What drew you towards the field of Intellectual Property law, and what were some of the early experiences that helped lay the foundation for your practice in this domain?
First of all, thank you for connecting with me to share my story. I was quite intrigued by the name of the platform ‘Super Lawyer’. This reminded me of the film ‘The Incredibles’ wherein a character Syndrome says that if all humans will have super powers, none will be a Super hero. Similarly, in my view since all lawyers are Super lawyers, thus no single lawyer is a Super lawyer. Now coming to your question:
I think my interest in Cinema. I was initially drawn towards Intellectual Property as a practice area since I had a lot of interest in movies. I was highly inclined towards Copyright Law, since I wanted to understand how the film industry functions.
As far as early experience that helped me lay the foundation in this domain are concerned, the first litigation matter that I worked upon was a passing off suit. In that suit, over a period of time after filing the suit, Defendant had obtained registration of its trade mark and moved an application for amendment of written statement to plead its registration. At that stage, when I was too young (barely a month into the practice) I thought that the Plaintiff’s case was over since the Defendant had obtained a trade mark registration. At that stage, my then senior told me that registration of Defendant’s mark is of no consequence in a suit for passing off, which is maintainable even against a registered proprietor. He further asked me to read N.R. Dongre and Ors. vs. Whirlpool Corpn. and Anr.; 1996 PTC (16) 583 (SC) wherein apex Court upheld this position arrived at by Single Judge and Division bench of the High Court.
You argued a landmark case where the Delhi High Court, for the first time, ruled on the registrability of geographical names as arbitrary trademarks. Could you share your insights from the case that shaped the Court’s reasoning, and what do you believe are the broader implications of this decision?
To be really honest, I don’t know as to whether it was a landmark decision or not. However, Siddharth Suri vs Registrar of Trade Marks does give a guiding light for registration of geographical names as trade marks where the geographical name has been applied arbitrarily to the goods. In this case, the goods were ‘Leather and imitations of leather, and goods made of these materials and not included in other classes; animal skins, hides, trunks and travelling bags; umbrellas, parasols and walking sticks; whips, harness and saddlery’ for which ‘Andamen’ was not found to be having a goods-place association. Accordingly, the objection under Section 9(1)(b) that the trade mark designates geographical origin was not found to be attracted since Andamen (whether said to be taken from Andaman Sea or from the Andaman & Nicobar Islands) does not have a reputation for goods falling in Class 18.
The broader implications of the decision are that when one comes across a geographical name as a trade mark, they should not disregard its protection/registration just because it is a geographical name but analyze whether that geographical area has an association or reputation for goods for which it is sought to be registered/protected.
You advise clients across diverse sectors including FMCG, pharmaceuticals, liquor, book publishing, and e-commerce. Given the rapid growth of the pharmaceutical industry, what are some of the major legal and compliance challenges entities face in this space?
I think as far as the pharmaceutical industry is concerned, the biggest challenge has been counterfeit products. For a consumer, who may consume these counterfeit products; disaster always lurks around the corner to make its presence felt. In other terms, the consumers are extremely vulnerable to life threatening consequences. I have, in the past, worked on multiple matters, both civil and criminal, where the Defendants/Accused produced identical drugs and it is not possible to identify the fake unless you get inputs from the team who worked on the packaging and in some cases research. The pharmaceutical industry is one of the most regulated industries; since it has to cater to safety and efficacy. Keeping this in mind, it obviously has to comply with safety and cleanliness standards, good manufacturing practices, disclosure of information and that too in line with labelling requirements. The major problem in the industry is fake drug racket, which may or may not be related to any Intellectual property and could be a completely new mark, where the ingredients told on the label will not even be present in the drug and the drug would have been sold or supplied clandestinely with no regulatory approval at all.
As a Partner, staying ahead of the curve is crucial. In your view, how effective have the current government initiatives been in streamlining the IP registration process? What further improvements in your opinion can be made?
In recent times, I could think of four initiatives done at the level of the Intellectual Property office which are commendable. First, is the possibility of search of device trade marks, which has been facilitated online by the IP office. The added advantage of this feature is that depending on the device/image the tool also suggests the possible Vienna Code Classifications; which also aids in saving time.
Second, is the enablement of a queue system for various functions and displaying it online; a real time check for hearing, review applications and examination status; which enables an entity to know as to where it marks stands in the list of hearings before the trade marks office.
