies, et cetera.

    But at the same time, whenever there is a human angle, you need to understand what is happening behind the scenes. So whenever we are in such a situation where we have to conduct an internal investigation, apart from going through the policies and documents, et cetera, we also need to go into the depths of what people perceive is wrong when a complainant is making a complaint. You have to understand from their perspective what exactly they are saying has happened in a wrong fashion, or the policies that have not been adhered to.

    There’s non-compliance, right?

    And they will not be able to write down that as per this particular policy this is wrong and therefore I’m complaining. It’s never that simple; it’s always gray. The practice of law itself, at least in India, most of the time deals with the gray.

    So as far as this process is concerned, one has to have a deeper understanding and should be able to create a very, very thorough process for themselves which can be followed in order to conduct an impartial investigation as an independent investigator, because most of the time these reports are actually submitted to either the board or the shareholders, and they should be able to communicate very, very clearly what the risk aspects are and what exactly has happened, what steps to take next as per the policy, and what steps are required to be taken as well. So, I would say a very clear and thorough process has to be devised. Most organizations have a very clear internal investigations or whistleblower policy, but of course they don’t prescribe a process, because processes are developed and created by the independent investigator, which comes through.

    And of course, you should be able to communicate very thoroughly and very clearly who the individuals are that you want to interview and what documents you need to look at. There is always resistance. I would say there is always resistance, but at the same time you should be able to get past that and thereafter conduct a meaningful and result oriented investigation.

    When investigating or working with a company, it’s difficult to build immediate trust, and the same applies to team members. You started Gravitas Legal about a decade ago, how did you find the right team members who share mutual trust and understanding with you? With the global presence you are now building, how has that been possible, and what strategies did you follow to develop and sustain that trust within your team?

    See, legal practice has changed a lot in the past decade or so. When we established Gravitas Legal back in 2015, I think that was around the same time there was this spurt of new generation law firms. I think that was the time around 2014, 2015 when there were a lot of breakaway firms that started coming through.

    The idea at that point in time, our main motivation rather, to start Gravitas Legal, was that we wanted to create something new and something better than what we had seen and what we had experienced. There were things that we wanted to do differently and probably advise differently, probably conduct the business differently, probably administratively we wanted to set up something new and different, probably partnership structure-wise, we wanted to create something new and different. So primary motivations were these. I am extremely thankful for all the people who have, in the past 10 years, worked with us, because each one of them has not only been instrumental in our growth but also has always ended up teaching us something new.

    I think the number of people or the newer people that we have worked with, they have kept us grounded in our upbringing also as a firm. Because like I said, in the past 10 years, the practice of law, the practice of law firms, has changed drastically.

    The market has changed drastically. There are opportunities like there have never been before. If you are a hardworking, focused person, there are opportunities galore for youngsters. At the same time, there is freedom. And I would also say that the perspective of clients has also changed.

    Clients have become very result-oriented, and they also allow the freedom that is required by lawyers and law firms to operate. The advent of so many newer firms actually shows that there is enough institutional work.

    There is enough corporate work in the market, and that actually shows the maturity that the Indian clientele is also achieving slowly. Of course, there are foreign clients also, but the Indian client has also matured in that they don’t want to go to the same old lawyers or the same old law firms. So the entire ecosystem has matured quite a bit. As far as my younger colleagues are concerned, younger colleagues or colleagues, my contemporaries are concerned, like I was saying, we are extremely thankful to them that they have spent the time they have spent with us and helped us grow immensely. There are a lot of our ex-colleagues who have now probably moved on and taken new roles in either different law firms or in-house. And actually, when I look back and remember where we all had started from and when I see that time has run so fast and people have grown so much and the growth has been mutual, frankly, that actually shows that perhaps we were doing something right and probably, somehow, slightly, we also contributed to their growth. I would say in that case, more than that position of trust and confidence, I think it was mutual confidence. Like I said, in the past 10 years, there are opportunities galore in the market, and still people trusted us, worked with us, and have been participating in our journey. I’m very thankful for that.

    Growing together not only feels good but also helps a law firm grow exponentially. Over the past 10 years, you and your firm have mutually grown, and along the way, you’ve worked on cross-border transactions, joint ventures, corporate law, and M&A, areas very different from what a general counsel usually handles. In today’s environment, where businesses are moving toward sustainable models, how do you see Gravitas Legal progressing in the next 5–10 years, and what plans have you made? While working in such niche fields, how do you identify which strategies work, which don’t, and how do you explain complex issues in simple language for clients who, though corporate, are still human? How do you train your team to do the same, keep everyone grounded despite pressures like money or mental strain, and ensure work is done beautifully, as you have been doing?

    Sure. Just concentrating on the first part of your question, considering the various areas of my practice or the firm’s practice, the firm actually practices general corporate, M&A, private equity, venture capital. We have a great and flourishing insolvency and restructuring practice, project finance, and we also do corporate litigation, indirect tax, criminal law. And they have developed, and let me just tell you this, we had started off with in the first instance.

    We started off as a boutique project finance law firm at that point in time. And then thereafter, we picked up. I was only 6 or 7 years into the profession when we had started, and I was responsible for building the general corporate and ancillary practices, as I call them. So, general corporate and M&A and PE VC funds, insolvency, restructuring, corporate and litigation strategy, everything came later. We were first a boutique project finance law firm.

    When starting off as a project finance law firm and when we saw that this is the only practice area that we are starting off with, our first concentration was on doing what we do best, which was project finance. Soon, when people also realized that now we are independent of any other tag and this is the ship that we are running, people would approach us, clients would approach us with different requirements.

    As from a young lawyer’s perspective, yes, you have to learn, you have to study while practicing also, you have to study. I have, despite having started Gravitas, while today it seems that time has flown like anything, it has been a journey which has required a lot of hard work. When you look at building new practice areas constantly, there are also things that you are dealing with for the first time. And practice areas which you have probably earlier not touched upon. There has to be an approach that you have to develop.

    It’s like how it goes for any lawyer who is just passing out from a law school and entering this business when they are a complete clean slate. When you start a practice area as a partner also, or rather as a leader at a law firm, the idea is that you should develop first a deeper understanding at your end of what you are dealing with or what you are approaching.

    What is that practice area that you want to master? Or rather, you should be able to go out there and say that we can do a major value add to whoever we are supporting in a new practice area. And then building credibility. Yes, organizations and institutions just don’t line up outside your door to give you work.

    You have to show them that you can actually perform, and there are a lot of smaller things that you would start with, things that make them gain confidence in you, and they should also be able to give you those opportunities.

    So from a young lawyer’s perspective, I would say that yes, these are not the times when you can be completely oblivious to whatever is happening around you. And you can just, you know, like this, you can just go enter your office, do your work, get up and go and live your lives.

    But one should be actually looking constantly at developing themselves as a professional. Keep on adding value into your own personality also. And that is what we try to do as a law firm as well. Probably, I would say the trajectories may be different, but the paths are the same ultimately.

    So, as far as our clients are concerned, yes, you are right. People are trying to create sustainable business models, and there is a huge concentration now on whether people are able to see you as an ethical business with sound governance models, sustainability models. So institutions, organizations, even smaller startups are also very conscious about this nowadays. And that is the way to go. I think the awareness that is now there, generally in the market regarding certain issues, especially environmental issues, there is a huge push towards creating sustainable models.

    When it comes to strategies, I’d like to ask about the base strategy you follow to take care of your own health, mental well-being, and also that of your team. Running a successful law firm obviously comes with pressure and challenges, so how do you overcome those? What kind of practices, trainings, or interactions do you use to ensure that everyone’s mental and physical health is taken care of, with the support and trust you’ve built within the team?

    Since the very beginning of my Gravitas Legal journey, or rather since the very beginning of my career, I’ve been very clear that I don’t carry my work home. By that I don’t for a moment mean that I don’t end up working at home sometimes, but I try to not discuss work at home, because if my family tends to get entangled in my work and if I carry my workplace stress home, then the office hours just keep on elongating. So I’ve tried to do that since the very beginning. I try to keep my Saturdays and Sundays very sacrosanct. It’s an effort, it’s an ongoing effort, but I try to ensure that I’m able to find clear me time or my family time on a very regular basis. My rules with my team are very clear that I will only ask you to work if I am working myself. So if I’m not working beyond 6 or 7 in the evening, they can also head home, enjoy life, enjoy whatever time that we can get.

    From an organization’s perspective, we try to set up a town hall every month or so, where we can just discuss things. It’s a great way to interact among different offices, and we try to discuss other things generally.

    In our town halls, we get to know so much about individuals that we are working with, rather than just the professionals. We found that one of us is a national-level athlete, for example. One of us was a great singer and an instrument player.

    So, in order to break the monotony of work, we try and make these efforts. Then we also try that, on a very regular basis, we do one or two youngster-type holidays, where we drive to the mountains and go to very difficult places where there is a lot of adventure and where everybody’s an equal. These are the kinds of things, at least stress busters, that we try to implement at the office. Generally also, we try to keep a very calm and casual environment in the office where people don’t feel over-pressurized. There is always pressure, there is always stress in the practice of law.

    There is no doubt about it, but at the same time these are the efforts that we try to make, and it’s a constant effort again, because times keep changing. There are a few months when there is no breathing space at all and there is constant struggle, there is no clock.

    Things like those happen, but then we try to manage our work well, and we try and find as much time as individuals also in our own lives.

    Get in touch with Varij Sharma –

  • 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 –

  • “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 –

  • “Law wasn’t a detour, it was a logical conclusion of my evolution from being just a writer to being one who writes to ensure that justice is available to everyone in need of it.” – Siddharth Chandrashekhar, Sr. Panel Counsel CBIC/DRI & Standing Counsel CBDT, Bombay High Court.