Third is the Open house sessions, the IP office does with applicants and stakeholders everyday from 4.30 PM to 5.30 PM virtually to address grievances or take suggestions on any issue related to Intellectual Property Rights.
Last is the ‘Notifications/Reminders’ feature on the e-filing page and the ‘Reminders’ feature on the E-Register Page; which enables one to see latest updates on their portfolio of applications, ensuring that no important update is missed. This saves a tremendous amount of time.
In my view, to ensure a smooth registration process; the first thing that should be incorporated is consistency and standard operating procedures; so that every applicant or stakeholder has a clear idea of the chance of their application getting accepted or rejected.
You’ve worked on intermediary liability matters. How do you assess the evolving legal framework around platform accountability, especially in light of recent judicial decisions and amendments to the IT Rules? What are the core challenges in striking a balance between free expression and regulatory obligations?
I think the intention is always to balance; that’s what in my view, any legislature or government exercising its legislative powers under the IT Act, 2000 looks at while keeping in mind the protection of the people and at the same time working out the economics. So, that’s the word. BALANCE!! – the evolving legal framework in the IT Rules, especially The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 [hereinafter ‘IT Rules, 2021’] indicates a tide towards control but the intent of that control is Balance; The amendments to the same in 2022 required the intermediary to make reasonable efforts so that content which is covered under Rule 3(1)(b) is, inter alia, not displayed on its platform. The intention is some sort of action; but the rule making body steers clear of indicating what sort of action (no pointers whatsoever) and leaves it as a subject of interpretation. However, what are these ‘reasonable efforts’ or what could be some examples of these ‘reasonable efforts’; for that we get an indication from judicial decisions such as the recent decision in Indiamart Intermesh Ltd. v. Puma SE; 2025: DHC:4819-DB which indicates that one of the reasonable efforts for a platform could be that each of the sellers is aware of the requirement to not display counterfeit products and to ensure that they furnish an express undertaking to the said effect to the intermediary. Apart from this, on reading of paragraph 92 of the decision, I think another indication of reasonable effort could also be not to re-list the same seller in respect of the same products whose listings have been taken down earlier.
As far as 2023 amendments are concerned; they appear to have been done majorly to have the online gaming intermediaries under a stricter control (as compared to intermediaries) , especially those online gaming intermediaries who enable the users to access any permissible online real money. A lot of compliance requirements under ‘IT Rules, 2021’ which were only applicable to a significant social media intermediary originally have been extended to online gaming intermediaries as well by virtue of the amendments done in the year 2023.
As far as your last question, I think the standard of morality/scandalous statements keeps shifting with every generation. The biggest challenge I believe is ‘viewpoint bias’ and the evolving nature of the society we live in. Thus, in my opinion there will always be shifting standards and that’s why this area of law will always be dynamic and never ending. In simpler terms, what may be kosher for one; may be outrageous for another and this will be perennial. So, it is extremely difficult to maintain that balance between free expression and regulatory obligations.
With such an enriching and diverse career, what initially inspired you to pursue law? What advice would you offer to law students and young professionals aspiring to build a career in Intellectual Property and litigation?
I am an extremely lazy person when it comes to doing things for myself. I try to take the most convenient and easy route to navigate life choices. So, resultantly, the decision to pursue law was the length of the programme; five years. No worry after school for another five years. I thought in the beginning of the law school that may be after these five years; I will know what I need to do. However, post five years, I just went with the flow. In hindsight, I think I should not have done law. I could have explored a creative vocation where my thoughts could be disseminated freely (Obviously, subject to reasonable restrictions in Article 19).
One of my advice to every aspiring professional in the field of Intellectual Property would be to be tech-savvy. To understand how content is being created these days. What are the terms of the AI platforms, which are used by us for content creation. Further, I would also recommend not to restrict their understanding of jurisprudence on intellectual property to India but analyze what is going on globally. In this decade already we are dealing with landmark decisions on intellectual property issues intertwined with technology utilised across platforms which have shown us issues which we could not have probably envisaged a few decades ago. Look at the issue that is challenging the use of content by AI platforms, ‘keyword advertising’, use of a mark in drop down menu at the back end to trigger a listing if one searches for those products on a platform, violations by virtue of deepfake technology etc. I mean, mirror websites and duping in the name of fraud schemes of investment or employment across the internet, fake domain names, domain name disputes are something that have become traditional violations of Intellectual Property and orders granting real-time injunctions are not being passed only in isolated cases.
So far as litigation is concerned, my advice has always been to be diligent and understand the background and the possible solutions through procedural laws. Litigation is not a predictable game; there are variables across stages in a matter – from inception to trial; from an ex-parte order till consequent appeals. One has to make a strategy giving all possible variables due weight.
Managing a demanding legal practice comes with its own pressures. How do you maintain a healthy work-life balance, and is there a personal philosophy or guiding principle that has helped you navigate your professional journey?
To be really honest, I am unable to maintain a healthy work-life balance. Unfortunately, my matters, the ongoing developments in the fraternity, the need for being constantly updated & networking does not allow me to shut down/switch off. While my office is five (5) days working, the only time I think I am able to be completely at peace is when I sleep or I read. I read a lot, and have also in this process edited a few comic books. These are my only escapes apart from occasional films in theatres or at home. A lot of professionals, who might be really busy may say that they spend time with their families; switch off on weekends etc. Kudos to them!! I am never able to shut down. There is a constant barrage of thoughts in my head unless I am sleeping, reading or watching anything. I am constantly thinking of what needs to be done, are we on top of all our matters, has the team done all the compliances etc. There is a constant urge to ensure everything is under control and all bases are covered. This leads me to not have a work-life balance.
The only guiding principle that has helped me to navigate my professional journey is sincerity and time management. One has to prepare as much as they could for a matter while giving other matters also their due importance. One has to give every advice keeping all the ethical considerations in mind. I try my best every day to do and pull off a lot, sometimes much more than I actually can. Sometimes I succeed; sometimes I don’t. On days I succeed, I stay calm and think something constructive has been achieved. On the remaining days, I am just too hard on myself.
Your journey reflects remarkable versatility and determination. Looking back, what pivotal decisions do you believe have contributed most to your practice over the years?
My journey into law, and specifically as an IP Attorney, was far from a linear path. Unlike many, I never initially aimed to be a lawyer; in fact, the term “IP Attorney” was completely foreign to me until my second year of law school when IP was first introduced as a subject.
Coming from a humble, rural background in Talegaon Dabhade, Pune, my early academic pursuits were remarkably diverse. I chose arts at Ferguson College, majored in Psychology for my B.A., and even dedicated time to learning and tutoring German language while preparing for Nritya Visharad, harbouring aspirations of becoming a classical dancer, psychologist, or German translator. Law was never on my radar.
However, destiny, as they say, had other plans. Being a first-generation lawyer in the family, unaware of the fascinating journey ahead, I took a significant leap of faith. I applied to only one institution, ILS Law College. Getting selected in the first list felt incredibly lucky, as it was a high-risk gamble with no Plan B – a rejection would have meant a wasted year. Although I later transferred to Shankarrao Chavan Law College in my second year, this initial entry into the legal field was itself a pivotal decision.
This unconventional start , directly led to numerous vital career breaks, opportunities, and challenges. The journey itself broadened my horizons, exposing me to diverse people, institutions, experiences, and ideologies. These early experiences undoubtedly instilled in me resilience, an openness to new directions, and a unique interdisciplinary perspective. I truly believe these qualities laid the foundation for my enriching legal practice and have profoundly shaped who I am today.
What motivated you to pursue a Master’s degree in Science and Technology Law? Why did you choose this particular specialization, and how has it influenced your practice?
My decision to pursue a Master’s degree in Science and Technology Law was a pivotal moment in my journey. The dynamic and evolving nature of science and technology, encompassing fascinating areas like Intellectual Property, Biotechnology Law, Cyber Law, and Health Law, deeply intrigued me. This particular specialization, offered by the Department of Law at Savitribai Phule Pune University, provided a holistic overview of the actual laws in place, regulations, and pending bills in these fields.
The one-year LL.M. program was instrumental in cultivating strong research, presentation, and public speaking skills. While Intellectual Property (IP) was my primary focus, this course provided a robust theoretical foundation in IP, which was crucial for my understanding, research, and practice in IP law. I am particularly grateful to my professors, Dr. Jyoti Bhakare Ma’am and the late T.S.N. Shastry Sir, for fostering my interest in research. The affinity for research I developed during my LL.M. studies remains a cornerstone of my practice today. Beyond academics, the program also allowed me to forge valuable connections and a supportive network that continues to be a source of shared knowledge and care.