    “Law wasn’t a detour, it was a logical conclusion of my evolution from being just a writer to being one who writes to ensure that justice is available to everyone in need of it.” – Siddharth Chandrashekhar, Sr. Panel Counsel CBIC/DRI & Standing Counsel CBDT, Bombay High Court.

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

    What inspired you to pursue a career in law?  Was there a particular moment, influence, or personal experience that drew you to the legal profession? 

    Since the time I learned to read and write, I have been a voracious reader. This passion led me to a deep interest in literature, history & political science. Everything I could lay my hands on, from William Shakespeare to Edgar Allen Poe to George Orwell and William Wordsworth to Arthur Conan Doyle, Oscar Wilde & of course Haruki Murakami. I was fascinated by how stories shape society and I was certain that I would either end up as a journalist chasing and breaking news stories or a writer churning out books and articles.

    My family of lawyers, journalists and politicians encouraged me to develop my writing skills by reading.  Contrary to popular belief, being a second generation lawyer is not always easy. In fact, like in my case, the bar was already set high by the rest of my family, and I knew that nothing less than excellence would be acceptable should I decide to join the legal practice and forge a career in law. However, my first choice was to be a journalist. 

    But one day during the Diwali/Winter break in my final year of studying for my Bachelor’s degree in Arts as I had made no plans to spend time in recreation with my friends, I decided to attend a cross-examination being conducted by my Advocate aunt when I watched her meticulously extract the truth with surgical precision from a witness on the stand with. The next day I requested my father, who had a flourishing legal practice in civil disputes and trial courts, if I could intern with him for a week. He agreed on the condition that I had to work even harder and put in more hours that week than the rest of the interns and not look at the clock. The first day I sat with him while he painstakingly drafted and re-draft a legal notice meticulously with the skill of what I could barely fathom. We must have spent close to 16 hours that first day, and much to my surprise, I was back again the next day where we spent another 16 hours, and I kept my word, I was the first to arrive and the last to leave. At the end of that week, I made up my mind to pursue a career in law.

     Thus, Law wasn’t a detour, it was a logical conclusion of my evolution from being just a writer to being one who writes to ensure that justice is available to everyone in need of it. 

    What motivated you to pursue your master of laws degree (LL.M.) from Queen Mary University of London?  What aspects of the program & institution aligned with your academic and professional goals? What are your key takeaways & experiences from your time there ? 

    If the degree of Bachelor of Laws was the foundation for my legal practice , my Masters in Law at Queen Mary, University of London was what built the edifice  from which I could have a world view of international legal trends at and the ever widening scope that law provides to ensure a more equitable world. Out there I wasn’t analysing just the law in theory, but society and the way we function in relation to the law which gave me tools to further my learning. 

    Most of India’s statutes have either been drafted while we were a colony of the British or are based on laws in the U.K. In that sense Queen Mary offered me a historical mirror coupled with a modern lens, which made it ideal for my practice in Corporate & Commercial law. I chose Queen Mary because its LL.M. was famous for being both rigorous in theory and incredibly practical. It felt less like a classroom and more akin to partaking in real world legal scenarios. Three factors converged to create the perfect storm: In fact, prior to my LL.M. degree I had already been advising startups on Transactions, Litigation Avoidance advisory and Pre-Litigation when I realized that understanding international commercial law wasn’t optional anymore, it was the only means of raising India to the highest international standards.  Second, London’s position as a global financial hub meant access to case studies that textbooks simply cannot replicate. Third, QMUL’s University’s faculty included practitioners who wrote the rulebooks on disputes and dispute avoidance.

    My Master’s Degree in law laid an emphasis on comparative legal systems which proved invaluable to me now in my legal practice. Part of socialising and networking would regularly involve heated debates with faculty and peers which were our own version of the Oxford Union debates where we dissected existential legal conundrums faced in transactional agreements under Indian, English, American (Delaware), and Singapore laws. These were followed by a round of Hors d’oeuvres and drinks for which the lawyers who had failed to win the crowd would have to pay for it. The program’s real value wasn’t in the lecture halls but in the conversations that followed afterward. Late-night debates at the pub about whether certain aspects of media law really needed new legal frameworks, weekend trips with peers, faculty and chance encounters with renowned QCs & KCs. 

    These sessions taught me that Law isn’t just about a set of rules, it’s the art of predicting human behavior within social constraints. That became my mantra. Even my dissertation became the foundation for later advising several startups on their transactional and regulatory strategies. My London experience taught me that legal advice without commercial context is akin holding G.P.S. hardware with no connection to satellites and software, technically sophisticated, but practically useless. London offered something Mumbai could not at that time, proximity to the birthplace of commercial law and traditions that govern global transactions even today. London taught me two things: how to use the law with surgical precision and how to survive in a multi-cultural metro much akin to my own home city of Mumbai, with the only difference being that it wasn’t ‘Home’.  

    Queen Mary wasn’t just a campus; it was a court room without borders. I chose it for its emphasis on comparative commercial laws and of course, being in London, the commercial capital of the world was the icing on the cake. Every lecture was an eye opener to the world’s legal machinery and watching it in motion. We didn’t just study corporate and commercial law but we debated it with both present and future public policy influencers. It provided me with the opportunity to interact with vanguards and scholars of law and economic policy in our classrooms and campus. Of course, having such as alumni consists of stalwarts including India’s former RBI Governor Mr. Urjit Patel, Economist Pranoy Roy & Davidson Nicol, the former Under Secretary General of the United Nations makes it stand out even more.  

    Legal expertise without cultural fluency is like using complicated words with no proper context in an unrecognisable language. The LL.M. taught me to be multi-lingual in legal traditions essential for any lawyer serious about Start-up advisory in our globalized world.  

    In the early stages of your legal career, what experiences or matters significantly enhanced your understanding of the Law? Are there any pivotal moments that helped shape your professional trajectory? 

    If law school is your boot camp, then your initial few years of practice are akin to active combat duty. My father who was my mentor when I joined the profession has a saying: “Every mistake you make costs someone else money, time, or opportunity, so be extremely alert you may make new mistakes, but never repeat the old ones which you must use as a means of from your old ones which you must use as a means of enhancing your knowledge.”. Those words transformed how I approach every Start-up advisory engagement. 

    Every lawyer has that one case or a few early on in their career that serve as their trial by fire. Mine involved a tech Start-up whose founders had structured their equity like a Rom-Com love triangle, complicated, dramatic & destined for disaster. As we worked towards reconstituting the documentation, one thing was clear to me, ‘Startup Law’ (as people have labelled it) isn’t about preventing problems, it’s about creating efficient solutions for smart people who often make predictable mistakes. That client taught me three things: First, documentation matters, but context matters more. Second, the best legal advice often sounds like business advice. Third, sometimes the best service you can provide to a client is talking them out of their own cleverness. 

    Another pivotal moment came during my first due diligence exercise for a Series A round. Thirty hours into document review, I discovered a licensing agreement that could torpedo the entire deal. The lead investor later told me that I didn’t just save them money, I saved them from becoming a cautionary tale. My (Late) Grand-mother, who was a highly respected and loved State Legislator once told me: Good lawyers know the law; great lawyers understand the story behind the enactment of that law. That’s when I realized that due diligence isn’t treasure hunting; it’s about defusing land mines. These experiences of multiple successful people shaped my philosophy: Be the lawyer who prevents a crisis, not one who profits from it. 

    One of my first major transactions involved a then small scale e-commerce startup with revenue in different jurisdictions and compliance documentation in none of them. It was like being asked to perform surgery with a plastic knife. We spent several weeks creating the legal infrastructure for them which in fact should have existed from day one. One of its founders later said, ‘We thought that legal documentation was trivial until we realized it was life support.’  

    You advise & litigate for several major government bodies as a Senior Panel Counsel for the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI)/GST Intelligence & Central Board of Indirect Taxes (CBIC) as well as Standing Counsel for the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), & Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Board (MHADA)  AND  being a legal advisor to several Start-Ups in the tech & media space on the other how has working across such diverse institutions influenced your legal approach?  What have been some of the most challenging matters among them? 

    My experiences with government agencies and statutory bodies taught me to navigate bureaucracy not as an obstacle, but as a playing field where real business gets done. This perspective proves invaluable when guiding startups through regulatory approval processes. Of course, I have been blessed and privileged to have had the opportunity to work with some of the most intelligent, upright & hard-working officers right from the grass-roots level Inspectors & Superintendents to Legal Advisors/Officers from right at the top up to (Chief/Joint/Deputy)  Commissioners, A.D.G., Deputy & Joint Directors, so I have to give them credit where it’s due. If I have to sit and name them all that in itself would be a fairly long list.  

     Diversity proves invaluable for Start-up advisory work. When advising media houses or fintech companies, It’s not just about understanding MCA, RBI, SEBI, SWA regulations, It’s about deciphering the Regulatory and counter party mindset, the concerns that keep regulators awake at night, and how policy gets translated into practice. 

    That lesson now translates directly into how I work with startups and media houses. I cannot count the number of times boot strapped founders have met me and said “We don’t need the paperwork, it’s fine, we trust each other” only to reappear a few  months later realising that when disputes arise trust flies out of the window. My early career showed me that cross-checking every consent form, every signature, every assumption can mean the difference between smooth sailing and sinking fast. 