In the early phase of your career, what experiences or cases helped solidify your interest and expertise in intellectual property law, ultimately leading you to build a career in this domain?
So, from administrative and accounting roles during my LL.B. to becoming a Trademark Associate, visiting faculty, researcher, and ultimately leading my own law firm, every step has been instrumental in building my network, professionalism, knowledge, and interpersonal skills. The one constant thread woven through all these experiences has been Intellectual Property.
A particularly pivotal moment occurred during my third year of LL.B., when I was working in an administrative capacity. However, my main work was to recover pending invoices from clients. For the first time I was tasked with coordinating copyright filings for a corporate client. As I wasn’t yet a qualified lawyer, the initial plan was to outsource this work. However, being new to the field with no prior legal experience or strong professional connections, I struggled to find a trustworthy attorney online, causing a delay in the assignment. Instead of waiting, I took the initiative. Under the guidance of my senior, I decided to undertake the assignment myself. Successfully completing it single-handedly, by the time the registrations were finalized, I had not only gained valuable IP experience, but this experience provided the initial boost of confidence I needed to delve deeper into IP.
At that time, I even found myself daydreaming about having my own law office and all the “corporate fancy things,” largely inspired by series like “SUITS.” From that point forward, the more I immersed myself in this field, the more opportunities I seized. Another impactful experience that solidified my global perspective was assisting foreign attorneys with trademark infringement matters in SAARC countries. Additionally, I had the opportunity to introduce new perspectives to the firm’s trademark practice, which led to a drastic increase in their filings. This invaluable exposure allowed me to read, understand, and apply IP laws in various foreign jurisdictions, especially within Asian countries, further cementing my dedication to this domain.
After working with prominent law firms, what inspired you to branch out and establish your own practice? What were some of the major challenges you faced during this transition, and how did you navigate them?
Establishing my own practice and ultimately my own office was always a core aspiration. While working with Ex- law firms, I actively immersed myself in client counselling, meetings, networking, and client acquisition, eventually realizing I excelled in these areas. By the time I decided to make the leap, I felt confident in my ability to navigate the challenges that lay ahead.
The opportune moment arrived post-COVID-19, amidst a global surge in entrepreneurial spirit. I decided to take the plunge, giving myself a pragmatic six-month window to explore the market. This time, I had a well-thought-out Plan B, given my increased responsibilities. I am incredibly satisfied, happy, and grateful for the overwhelming positive response and trust I received not only from my professional network but also from my husband. What began as an individual practice has since grown into an LLP, offering a diverse range of services beyond IP, including Data Protection, Privacy Laws, Cyber Laws, Entertainment Laws, Legal Metrology, POSH, Litigation, and General Corporate matters. My portfolio expanded organically, driven by my clients’ evolving needs.
A unique challenge emerged during this transition, one that I found both amusing and concerning. I received calls, on multiple occasions, demanding justification for starting my individual practice. These calls explicitly instructed me not to approach former firms’ clients or even to redirect any clients who might approach me in my individual capacity. Such demands from senior industry figures were not only illogical but also fundamentally unacceptable. Indeed, it felt like an attempt to threaten, suppress, and dominate me. But, this act inadvertently bolstered my confidence, affirming that I was on the right track and destined for something significant.
My belief has always been, “There are plenty of fish in the sea; go and catch yours.” I am immensely proud to state that my first 50 clients were acquired purely through my own efforts and network, not by “stealing” or personally soliciting from any previous firm. This is a point I’ve rarely discussed publicly, known only to my closest friends. Naturally, I chose to ignore those unwarranted demands, focusing instead on testing and implementing my own ideas. I am proud to say that I have never had to proactively solicit work from clients. Instead, my clients, friends, family, my husband, and my business partner have organically become my most effective brand ambassadors.
You’ve worked on over 3000 trademark applications across jurisdictions. Could you share a particularly complex or memorable case that left a lasting impact on you professionally?
Yes, indeed. Each and every case and application has its own unique journey with its challenges and surprises. One particularly memorable case that left a lasting impact on me professionally involved a situation where the infringers were, surprisingly, a group of my client’s own students. They had copied my client’s domain name with deceptively similar words and spellings, leading to clear trademark infringement and cyber-squatting.