    Despite my LL.M. specialisation I never restricted myself to one particular area of practice, which is why I now am able to decipher matters ranging from Income Tax disputes, Customs act & GST related Writs, Appeals, Bail & Anticipatory Bail dealing with Tax Evasion, NDPS cases, Housing disputes & other laws. Working across government bodies is like playing five-dimensional chess with tax intelligence, urban planning, housing rights, anti-evasion laws being the pieces on the chess board. Each brief requires switching mental gear and watching details with varied legal lenses. I’ve argued tax evasion by breakfast and housing and society related issues in the second half. 

    Working with multiple statutory bodies is like being a legal anthropologist and a linguist, each institution has its own culture, priorities and rules, both written and unwritten. My empanelments read like a tour of some of India’s most fascinating legal statutes including The Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income & Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, Finance Act & Income Tax Act under the CBDT, the Goods & Services Act, Customs Act & Narcotics & Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act under the CBIC & DRI and the Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Act, to name just a few. 

    Each case has been fascinating and just like fingerprints no two cases are alike but one of my most fascinating as well as challenging one has been a Writ Petition filed by one of the world’s largest manufacturers of automobiles having it’s parent company based in Germany who had sought to quash & set aside a $1.4 billion Show Cause Notice issued by the Office of the Commissioner of Customs based on investigations by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence for wilful tax evasion  misclassifying imported car parts to avail lower import duties. In that case, I was led by the Learned Additional Solicitor General (ASG) of the Government of India who used to regularly fly down from New Delhi to argue the case. It was like solving a Rubik’s cube while being blindfolded where every move in one dimension affects others. That case taught me that regulatory strategy isn’t merely about simple compliance or the lack thereof with statutory provisions which may appear uncomplicated but a complex choreographed play involving multiple issues which ought to be viewed from multiple angles to get a holistic picture and arrive at what requires to be followed in practice. 

    Another case involved the challenge to an incorrect and manipulated technical opinion given by a multi-national consultancy firm to a multi-national South Korea based conglomerate who imported electronic equipment worth billions of dollars under a wrong entry based on the aforesaid technical opinion.  

    Yet another case involved a challenge to a pivotal aspect of tax administration which involved the transfer of a group of cases from one Assessing Officer (AO) to another and was crucial in ensuring the smooth functioning between two different state jurisdictions of the tax administration where the Assessee raised objections to the change in jurisdiction. 

    The diversity proves invaluable for startup advisory work. When advising Start-ups and individual entrepreneurs, I don’t just have to understand and simplify regulations I have to understand the regulatory mindset, the concerns that keep regulators awake at night, and understand how policy has to get translated into practice. 

    My government litigation experience taught me to navigate bureaucracy not as an obstacle, but as a playing field where real business gets done. This perspective proves invaluable when guiding Start-ups through regulatory approval processes. It has helped me to represent my private clients in their attempt to bridge the gap between legal theory and public policy reality. 

    Each role brought with it unique challenges, serving on regulatory panels involves balancing innovation with protection, investigating financial irregularities requires detective skills which they don’t teach you in law school, and where policy advisory work demands thinking beyond individual cases to systemic implications. 

    Yet another challenging matter pertained to a multi-agency investigation into a scandal involving small individual investors on the one hand and a group of companies, whose interests ranged from real estate development to cattle rearing to broadcasting services. Over three years, multiple stakeholders, and countless sleepless nights later, we crafted a resolution that protected investors while preserving innovation incentives. The experience taught me that public service isn’t about serving the law, it’s about serving justice through the law. 

    The experience of working with government bodies and statutory bodies transformed my startup advisory practice. I don’t just help companies comply with regulations; I help them understand the ‘why’ behind the rules. When founders grasp regulatory intent, they can work smoothly within set boundaries rather than riding rough shod over the set perimeters. These roles have made me lawyer, policy analyst & virtual entrepreneur. When advising CBIC on procedural lapses or individual entrepreneur clients, I often have to translate complex regulations into implementable steps. That cross-sectoral experience honed both my legal acumen and empathy to various causes. 

    You’ve actively participated in pro bono matters & causes varying from human rights to animal welfare, including filing public interest issues before the hon’ble Bombay High Court.   What drives you to take up such socially significant and often challenging cases?   In your view, what role should pro bono work play in a lawyer’s practice?   You’re also a legal advisor to Sanctuary Foundation and Fur-rida’s Animal and Rehabilitation Trust, NGOs dedicated to Animal Welfare & rehabilitation in Mumbai,  how do you balance both out? 

    Pro bono work, for me, began as a calling of my conscience. As a lawyer when you only litigate on behalf of  those who can afford it, you are not helping the cause of justice but only helping those who are already privileged. Pro bono work always reminds me why I became a lawyer: not to rake in the money, but to actively work towards changing our world for the better, using the opportunity to advocate for a better, fairer and more equitable society. Billed clients feed the body. Pro bono work feeds the soul. 

    But here, before I even begin to think of taking any personal credit I must mention that it was the elders in my family for instilling whose values instilled in me makes me give back to society. My Late grandfather, an industrialist paved the way by social and charitable work. My Late grandmother was a Mumbai City Legislator and later Maharashtra State Legislator from the 1990s to the early 2000s. My Late uncle, also a businessman, sacrificed his business interests to champion the causes of the common man and was well known as a vociferous advocate of causes who many felt were lost causes. Just the three of them were responsible for providing basic sanitation and piped water connections to lakhs of residents of informal settlements in underserved parts of (South) Mumbai and also later went on to build study centres and gymnasiums for the poorer class of citizens who could not afford these “luxuries” throughout (South) Mumbai.  

    I grew up watching my father put in the same dedication and hard work into his pro bono clients that he would into his millionaire clients and once (while I was very young) I asked him why he did this, he simply said, If I don’t, then who will? … and that rational question just stuck with me. My mother gave up a very promising career as a journalist to teach journalism, creative writing and conduct writing boot camps. My brother, now a high-profile Surgeon still spends days working pro bono and organising medical camps in rural Maharashtra where there is little to no expert medical facilities. Another uncle is a senior journalist who has covered some of the most ground breaking issues of the time, not stories about luxury but the ones that no one else dared to cover because he felt that someone had to take up such matters. Another aunt gave up her job as a Banker to teach children. 

    When the Covid-19 pandemic hit India people had to take recourse to the Covid vaccine as it appeared to be the only defence against it. However, some unscrupulous elements took advantage of the rush for the vaccine and started administering mere saline water and passing it off as the Covid Vaccine. When my aunt, and I heard of it we couldn’t ignore it. The idea that thousands of people were tricked into believing that they were being given the vaccine when in reality they were not, shook both of us. Our PIL on this issue wasn’t just about a legal remedy, it was about restoring public faith in the ability of the  law in dealing with such unscrupulous elements. 

    What continues to drive me is the belief that law must serve those who can least afford it. If startups look to me for guidance on shareholder rights, ordinary citizens need me for something far more basic: the right to life and health. In my view, pro bono isn’t charity, it’s oxygen for the soul. It reminds us why we became lawyers in the first place. As William Scott Downey had aptly put it, Law Without Justice is a Wound Without a Cure. 

     Pro bono litigation is not mere work without purpose in monetary terms, it’s about priceless work for those who cannot afford to pay to get good legal representation. I believe every lawyer who has crossed 10 or more years of practice must dedicate a part of their practice to Pro Bono Litigation. Otherwise, we risk becoming mere paper pushers and money making soulless machines instead of custodians of real justice. 

    Once I found myself in the thick of a case involving a teenage boy who died after being detained and allegedly tortured by the police whilst in their custody. The boy, barely 17 years old from Mumbai’s Dharavi slum district, was accused of stealing a mobile phone. After being released from “routine police detention” in July 2018, he complained to his parents and siblings of his torture by the police while in their custody. Soon after his release, he developed a fever, and his condition deteriorated rapidly, and he tragically passed away within a week. The post-mortem report mentioned pneumonia as the cause of his death. To everyone but his family, the case was as good as closed. The family’s grief was not just raw, it was distrustful of the very system that swore to protect them and it was absolutely justified in refusing to take their child’s body for his last rites for nearly two years until the High Court ordered a second post-mortem. For those two years, the body lay unclaimed in a morgue, almost frozen in time. But the law did not forget him and nor did I.  

    I wasn’t new to litigation then, but here I learned something every statute book misses: law isn’t just about sections and precedents; it’s about instilling trust in those for whom laws are enacted. The Hon’ble High Court’s order was a pivotal moment it showed me about the compassion and kindness of judges and it showed me that you don’t need to have the loudest voice to tilt the scales of justice in favour of the helpless and restore faith in the judiciary. It also sharpened my skills in due diligence because when you’re digging through contradictory medical reports and hospital records, you learn how to scrutinize details like an auditor hunting for hidden liabilities.  

    Taking on that case was not about earning any fees as it was completely pro bono, it was the weight of my conscience which guided me to do so. That case became my personal reminder that law is not always swift, but it is relentless. Sometimes you carry files that weigh more than law books they weigh with grief, suspicion, and silence. 

    Another matter that shaped my formative years was one that involved a medical negligence case where a woman contracted Hepatitis C after a hysterectomy at a famous South Bombay hospital. A team of surgeons and doctors, one operating theatre, and a chain of negligence right from the top, it was a puzzle of medical protocol and accountability. For a young lawyer, it was baptism by fire. I spent nights reading medical manuals, learning how a surgery should be conducted, and finding out with what went wrong. What it taught me is that the devil truly hides in the documentation. 

    Pro bono cases also tend to surprise you and throw you into the deep end, no fees, minimal support, high legal stakes for those involved. But they also teach you to think creatively and advocate fiercely. They’re a bootcamp for both skill and conscience.  Pro bono work teaches you humility: you are not always the smartest person in the room, sometimes you are the only person standing between injustice and justice. 