The complexity arose from the existing relationship between my client and these individuals. A direct legal enforcement action, while legally justifiable, would have severely damaged those relations. Therefore, my approach had to be non-conventional. Instead of issuing a formal legal notice, we had to very politely communicate with them, explaining the legal implications and amicably requesting them to take down the domain name and refrain from future use.
This case was a significant learning experience for me. It taught me that legal solutions aren’t always black and white, and understanding the human element can lead to a far more satisfactory and sustainable outcome for all parties involved.
As a Trademark Facilitator and mentor under the Start-up India initiative, how would you assess the current level of IP awareness among Indian startups? What more can be done to foster a stronger culture of IP protection in the startup ecosystem?
As a Trademark Facilitator and mentor under the Start-up India initiative, I’ve seen India’s startup ecosystem flourish since 2015. While many startups are aware of IP’s existence, there’s a significant lack of strategic understanding in approaching IP registrations. Even after a decade of Start-up India Scheme, very few startups genuinely prioritize and secure their IPs seriously. Those who do are consistently at the forefront of the market, proving the competitive edge IP offers.
To foster a stronger IP culture, we must empower founders with foundational IP knowledge, which shall help them to identify their IP assets. Also, this would prevent them from being misled and enable them to proactively integrate IP protection into their business strategy, which is crucial for long-term success.
You’ve presented research and spoken at international conferences in Singapore and China. How have these global engagements shaped your professional outlook and influenced your long-term vision?
My global engagements, especially the ARCIALA research conference in Singapore and fellowship in China, profoundly shaped my professional outlook. Initially seeking research opportunities in IP, these experiences offered me an invaluable global perspective from diverse international researchers. They provided strong connections and significantly deepened my understanding of the subject. This exposure solidified my long-term vision to practice IP with a broader, more interconnected view, constantly seeking to understand and adapt to the evolving international IP landscape.
Your extensive work across SAARC, GCC countries, and through the Madrid Protocol gives you a unique global perspective. What are some key considerations Indian IP practitioners should keep in mind while managing international trademark portfolios?
Having the opportunity to work on various international trademark assignments, definitely it becomes very important for us as Trademark Attorneys to go beyond eye on details, deadlines and trademark filing requirements of a particular country. It’s crucial to grasp the technical nuances of each country’s trademark law, such as “first-to-use” versus “first-to-file” systems, and ensure the mark is morally and culturally acceptable in that specific region. Thorough due diligence, understanding local language requirements, knowing the protection period, establishing strong connections with foreign attorneys, and being prepared for diverse enforcement procedures are all vital. This comprehensive approach is essential for effective global trademark management.
In addition to your legal practice, you’ve been a visiting lecturer for nearly seven years, work with an NGO, and have co-authored a book. How do you balance your professional responsibilities with these meaningful pursuits, and what drives you to stay engaged on so many fronts?
Balancing my legal practice with lecturing, NGO work as a POSH committee member, and co-authoring a book comes down to strategic time management and prioritizing urgency. I initially took lecturing roles outside office hours, and now, with a diverse practice, I focus on shorter courses and sessions. Co-authoring was part of a job role, yet it significantly advanced my research direction, while NGO work is primarily “as required on site” role.
So, the support and belief of the good people around me drives me across these varied engagements, which keeps me motivated and energized!
Looking back at your career and the successful practice you’ve built today, what were the key experiences that initially led you toward pursuing law? What moments or influences made you choose law as a career? Additionally, how did your time at NLU Gujarat shape and deepen your passion for the field?
I was drawn to law after witnessing how legal complexities often overwhelmed individuals and businesses, creating unnecessary barriers to their goals. A defining moment came during my undergraduate years when I saw a family dispute escalate simply due to lack of proper legal guidance. This showed me that law isn’t just about statutes, but about people and relationships.
NLU Gujarat was transformative. The practical learning approach, diverse legal exposure through moot courts and internships, and exceptional faculty mentorship developed the critical thinking skills that guide my practice today. The institution’s emphasis on real-world application deepened my understanding of law’s potential to create positive change.
In the early years of your practice, what experiences helped you build a stronger understanding of the law and laid the foundation for your career? Could you share some key lessons from that period that would benefit our young readers?