    Animal welfare law in India is like a crossword puzzle with half its clues missing. As advisor to Stranctuary Foundation and Fur-rida’s Animal Rehabilitation Trust, I have actively helped them get set up as well as look into internal policy and legal fine print. I’ve worked on matters involving animal cruelty, harassment from societies against members from using elevators or accessing common areas with their pets. These cases taught me that education is as vital as litigation. Sometimes, the law needs a lawyer often it needs an earnest storyteller. “Until one has loved an animal, a part of one’s soul remains unawakened.” – Anatole France 

    Pro bono work should be mandatory in every lawyer’s practice, not as a penance for making money, but as a training for making better decisions. Every PIL or Pro Bono Writ I advise on makes me a sharper commercial lawyer because it reminds me that law exists to serve, not the other way around. Plus, there’s practical value: Pro bono cases often involve cutting-edge legal questions that commercial clients pay premium rates to explore. It’s continuing education coupled with social service. My pro bono work began with the simple realization of the advice of my (Late) grandmother who told me: Corporate law pays your bills, but public service will reward you with a clear conscience and a good night’s sleep. When you spend your days crafting shareholder agreements and due diligence reports, you can lose sight of law’s fundamental purpose of protecting the vulnerable and ensuring fairness. Pro bono work keeps me honest. 

    Every time I review a startup’s employment policies, I remember the domestic workers whose rights I’ve advocated for. Every time I structure a complex transaction, I’m informed by cases where transparency could have prevented injustice. It’s enlightened self-interest: Better lawyers emerge from engaging with law’s moral dimensions, not just its commercial applications. 

    And oddly, these cases have made me sharper in my commercial practice. Start-ups come to me with messy equity structures, hidden liabilities, and co-founder disputes. I approach those files with the same rigor I did in the case of the boy’s family who allegedly died as a result  of custodial interrogation, digging until the truth emerges from a metaphorical mountain of dirt and stones which seek to hide it. Pro bono makes your professional muscle stronger, because when you stand against the State or against a famous hospital with unlimited resources and a legal team the size of a small army for free, a mere shareholder squabble doesn’t scare you. 

    Why take up pro bono cases? Because the power of the law is meaningless unless it reaches those who most need it. The directing of a second post-mortem after a teen’s death or holding doctors accountable for medical negligence are milestones for society and for any lawyer involved in pursuing such cases. 

    Looking ahead, what is your vision for the future of your legal practice? How do you see your personal journey evolving within the legal field? In a profession that is both demanding and dynamic, how do you maintain focus, purpose, and mindfulness?

    My future vision is to promote people to start building a hybrid practice where commercial matters fuel a strong public interest wing and not just something which has purely commercial motivation. Think of it as the Robin Hood model: charge the rich, fight for the voiceless. 

    The future belongs to lawyers who can speak three languages fluently: Law, business, and technology. I’m building a practice that serves as a bridge between these worlds, helping founders navigate not just current regulations but anticipate future ones. 

    As for purpose: I want my legacy to be measured not in my tangible assets, but in barriers removed, regulatory hurdles that no longer impede innovation because I found simple solutions, and compliance frameworks that enable rather than constrain entrepreneurial ambition. My goal isn’t to be the most famous lawyer or the richest one, it’s to be the one clients trust with their most important decisions because they know I’ll give them efficient solutions within the parameters of the law and not just some short sighted temporary balm for any problems that they could encounter. 

    The legal profession needs fewer disruptors and more steady ships. Staying focused requires principled pragmatism. When faced with ethical dilemmas, I ask not ‘What’s legally permissible?’ but ‘What would I want my family & friends  to be told about me as a lawyer and a human?’ This compass has never steered me wrong. I see myself evolving into policy advisory roles, where law meets legislation. I mentor young lawyers and young law students, and I hope to  use this to build a legal aid network where all of us endeavour to focus just 30% of our time and resources towards pro bono legal aid in india focussing on individual cases and causes ranging from human rights, prevention of  domestic violence and animal welfare cases.  

    My five-year vision: Become the first and last go-to legal strategist for Tech & Media Entrepreneurs and Start-ups tackling challenges such as: Intellectual Property Protection, Transfer & Monetization, Data Privacy & Compliance, Fund-raising & Investor relations, Content Liability & Platform Responsibility, Technology Contracts & Partnerships, Regulatory & Policy Navigation and the biggest & most common one being: Dispute Prevention & Legal Crisis Management.  These companies don’t need traditional lawyers; they need legal pioneers who can craft frameworks for technologies that don’t yet have regulatory precedents. Maintaining focus requires what I call ‘productive paranoia’ constantly asking ‘What could go wrong?’ not from anxiety, but from genuine curiosity. Mindfulness comes from remembering that every legal document I draft affects real people’s lives and dreams. 

    My endgame? To be feared by crooks, respected to be fair by counter-parties and of course, followed by puppies, especially the ones that have no place to call home. 

    Focus and mindfulness? I journal, I used to learn Salsa & Bachata, popular latin american dances, I also took up MMA and found that to be a great stress-buster, I spend time taking care of my dogs as well as feeding a few community dogs. I take breaks from the screen.  “The law is a jealous mistress, but she respects a loyal one.”   

    I have one rule which most of my clients are already aware of: if it’s urgent I’ll be drafting and doing research even if it’s 3am or a holiday, but if it doesn’t need urgent redressal I stop working by 9 pm. Balance isn’t a luxury, it’s how I keep the fire burning without burning out. 

    Based on your extensive experience across sectors, what advice would you offer to young lawyers just starting out in the profession? Are there any particular resources or habits you would recommend to help them build a strong foundation?

    Your law degree is just a learner’s license. The real exam begins in court. Try and read at least one interesting case law a day or at the very least. Argue (respectfully) with your peers. Your opponents and counter-parties are not your enemies. In litigation, your opponent is your adversary, but only inside the courtroom, they are your peers, your colleagues, your juniors and seniors outside the courtroom, treat them all with the same respect once your matter is over that you would want them to treat you with. 

    Even if you’re being appointed just for an adjournment, read the entire case, carefully, make sure if given the opportunity by the court, you answer correctly and confidently, most judges asking you about your case are providing you with an opportunity, they know they may lose time with a young lawyer, but they are trying to help you and not put you in a spot. 

    Your counter-parties are not your adversaries, you have a common goal, mutual co-operation and trust go a long way here, far longer than brow beating or one-upmanship.  Write even when no one’s reading. Don’t confuse over-confidence with Confidence. But humility is better. Young lawyers often worry about the wrong things. 

    Here’s what actually matters: Master the fundamentals before chasing specializations. You can’t advise on complex M&A structures if you don’t understand basic contract principles. It’s like trying to compose symphonies before learning scales. 

    Your first five years will feel like everyone’s speaking Latin while you’re struggling with the alphabets, that’s okay, read and re-read. The lawyers who succeed aren’t the smartest ones, they’re the ones who can admit ignorance, ask better questions, and turn feedback into improvement rather than taking it personally. Clients hire lawyers to solve problems, not to demonstrate legal knowledge. Be solution-oriented, not statute-oriented. 

    Stop thinking like a student who merely asks for answers and start thinking like a strategist who helps clients navigate ambiguous situations. Law school teaches you what the law says; practice teaches you what the law means. 

    In start-up advisory, I’ve learned that founders and investors speak different languages, even when using the same words. ‘Aggressive timeline’ means ‘next week’ to founders and ‘next quarter’ to VCs. A founder once wanted to structure their Series A with several different classes of shares: one for each team member’s ‘unique contribution.’ We simplified to three classes and closed the round in half the time. Then there was the time that Start Up wanted to grant equity to advisors before clarifying their intellectual property ownership. We sorted IP first, advisory agreements second. One recent challenging due diligence involved a company with operations in four countries, three legal entities, and legal documentation that looked like abstract art.  

    Good legal advice feels expensive until you need it, then it feels cheap. My approach is preventive medicine for businesses, identifying potential complications before they become complications. Whether it’s crafting founder agreements that anticipate future disputes, structuring employee equity plans that scale with growth, or creating compliance frameworks that evolve with regulation, the goal is always the same: Build legal infrastructure that enables business success rather than constraining it. Benjamin Franklin said, ‘An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.’ In startup law, an hour of careful drafting can prevent months and sometimes years of expensive litigation. Don’t aim to be the smartest/richest lawyer. Aim to be the one your client calls first when they need a solution. 

    Four Non-Negotiable Principles: 

    1. Understand not just legal implications but business consequences. 
    2. Sometimes the best legal advice is telling clients what they don’t want to hear. 
    3. Your career will be defined not by the cases you win, but by the problems you prevent and the trust you build. Be the lawyer people call not just when they’re in trouble, but when they want to avoid trouble altogether. 
    4. The moment you think you know everything is the moment you become dangerous to yourself, as well as your clients. 

    Essential Habits: 

    1. Read everything thrice, once for content, once for implications, and once again for good measure.  
    2. Make time for one pro bono brief,  at least once a month. 
    3. When you aren’t reading, attend court like an obsession: watch, make notes, learn. 
    4. Kindness, not money, makes the world go round. Be Kind… Always, especially when you would not benefit. Be kind to those less fortunate than you, how you treat a clerk or a peon is a lot more telling of your character than how you behave in front of a Judge or a Senior Advocate.  Be kind to people, be kind to animals.
    5. You don’t have to be the biggest fish in the court-room or the negotiation table, remember piranhas bite more sharply (but remember, above all, Kindness) 

    Get in touch with Siddharth Chandrashekhar –

  • “Across every area I’ve worked in, the core principles have remained the same: preparation, clarity of thought, and a deep sense of responsibility toward the client’s case.” – Ankita Tiwari, Founder and Managing Partner at T&P Law Offices.