Working across different practice areas initially provided invaluable insights into how various legal disciplines intersect. A pivotal experience was advising a struggling startup on restructuring, which required understanding corporate law, employment regulations, and tax implications simultaneously teaching me that modern legal practice demands interdisciplinary expertise.
Key lessons for young practitioners: embrace every learning opportunity regardless of how mundane it seems; develop strong communication skills to translate complex legal concepts into actionable business advice; build relationships based on trust and transparency; and stay curious; the law evolves constantly, and successful practitioners evolve with it.
What inspired you to establish your own practice? What were some of the challenges you faced in the beginning, and how did you navigate those obstacles?
I wanted to create a practice that delivered personalized, innovative legal solutions while maintaining the highest ethical standards combining the expertise of larger firms with the agility and client focus of boutique practices.
Initial challenges included building credibility, establishing a client base, and managing financial constraints while maintaining service quality.
I navigated these through strategic relationship building, delivering exceptional results on smaller matters to build credibility, and focusing on becoming specialists in chosen practice areas rather than trying to be everything to everyone. We never compromised on quality to win business – a principle that ultimately distinguished us in the market.
Cross-border transactions often involve navigating multiple legal frameworks and jurisdictions. How do you manage the complexities of these deals? What are the critical legal considerations businesses must keep in mind when engaging in cross-border transactions, and how do you ensure compliance with international legal standards while advising clients?
We manage complexity through systematic due diligence across all relevant jurisdictions, collaborating with trusted local counsel worldwide. Our framework maps regulatory requirements, tax implications, and compliance obligations for each jurisdiction involved.
Critical considerations include foreign investment regulations, tax treaty implications, currency exchange controls, sector-specific restrictions, dispute resolution mechanisms, and enforcement challenges across different legal systems.
We ensure compliance through jurisdiction-specific checklists, regular regulatory updates, and maintaining relationships with qualified local counsel. Our approach emphasizes early identification of potential conflicts between legal systems and structuring transactions to minimize regulatory friction while ensuring comprehensive documentation that anticipates cross-jurisdictional enforcement challenges.
With the evolving landscape of CSR compliance, what trends do you foresee emerging in the near future? Additionally, could you share how you guide clients in aligning their CSR strategies with both domestic and international laws?
Emerging trends include mandatory climate disclosures, supply chain responsibility requirements, and stakeholder-centric reporting. We’re seeing convergence between ESG standards and domestic CSR requirements, with increased focus on measurable impact assessment and integration with business strategy.
We guide clients by conducting comprehensive assessments of applicable domestic and international obligations, then developing CSR strategies that exceed minimum compliance while creating genuine business value. Our approach emphasizes robust documentation, impact measurement systems, regular compliance audits, and integration of CSR considerations into business decision-making processes.
Start-ups face several challenges when it comes to establishing their legal foundations. What are the most common legal hurdles that start-ups should address early on? How do you assist them with crucial aspects like intellectual property rights, employee agreements, and business structuring?
Common hurdles include inadequate business structuring, insufficient IP protection, poorly drafted founder and employee agreements, and underestimating regulatory compliance requirements.
Our approach begins with comprehensive business structure analysis considering investment plans, tax efficiency, and regulatory requirements. For IP, we conduct thorough audits and establish protection strategies including trademark registrations and robust confidentiality frameworks. Employee agreements require balancing company protection with talent attraction—we draft comprehensive contracts and establish equity participation frameworks.
We emphasize establishing good governance practices early, including board structures, decision-making processes, and compliance systems that become crucial as startups scale.
Given your expertise in handling family estate disputes, what aspects of family law do you feel need more focus or reform? How do you approach succession planning for high-net-worth families, especially when dealing with complex cross-border elements?
Family law needs greater focus on alternative dispute resolution and preventive legal structures. The current system often exacerbates conflicts rather than resolving them constructively.
For high-net-worth succession planning, we begin with comprehensive family and asset mapping, then develop flexible structures adaptable to changing circumstances. Cross-border elements require careful jurisdiction selection, appropriate trust structures, and documentation that anticipates enforcement issues across different legal systems.
Our methodology emphasizes family governance frameworks including family constitutions, communication protocols, and dispute resolution mechanisms, with regular plan updates to reflect changing family circumstances and regulatory environments.