    “Across every area I’ve worked in, the core principles have remained the same: preparation, clarity of thought, and a deep sense of responsibility toward the client’s case.” – Ankita Tiwari, Founder and Managing Partner at T&P Law Offices.

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

    You’ve worked extensively across multiple domains, from white-collar crime and NDPS litigation to cross-border family law, commercial disputes, and arbitration. What core principles have guided you in navigating such varied legal landscapes?

    Across every area I’ve worked in—be it white-collar crime, international family disputes, or commercial arbitration—the core principles have remained the same: preparation, clarity of thought, and a deep sense of responsibility toward the client’s case. I believe in knowing the facts better than anyone else in the room and staying practical about how the law will operate in real-world scenarios.

    While each domain comes with its own nuances, I’ve found that a strong foundation in legal reasoning and the discipline to prepare thoroughly are what make the difference. Over the years, I’ve had the opportunity to work on complex and sensitive matters, and it has reinforced my belief that there’s no substitute for sincerity and strategic thinking. I may not always take the loudest approach, but I make sure my work speaks for itself—and that has taken me further than I had imagined when I started.

    Handling high-profile matters such as securing bail for a well-known actress in an NDPS case, and assisting in matters like the 2G and Satyam scams, must have come with immense pressure. How do you prepare for such sensitive and high-stakes cases? 

    High-stakes matters bring added pressure, but the key is to focus on the preparation. I had the opportunity to assist in the 2G and Satyam Scam matters early in my career, which helped me understand the scale and complexity of such prosecutions. In sensitive cases, I try to build the legal strategy step-by-step—starting with a solid understanding of the record, anticipating the likely challenges, and keeping the client well-informed throughout. When media or public attention is involved, it’s even more important to stay disciplined and avoid unnecessary noise.

    I was also fortunate to have assisted in landmark matters including Vijay Madanlal Choudhary vs Union of India, where the Supreme Court upheld key provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), and Madras Bar Association vs Union of India, which clarified the framework for the functioning and independence of tribunals in India. These cases shaped critical areas of law, and being part of the teams working on them gave me a deeper understanding of constitutional interpretation and statutory design.

    Moreover, no matter how big or small the matter is, a good lawyer has to put everything into the case. That’s something I’ve always believed in and something I’ve learned from my father. Every case deserves the same level of sincerity and attention, whether it’s a high-profile matter or an everyday dispute.

    As the Founder and Managing Partner of T&P Law Offices, how do you balance your responsibilities as a practitioner, team leader, and mentor particularly in a firm that handles complex, multidimensional disputes?

    Balancing these roles requires careful time management and trust in the team. I try to remain hands-on in most matters while giving space to younger lawyers to take responsibility. I’ve realized that mentoring is as much about listening as it is about guiding. I also make sure we have systems in place that support efficient work—clear division of tasks, regular check-ins, and open communication. Ultimately, if the team works well together, things run more smoothly across the board.

    Representing NewSpace India Ltd., ISRO’s commercial subsidiary, places you at the unique intersection of law, science, and national interest. What legal challenges or insights have stood out to you while working in the space-tech sector?

    It’s a sector that’s still evolving, and every assignment brings new issues to think through. Working with NSIL has required understanding not just the legal aspects but also the technical and policy background. One major insight has been the importance of anticipating regulatory changes and making sure legal advice aligns with broader national objectives.

    You’ve successfully mediated complex cross-border child custody disputes involving countries such as the US and UK. How do you navigate these high-stakes international matters, and what steps do you take to prepare for cases involving multiple jurisdictions?

    My experience as a panel counsel for the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has given me practical exposure to cross-border custody matters, which are often both emotionally intense and legally complex. The first step is to develop a holistic understanding of the jurisdictional interplay—knowing when Indian courts will assume jurisdiction, understand the Hague Convention framework, and coordinating with foreign counsel where needed.

    In several matters, I’ve worked closely with the US and UK embassies, and in collaboration with NCPCR, where the legal systems of both countries were able to align in support of the child’s welfare. In such cases, the legal frameworks often coincide in a way that strengthens cooperation between authorities and facilitates effective remedies.

    I also prioritize mediation and alternative dispute resolution, especially when the well-being of children is involved. Each case demands cultural sensitivity, awareness of international norms, and the ability to negotiate without losing sight of legal enforceability.

    One of the practical tools I’ve used successfully is drafting parental plans that outline shared responsibilities and structured arrangements—covering education, visitation, healthcare, and communication between the child and both parents. These plans, drafted keeping the child’s best interest at the core, have often helped in reaching settlements that are acceptable to both parties and enforceable across borders.

    Ultimately, while the legal strategy must be sound, the focus in such matters must always remain on the child’s welfare, not just the legal outcome.

    Having worked with prominent lawyers and leading firms, what were the most important lessons or values you carried forward into your own independent practice? Additionally, what was your motivation to establish your own practice?

    Working with Senior Advocate Mr. Sidharth Luthra taught me how important precision and clarity are—both in how you present a case and how you think about it. At Saraf and Partners, I learned how to handle complex matters that involved a lot of moving parts, and how to function effectively as part of a structured team. Both experiences shaped the way I approach work even today.

    But at some point, I felt the need to build something of my own—something more personal and meaningful. I’ve always wanted to contribute to society in a real way, and that was one of the reasons I joined the Delhi Legal Services Authority early on in my career. That experience reinforced for me that law isn’t just a profession—it can be a tool to help people, to solve problems, and to make space for fairness.

    Starting my own practice was a step toward aligning my work with what I care about. I wanted more control over the kind of matters I take up, and the kind of environment I create for the people I work with. Law has its challenges, but for me, it’s something I’ve genuinely grown passionate about—it gives me a sense of purpose, even when the day-to-day is tough.

    As a practitioner who actively engages with legal education through guest lectures and mentoring, how do you view the relationship between academic involvement and courtroom practice? In what ways has this engagement shaped your growth as a legal professional?

    Academic engagement has always been an integral part of my professional growth. It provides the space to reflect more deeply on legal principles beyond the immediacy of courtroom pressures. Delivering guest lectures or judging moots requires distilling complex legal concepts into accessible ideas, which in turn sharpens my own clarity of thought and argumentation. It’s also intellectually refreshing—interacting with students often brings unexpected questions and fresh perspectives that challenge rigid thinking and encourage a broader view of the law.

    Mentoring, both within and outside the office, has been equally meaningful. I’ve benefited from strong mentors myself, and I try to carry that forward by offering honest, practical guidance to younger lawyers. Teaching and mentoring remind me that legal practice isn’t just about individual success—it’s about contributing to the growth of the profession as a whole.

    Given your specialization in white-collar crime, how do you approach ethical dilemmas, particularly in cases involving allegations of financial misconduct, corruption, or money laundering? Additionally, what drew you to a career in law and led you to focus on this area of practice?

    I was drawn to law because I’ve always appreciated how structured, purpose-driven, and outcome-oriented the profession is. Over time, I naturally gravitated towards white-collar crime because it brings together the two things I find most intellectually engaging—analytical reasoning and investigative problem-solving. The issues are layered, the fact patterns are rarely linear, and the stakes—both reputational and legal—are incredibly high.

    What I enjoy most about working in this space is the challenge of navigating complex regulatory frameworks and making sense of large volumes of financial or digital evidence. Each matter demands a deep dive, not just into legal precedent but also into operational realities—whether of companies, public institutions, or individuals in leadership roles.

    Ethical dilemmas are inherent in this space, and they require a calibrated approach, one that balances legal strategy with integrity and foresight. My role is not just to respond to allegations, but to anticipate implications across forums—criminal, regulatory, and reputational. I believe clients come to you in such situations not only for legal defence, but for clarity, discretion, and a roadmap forward. That’s what I strive to deliver.

    With nearly a decade in the legal profession and diverse exposure to litigation, advisory work, and international law, what advice would you offer young lawyers, especially women, who aspire to build resilient and independent practices like yours?

    My first piece of advice would be: be patient, and keep showing up. There really is no substitute for consistency. A practice isn’t built overnight—it’s the outcome of sustained effort, credibility, and doing the work well, matter after matter.

    For women in particular, the legal profession can present both visible and invisible challenges. It helps immensely to develop a strong support system—whether through peers, mentors, or collaborators. Equally important is to be assertive in taking up space: seek opportunities, ask the questions, and don’t hesitate to say no when something doesn’t align with your professional values or direction.

    Most importantly, don’t let self-doubt become part of your inner vocabulary. The law is demanding, but it’s also deeply rewarding for those who stay committed. With time, clarity, and hard work, your practice will evolve in ways that are both sustainable and fulfilling.

    Get in touch with Ankita Tiwari –

  • “Start with substance before specialisation. If you master the fundamentals, then transferring those learnings and skills to a specialisation such as international arbitration becomes easy.” – Satjit Singh Chhabra, Senior Associate at Khaitan & Co.

    “Start with substance before specialisation. If you master the fundamentals, then transferring those learnings and skills to a specialisation such as international arbitration becomes easy.” – Satjit Singh Chhabra, Senior Associate at Khaitan & Co.

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

    Having gained intensive experience and developed commendable expertise in dispute resolution, what initially inspired you to pursue law as a career? Could you share some insights from your law school journey that helped shape your path?

    When I was deciding what career to pursue, I knew that I wanted to do something that was stimulating and intellectually challenging – and law fit the bill perfectly. Growing up, my dinner table conversations often revolved around legal issues, thanks to my father being a lawyer himself. So early on, I got front-row tickets to watch him in action which undoubtedly influenced my decision to pursue law. His anecdotes and insights into the legal world were like  fascinating stories that gradually drew me into the profession.

    Law school was a whirlwind of case studies, moot court competitions, and sleepless nights. The mentorship I received was instrumental in shaping my career path. Academic learning apart, what helped me immensely was the chance to get an insight into all areas of law, whether through internships or moots, that finally helped me decide my calling. Participating in moot court competitions gave a taste of the adversarial nature of legal practice, while internships provided practical insights into the real-world workings of the legal profession. While you leave law school one day, it is the friends you make and the professors you meet along the way that stay, who I continue to learn from and consult from time to time.  

    Reflecting on my journey, I realize that every step—from those dinner table conversations to the academic pursuits—played a crucial role in my development as a lawyer. 

    What motivated you to pursue a Master’s in International Commercial Law at University College London? How do you believe your experience at UCL differed from other institutions offering similar programs, and in what ways has it broadened your perspective and enhanced your practice?

    I chose UCL for my Master’s because of a few things that really stood out to me. The biggest draw was the unique composition of their faculty. Unlike many institutions where professors are primarily theoretical scholars, UCL’s program was taught by professors who were actively practicing. This made a huge difference because everything we learned was based on real cases and situations they were dealing with, not just textbook theory. The insights I gained were immediately relevant to the challenges I would face in practice, giving me a significant advantage. 

    What I also loved about UCL was the flexibility to pick and choose courses that interested me. As someone just starting out, I was not sure exactly which area of law I wanted to focus on, so I took courses in arbitration, commercial law, and corporate finance. That mix turned out to be perfect—today, when I am reviewing financial documents for clients, I am able to quickly comprehend what I am looking at because of that corporate finance background. It helped me figure out that arbitration and commercial law were really my thing, and those subjects form the core of my practice today.

    The alumni network has been incredibly helpful too. UCL has a really strong presence in India and internationally, and I have found that UCL alumni are genuinely willing to help each other out. When I get a case that involves foreign law—I often reach out to UCL graduates practicing in those countries for advice. Plus, being in London was amazing because it’s basically the hub of international arbitration. I could attend industry events, see how things actually work, and meet people in the field while I was still studying. Those connections and that exposure to the real arbitration world have been invaluable.

    Looking back after six years of practice, choosing UCL was definitely one of my best decisions. The experience taught me to think beyond just Indian law and spot international issues that other lawyers might miss. I believe that my clients benefit from this broader perspective, especially when their businesses have cross-border elements. 

    You’ve worked alongside several prominent lawyers and leading law firms early in your career. Could you share some of the most formative or memorable experiences during that time, and how they laid the foundation for your current practice?

    I was incredibly fortunate to work with some of the most respected names in Indian law early in my career, and honestly, those experiences shaped everything about how I approach the profession today. Getting a chance to observe and work with stalwarts like Mr Sibal and Mr Jethmalani was inspiring beyond words. Each day was genuinely exciting—I don’t think there was a single day I came home without being amazed by how productive and intense their work was. Watching them up close taught me that there’s absolutely no replacement for hard work in this field, and the level of discipline it requires is something you can only truly appreciate when you see it in action.

    What struck me most was their work ethic and attention to detail. These weren’t just naturally gifted lawyers coasting on their reputation—they were putting in the hours, preparing meticulously, and constantly pushing themselves. That observation really drove home the point that success in law is not just about being smart or having good arguments; it’s about the relentless effort you put in behind the scenes. That lesson has stayed with me throughout my career, and I try to bring that same level of commitment to every case I handle.

    After that experience, I moved to a premier law firm in India, and that’s where I really learned the art of legal writing. My mentors there were incredibly particular about quality drafting—they taught me how to think through legal arguments systematically and then put them on paper in a way that was clear and compelling. I’ll be honest, at the time, the constant revisions and re-revisions of drafts often felt unnecessary and frankly exhausting and I remember thinking some of the feedback was nitpicking − but looking back now, I can see what a huge difference that process made in developing my drafting skills – a crucial skill as a lawyer.

    You’ve handled high-stakes arbitrations across diverse industries such as energy, chemicals, aviation, and mining. When it comes specifically to the energy sector, what are some unique legal or regulatory challenges you’ve encountered?

    The energy sector is one of the most challenging areas I work in because energy arbitrations can get incredibly technical and complex. As lawyers, we can’t just rely on legal knowledge—we really need to understand the commercial perspective, and of course, the science behind these projects to grasp the facts properly and apply the law correctly. I’ve spent hours trying to understand power generation technologies, transmission systems, and renewable energy processes because without that foundation, you’re essentially preparing your case in the dark.

    Another unique challenge is how many different laws and regulations intersect in energy disputes. You’re dealing with contract law, environmental regulations, power sector reforms, electricity acts, renewable energy policies, and often state-specific regulations all at once. The research becomes much more extensive because each regulatory framework can significantly impact your case strategy. What makes this even more complex is that the energy sector is extremely important for the government given their emission targets and climate goals, which means they’re constantly revising regulations and policies. This dynamic regulatory environment can be challenging, but it’s extremely important to stay abreast of these developments to properly represent your clients. When foreign clients are involved, you’re also navigating FDI regulations and FEMA compliance, which adds another layer of complexity.

    Energy arbitrations are also extremely document-heavy, with tons of technical documentation that can be overwhelming. What’s crucial is having strong communication with clients who can distil these technical points into simpler terms that we as lawyers can then convey effectively to a tribunal. 

    Being qualified to practice law in both India and the UK is a notable accomplishment. How has your dual qualification influenced your strategy and perspective in handling cross-border disputes?

    Having dual qualification in both India and the UK has been really helpful in my practice, especially when dealing with cross-border disputes. The biggest advantage is when I’m working on arbitrations that involve English law—I can understand English law concepts much more easily because of my UK qualification rather than having to rely entirely on expert opinions or academic research.

    When you’re dealing with English law governed contracts or English legal principles in international arbitrations, having that background makes a huge difference. I can read English case law and understand the nuances in a way that feels natural, rather than struggling to interpret concepts from an outside perspective. This helps me structure arguments better and anticipate how English law points might be argued by the other side.

    The dual qualification also helps when I’m coordinating with English solicitors or barristers on cases. There’s a common understanding of how things work, which makes collaboration smoother. I can communicate more effectively because I understand their legal framework and approach, and they don’t have to spend time explaining basic English law concepts to me.

    Overall, it’s made me more confident in handling international disputes where English law elements come up, which happens quite frequently in commercial arbitrations. Instead of feeling like I’m working in unfamiliar territory, I can approach these cases with the same comfort level I’d have with Indian law matters.

    Among the many significant matters you’ve handled, which case stands out as the most complex or strategically demanding, and how did you approach resolving it? 

    While confidentiality prevents me from discussing specific details – generally speaking, arbitration disputes can get quite complex when there are parallel proceedings in multiple jurisdictions. Each proceeding can have an impact on the other, with laws differing in each jurisdiction, and overall, often can be too much to track at the same time – that can be quite challenging. 

    I recently worked on an arbitration, followed by set aside proceedings before Singapore Courts and enforcement proceeding in the US, which was very interesting and complex. Earlier last year, I successfully represented a major oil and gas giant against its downstream purchaser relating to non-supply of gas – that led to a contentious Section 9 before the Delhi High Court. Then, some of the arbitrations I am working on are a bit technical, and they can be quite demanding but equally interesting.

    The way I approach these disputes is to adopt a methodical approach and distil complex issues into simple fragments, making it easier to understand. And then, I align the strategy overall to have a unified approach. There is no substitute to hard work – and the more time I spend on understanding the matter, and going through the material – the easier it becomes to strategize and form arguments. 

    What guidance would you offer to young lawyers aspiring to build a practice in international arbitration? What resources would you recommend to them to stay updated on the latest legal developments?

    Start with substance before specialisation. If you master the fundamentals, then transferring those learnings and skills to a specialisation such as international arbitration becomes easy. The glamour of international arbitration means nothing without a rock-solid foundation. My strategy has been simple, do all kinds of work that come your way early on – each experience teaches you something that will be useful later. 

    For staying current, I would suggest reading arbitration blogs, such as Global Arbitration Review and Kluwer International Law – they are goldmines for understanding trends and recent decisions. Attend webinars and events hosted by organisations like Young ITA, SIAC, ICC etc. 

    As an arbitration lawyer one needs to develop commercial awareness – understand your clients’ businesses. In my experience, the best arbitration lawyers are not just great with legal knowledge, they are strategic advisors who understand how legal outcomes can affect business objectives. To achieve this, read the newspaper. Every morning, read the newspaper, specifically the financial section. If you prefer digital means, get a subscription like Magzter that will get you access to most publications. 

    Looking ahead, how do you foresee the field of international arbitration evolving over the next five years, particularly in the context of emerging technologies like AI and shifting geopolitical dynamics?

    According to me, the next five years will likely see a significant evolution. AI will revolutionise document review and legal research but, in my view, will not replace the strategic thinking that disputes require. We are already seeing firms adopt AI models which has been a blessing for combing through volumes of data. While the existing AI models offer better support to corporate work, I am confident that models that are better suited for disputes will also come soon. I am also hopeful for more technological integration in arbitration – we have already seen virtual hearings being normalised – a trend that is making arbitration more accessible. The adoption of such dispute resolution platforms will make arbitration more accessible, allowing parties to resolve disputes remotely and reducing costs associated with travel. Additionally, the integration of robust cybersecurity measures and compliance with global data protection standards will become paramount as reliance on digital technologies increases. Arbitration rules and procedures will keep on evolving to accommodate these changes, with updated guidelines for digital evidence and flexible procedural frameworks.

    The geopolitical shift is where the things get interesting. Geopolitical tensions, like the Russia-Ukraine conflict and shifting alliances, are fueling a rise in disputes—especially in energy, infrastructure, and sectors affected by sanctions. Now with tensions increasing in Middle East as well, it is possible that we see an increase in disputes in that area as well. With these developments,  the enforcement of arbitral awards may face new challenges as geopolitical tensions affect cooperation between jurisdictions. Specifically, investment arbitration will be impacted by changes in international trade agreements and policies. 

    With such a demanding professional life, how do you manage to maintain a work-life balance?

    The absolute game changer for me has been to have a well organised calendar and better planning. I block out time for everything – client calls, research etc. That helps me plan my day better and find time for things except just work. Start your day with a to-do list and plan your day accordingly.  Better planning = better control over your day. 

    Try your best to set realistic timelines with your seniors and your clients about response times – a concept that might seem shocking at first, but more often than not, if you make a reasonable request to your client / senior, they will likely understand.  

    To sustain this ‘life’, it’s important to find pockets of sanity throughout the day. Maybe it is a proper lunch, a quick walk, a session of pickleball or just an episode of ‘Friends’. Sooner or later, everyone realises that physical and mental health directly impacts your ability to serve your clients well, so always remember to take care of yourself. 

    Of course, the nature of the profession is that you will pulling all-nighters or eat out of a cardboard box some days, or perhaps weeks. But the idea is to try and disconnect when the work becomes manageable and then come back rested and focussed.   

    What keeps you motivated, and is there a personal philosophy or motto that has guided you through your journey?

    As cheesy as it might sound, I genuinely love what I do. Every dispute that I work on is like an intellectual challenge that teaches me something I didn’t already know. One week I am trying to figure out how electrical plants work and then the next I am knee deep in a mining dispute. The thrill of being intellectually tested in completely different ways keeps me on my toes – which is very exciting.

    What really drives me is ambition and the hunger to get better. The goal is to keep improving at what I do and constantly grow. Each case is an opportunity to push myself further than the last one, to understand something new, to develop a skill I didn’t have before. There’s something incredibly satisfying about looking back at cases from a year ago and realising how far ahead I have come and how my approach has improved. I am always trying to level up. 

    Get in touch with Satjit Singh Chhabra –

  • “If I have any advice for students, it’s this: please don’t follow a path just because it looks safe or conventional. Follow your curiosity. You don’t have to know everything today.” – Rahul Anil Khanna, Founder & Managing Partner at RAKlaw.

    “If I have any advice for students, it’s this: please don’t follow a path just because it looks safe or conventional. Follow your curiosity. You don’t have to know everything today.” – Rahul Anil Khanna, Founder & Managing Partner at RAKlaw.

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

    With over a decade of experience in corporate legal affairs, what initially drew you to the legal profession? Was it a planned pursuit, or did your interest in law evolve over time?

    To be candid, I never planned for my career to shape the way it eventually did. I’ve always believed in the power of timing and going with the flow, and in many ways, the legal profession found me rather than the other way around. Initially, law was more of a functional career choice. However, my interest in the profession evolved significantly during the early years of my corporate tenure.

    One of the key turning points was the mentorship I received. I was fortunate to work under a senior who not only trusted me but gave me a free hand to deal with matters independently—whether it was navigating compliance, handling regulatory inquiries, or representing the company before statutory bodies. This autonomy instilled a sense of responsibility and curiosity in me.

    I found myself increasingly drawn to the strategic aspect of legal work—how sound legal advice can influence business decisions, mitigate risks, and protect long-term interests. Over time, I began to view the legal function not merely as support but as a value driver within the organization. That shift in perspective was what truly cemented my commitment to the legal profession.

    Looking back, what started as a role gradually transformed into a passion. Today, whether it’s regulatory strategy, dispute resolution, or guiding startups through complex compliance landscapes, I find immense satisfaction in the challenges and the continuous learning the field offers.

    You’re currently building a specialized platform for startups in the food sector. What are some of the most frequent compliance challenges these businesses face, and how does the platform help them navigate these hurdles in a practical way?

    Yes, this has been an idea in the making for quite some time. Having closely observed the food and beverage (F&B) sector, particularly by attending various industry exhibitions and trade fairs, I realized there’s a significant gap in legal awareness and compliance readiness among startups in this space. The food industry in India is evolving rapidly. In fact, according to Invest India, the Indian F&B sector is expected to reach USD 535 billion by 2025, driven by changing consumer preferences, innovation, and a rising number of food startups entering the market each year.

    The most frequent compliance challenges startups face are quite fundamental yet critical:

    1. Understanding Regulatory Applicability – Startups often struggle to determine which specific licenses or approvals apply to their product. For example, a plant-based dairy alternative cannot simply replicate the compliance of traditional dairy—its classification and labeling requirements are entirely different.
    2. Knowing Whom to Approach – Navigating through authorities like FSSAI, Legal Metrology, State FDAs, and Pollution Control Boards is overwhelming. Startups don’t know where to begin, especially when their business model spans multiple states or channels (offline, D2C, exports).
    3. Copying Industry Leaders Blindly – Many new entrants simply mimic compliance templates of large FMCG companies, not realizing that their own product category or manufacturing model requires a tailored approach.

    This is exactly where our upcoming platform aims to make a difference. It’s being developed as a one-stop ecosystem that not only offers end-to-end compliance support—from FSSAI licensing, label reviews, and legal metrology filings to EPR and state-wise registrations—but also provides legal representation when issues escalate into litigation or adjudication.

    The idea is to simplify legal compliance through practical tools, updated regulatory content, and access to on-demand legal professionals who specialize in this domain. The platform is currently in development, and while I can’t share all the details just yet, I can say that it’s being built to bridge a very real and very critical gap in the F&B startup ecosystem.

    In the early stages of your career, were there any specific experiences or turning points that deepened your understanding of food laws and regulatory compliance, ultimately guiding you to specialize in this domain?

    Yes, there were many such moments. In fact, I often say that having someone place their trust in you early on can completely shape your professional path. I was fortunate to work under mentors who gave me the autonomy to explore, question, and resolve matters independently. That freedom helped me develop a deep, ground-level understanding of how regulations intersect with real business challenges.

    One of the turning points was dealing with a product recall that originated from a minor labeling non-compliance. It seemed procedural at first, but the impact was operational, reputational, and financial. That experience taught me that in food law, every word and symbol on a label carries legal weight—and the smallest error can have disproportionate consequences. It was in those moments that my interest in regulatory compliance truly deepened.

    Even during my corporate tenure, I made it a point to work across functions—marketing, manufacturing, supply chain—not just to advise them legally, but to understand how decisions were being made on the ground. I always tell the juniors and interns who work with me: don’t wait for permission to get curious. Even if you’re a legal person and your idea in a marketing meeting feels like the dimmest one—speak up. You’ll be surprised how often the “outsider’s perspective” helps, and how much it sharpens your understanding of your own role.

    And then, after I transitioned from the corporate setup into independent practice, my learning curve accelerated even more. When you’re working closely with startups and entrepreneurs, especially in the food sector, you begin to see firsthand the complexities and creativity that go into new product development. The challenges are dynamic—whether it’s decoding novel ingredients, managing multi-state compliances, or responding to evolving FSSAI regulations.

    Just take a step back and look at the food landscape today. Think about it—five years ago, how many pre-packed food products did we really see in our daily lives? Comparatively few. Today, nearly everything we consume—snacks, beverages, condiments, ready-to-cook meals—is pre-packaged. It’s no longer occasional; it’s integral to our routine. The scope of this sector in the next five to ten years is massive, not just in terms of business growth but also from a regulatory standpoint. It’s an exciting space to be in, and being part of this transformation—while ensuring that safety and compliance go hand-in-hand with innovation—continues to drive my work every day.

    Your work spans labour laws, dispute resolution, and policy development. Could you share an experience where you handled a complex labour law issue? How do you stay agile and adapt to the evolving legal landscape in this domain?

    Absolutely. One of the most complex and insightful matters I’ve dealt with involved assessing the legal validity of a widespread retainership model adopted by a leading cosmetics brand that operated across various retail formats—including exclusive brand outlets, modern trade counters, and general trade counters.

    The company had deployed over 2,000 personnel—primarily as “Beauty Consultants”—engaged on fixed-term retainership contracts. On paper, these individuals were termed as ‘Consultants’ with monthly invoices raised for services rendered. However, upon closer scrutiny, it became evident that the structure did not hold up to the legal tests used to determine the existence of an employer-employee relationship.

    We undertook a detailed legal review, mapping the operational realities against judicial benchmarks laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Balwant Rai Saluja v. Air India Ltd.—specifically focusing on elements like who appoints, who supervises, who pays, who disciplines, and whether continuity of service exists. Our findings revealed that despite the nomenclature of “retainer” or “consultant,” these individuals were under direct control, supervision, and functional command of the management. They were hired, transferred, granted leave, and even disciplined by company supervisors. In other words, the arrangement was more of an employment model disguised as consultancy.

    The risk exposure was significant—both under the Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, and under core labour laws like the Payment of Gratuity Act, ESI Act, and Maternity Benefit Act. Moreover, since there was no contractor involved, the management couldn’t take shelter under the principal-employer framework either. We advised a comprehensive review and reclassification of roles, alongside a phased transition towards compliant staffing structures, to mitigate future litigation and regulatory risk.

    This matter underscored the importance of not just legal drafting, but understanding how the structure plays out on the ground. Labour laws in India are heavily precedent-based and interpretive—courts tend to prioritize substance over form. So, staying agile means continuously aligning HR practices with legal reality, adapting to new judgments, and anticipating regulatory scrutiny—not reacting to it.

    Matters like this also highlight why I’ve always believed in being proactive rather than reactive. Labour compliance isn’t about ticking boxes—it’s about ensuring that your internal structures can stand up to judicial and regulatory scrutiny when tested. That’s the mindset I bring to every assignment in this domain.

    You’ve overseen compliance across diverse marketing channels, including traditional advertising and influencer-led campaigns. What are some of the major legal challenges in this space, and how do you help brands align creative strategies with regulations such as ASCI guidelines and emerging digital marketing norms?

    This is an area where legal, regulatory, and creative disciplines intersect in very real and often challenging ways. Over the past few years, marketing strategies have evolved rapidly—from traditional print and television ads to influencer-driven digital content and real-time engagement campaigns. And while the mediums have changed, the legal obligations have only become more layered.

    One of the core challenges is balancing creative freedom with regulatory compliance. Whether it’s the Food Safety and Standards Act (FSSA), the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, or ASCI’s Code for Self-Regulation in Advertising—every product category, particularly in the FMCG and food space, comes with defined boundaries for advertising claims, disclosures, and substantiation.

    For instance, brands often want to use superlatives like “best,” “purest,” or “clinically proven,” but may lack the documentary evidence or test reports to substantiate such claims. In such cases, I advise internal marketing and product teams right from the conceptualization stage—ensuring that claims are backed by appropriate documentation, lab tests, or consumer studies, and that disclaimers are clear, visible, and compliant with ASCI standards.

    With influencer marketing, the challenges are different—but equally significant. The ASCI Guidelines for Influencer Advertising in Digital Media, coupled with recent enforcement advisories from the Department of Consumer Affairs, have made it mandatory for influencers to clearly disclose paid partnerships, sponsored content, or brand affiliations through unambiguous tags like #Ad or #Sponsored. Many influencers—and even brand teams—are unaware that simply gifting a product or offering a barter collaboration also qualifies as a material connection requiring disclosure.

    In my experience, one of the key gaps is the lack of structured compliance protocols for influencer campaigns. To address this, I’ve helped several brands develop standard influencer contracts, compliance checklists, and pre-approval workflows. These documents cover not just disclosure requirements, but also ensure that influencers do not make unauthorized or misleading claims—especially in regulated sectors like health supplements, beauty, and food products. For example, using a phrase like “immunity booster” or “approved by FSSAI” without factual basis or regulatory clearance could expose the brand to penal action.

    Another area that requires careful navigation is comparative advertising—where brands position themselves as superior to competitors. While permitted in principle, comparative ads must be truthful, fair, and not disparaging. This line can be thin, and I’ve often had to work closely with creative agencies to ensure that the tone, visuals, and language don’t cross into unlawful denigration, which could trigger litigation under trademark law or consumer protection statutes.

    Moreover, platform-specific policies—like ad restrictions on Meta, Google, and YouTube—add another layer of compliance. Certain product categories, such as tobacco, alcohol, or even baby food, face restrictions not just under Indian laws but also under global content moderation guidelines. It becomes essential to harmonize regulatory approvals with platform rules and ensure that every campaign is vetted through both lenses.

    To manage all of this in real time, I advocate a cross-functional compliance model—where marketing, legal, product, and digital teams work in collaboration. I also conduct periodic training and workshops to keep teams updated on evolving norms, such as influencer disclosures, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, and amendments under the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules.

    In conclusion, marketing compliance isn’t just about saying “no” to risky ideas—it’s about helping brands communicate creatively within a legally sustainable framework. My role has always been to enable campaigns, not obstruct them—by anticipating risk, offering alternatives, and ensuring that creativity and compliance coexist seamlessly.

    In managing compliance under the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act (COTPA), what were the biggest challenges, and how did you ensure consistent compliance and legal challenges?
    Oh my God—what a question to ask!

    When it comes to managing compliance under the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act (COTPA), you’re stepping into one of the most tightly regulated spaces in Indian law. This isn’t just about compliance—it’s about navigating a minefield of statutory restrictions that govern everything from advertising and packaging to distribution and point-of-sale visibility.

    The biggest challenge? Communication. Since both direct and surrogate advertising are prohibited, the question becomes: How do you inform a consumer about something new—without actually telling them? You’re managing a brand that legally can’t raise its voice.

    And here’s the beauty of it: when an entire company is working on launching a product, figuring out how to communicate it to the world becomes a massive, complex challenge. This is where great marketing minds meet great legal minds, united by two shared missions: to communicate, and to protect. It’s chess, not checkers.

    I won’t reveal the specific tools or tactics—that’s confidential—but working in such a constrained environment forces innovation like few other sectors. Legal and commercial teams must operate not just with creativity, but with precision. You need real-time awareness of law, razor-sharp risk judgment, and a deep understanding of regulatory nuances.

    And remember, compliance here isn’t a one-time checkbox—it’s a full-time business philosophy. From pictorial warnings that occupy 85% of the pack, to ensuring the retail shelf doesn’t accidentally violate visibility norms, every pixel and placement matters. One slip, and you’re looking at fines, seizures, or even criminal prosecution.

    Ultimately, the art lies in keeping the business alive and thriving—without crossing the legal line. That’s the real thrill of COTPA compliance. You’re not just managing law—you’re helping the business whisper where others shout.

    After a successful corporate career, what motivated you to establish your own independent practice? What were some of the initial challenges you faced during the transition, and how did your in-house experience shape the way you now deliver client-focused legal solutions?

    To be very honest, when you work in a corporate environment for years and start doing the same set of tasks repeatedly, you eventually hit a point where you feel like you’ve plateaued. The ideas don’t flow like they used to, the work starts to feel cyclical, and somewhere along the way, you stop growing. That’s when I knew — I needed to shake things up.

    I’ve always believed in the power of timing. I didn’t leave my in-house role because I was unprepared — in fact, I had long dreamt of building something of my own. But as life would have it, it was a mix of circumstance, instinct, and courage that eventually pushed me over the edge. And I’ve never looked back. I firmly believe that situations never remain constant, and if you don’t evolve with them, you’re choosing stagnation. I chose the challenge.

    Starting an independent practice isn’t easy — far from it. The first and biggest question is: Where do you begin? You no longer have structured teams, support systems, or a fixed agenda. In fact, there were days — and weeks — where I didn’t have a full calendar. But I kept showing up. I’d read, draft, network, and build systems because this was a path I chose, and failure wasn’t an option. Especially when others start relying on you — clients, juniors, peers — it becomes more than just your own dream.

    Luckily, I had unknowingly been preparing for this for years. During my in-house career, I was fortunate to work with mentors who encouraged us to take ownership of everything end-to-end — be it compliance audits, litigation strategy, contract vetting, or regulatory filings. There was no outsourcing mindset; everything was handled in-house. That exposure helped me develop a problem-solving mindset — not just legally, but strategically.

    Of course, transitioning to the client side required a different skill: visibility. You can be the best lawyer, but if people don’t know you exist, it doesn’t matter. So I had to put myself out there — make calls, write emails, meet people, follow up, and tell my story. My interpersonal skills and relationship-building approach really helped in that phase. I didn’t chase big-ticket clients; instead, I focused on building long-term retainers — even if modest at first — because they provide continuity, predictability, and a chance to grow with the client.

    In fact, cracking a few retainers with early-stage startups was a turning point. Working with startups taught me how to simplify complex legal frameworks into actionable advice, and how to be more accessible, responsive, and solution-oriented. These experiences reinforced a client-first mindset — something I deeply value in my current practice.

    Today, I run a growing independent practice, and I can say with confidence that my corporate background gave me a solid foundation — but the real learning came when I stepped into the unknown. It taught me resilience, humility, and the sheer joy of building something of your own, one client and one challenge at a time.

    Looking ahead, how do you envision the growth of your practice and your role within it? Additionally, what advice would you offer to students aspiring to build a career in your area of specialization?

    To be honest — and I’ve said this before too — I’ve never been someone who envisions too far ahead. I firmly believe in time. As the Bhagavad Gita says, “Kaalasya chalanam anivarya hai” — time never stops, and you never really know what tomorrow holds. I just keep my head steady and walk the path in front of me. One step at a time.

    I didn’t start with a 5-year plan or a vision board. Life pushed, and I moved — that’s always been my way. You adapt, stay honest with your effort, and trust that the path you’ve chosen will unfold as it should.

    Over the years, I’ve had the chance to work with some incredible interns — all unique in their own way. Some were quiet, in their shell. Others were confident and unfiltered. But all of them, truly, were just awesome to work with. And honestly, I’ve learned a lot more from them than they probably learned from me.

    One thing I always tell my interns: you have to teach me five things before you leave. It can be anything — a new productivity tool, a Gen Z slang like “no cap”, “it’s giving”, or “let’s soft launch this idea”, or even something random like a new music genre or their favorite YouTube rabbit hole. One of my interns was so passionate about reviewing movies, he actually created a rating matrix — acting: 8/10, story: 6.5, background score: 9, cinematography: 7.2 — I mean, it was serious business for him! And I loved it. That kind of passion — whatever the field — is what matters.

    So if I have any advice for students, it’s this: please don’t follow a path just because it looks safe or conventional. Follow your curiosity. You don’t have to know everything today. And even if you choose law — you don’t need to pick a specialization on Day 1. Initially, you’ll do a bit of everything — contracts, compliance, litigation, drafting, maybe even filing! Let it all come. It’ll take shape with time.

    Whatever you do, just stay open. Learn from everyone — juniors, seniors, clients, even strangers. And don’t be afraid of uncertainty. Sometimes not knowing what comes next is the best part of the journey.

    Get in touch with Rahul Anil Khanna –