Trust formation is often a delicate issue, especially for business families. Could you elaborate on your approach to setting up trusts and advising clients on succession planning? What are some common misconceptions businesses or individuals might have about trust formation, and how do you address these?
Our approach begins with thorough understanding of family dynamics, business structures, and long-term goals, then designing flexible trust structures that serve multiple purposes while maintaining adaptability.
Common misconceptions include believing trusts provide absolute asset protection, assuming trust formation means loss of control, and underestimating ongoing compliance requirements. Many don’t understand differences between trust types and their specific applications.
We address these through comprehensive education about trust mechanics, clear explanation of rights and obligations, and realistic assessment of benefits and limitations. For business families, we focus on structures facilitating business continuity while providing appropriate family financial security, often involving multiple trust vehicles and governance frameworks for family participation in business decisions.
Your commitment to fostering diversity in the legal profession is commendable. How do you ensure aspiring lawyers have the mentorship and opportunities they need within your firm? What qualities do you look for when mentoring young lawyers, and what advice do you offer them as they navigate the legal profession?
We ensure opportunities through inclusive hiring practices, structured mentorship programs pairing senior and junior lawyers across practice areas, meaningful work assignments, and regular professional development workshops.
In mentoring, I look for intellectual curiosity, ethical grounding, strong communication skills, and resilience. Technical skills can be taught, but these fundamental qualities determine long-term success.
My advice focuses on building strong foundational skills, maintaining ethical standards regardless of pressure, developing business acumen alongside legal expertise, and understanding that successful careers are built on relationships and reputation. Most importantly, find meaning in your work – legal practice provides unique opportunities to make positive differences in people’s lives.
With your demanding career and leadership role, how do you personally manage work-life balance? Additionally, how do you encourage your team to maintain a healthy balance while excelling in their roles?
I maintain balance through disciplined time management, prioritizing high-impact activities, delegating effectively, and protecting family time. Sustainable success comes from managing energy, not just time.
For the team, we’ve implemented realistic project timelines, adequate staffing, flexible work arrangements where possible, and measure success by results and client satisfaction, not hours worked. We encourage time off and maintain open communication about workload concerns.
Most importantly, I model healthy balance myself. Teams take cues from leadership, so demonstrating that it’s possible to excel professionally while maintaining personal well-being encourages others to do the same. We celebrate achievements and recognize that sustainable careers require attention to both professional and personal development.
With a specialized academic background in Intellectual Property Law and experience in arbitration, what first sparked your interest in these fields, and how did you chart your path toward building a niche?
My interest in Intellectual Property (IP) Law and Arbitration developed early during my legal education, as I observed how legal structures could facilitate innovation and enable efficient dispute resolution. The interplay of creativity, commerce, and protection within IP law captivated me, while arbitration appealed to my inclination toward structured, time-bound mechanisms for conflict resolution. Recognizing their growing relevance in a globalized, technology-driven world, I pursued a specialization in Intellectual Property Law and complemented it with a Diploma in Cyber Law and a Diploma in Alternate Dispute Resolution. Early in my career, I had the opportunity to work on both IP-centric transactions and arbitration matters, particularly for technology and media clients. This exposure helped me build core competence in these areas. Over the years, I have advised and represented clients in complex IP disputes, as well as high-value arbitrations, thereby developing a niche, multidisciplinary litigation and advisory practice.
With over 12 years of diverse litigation experience across multiple domains, what inspired you to establish your own independent practice? What were some of the initial challenges you faced, and how did you overcome them?
The decision to establish my independent practice was a natural evolution in my professional journey. After years of working with reputed law firms and handling high-stakes litigation and arbitration, I felt the need to channel my experience into building a practice that reflects my values and strategic approach.
Presently, I am regularly engaged by clients and fellow advocates for representation and strategic assistance in matters before the Supreme Court of India, the High Court of Delhi, the NCLT/NCLAT, NCDRC, and Arbitral Tribunals. My practice spans a wide range of civil, commercial, and arbitration matters, with a strong emphasis on tailoring strategy to suit the forum and the nature of the dispute.
That said, the transition to independent practice came with its own set of challenges, particularly as a first-generation lawyer. Unlike those with family legacies in the profession, I did not inherit a chamber, a network, or a ready set of clients. Every brief, every introduction, every recommendation had to be earned through consistent effort and credibility.
One of the most immediate hurdles was building a reliable and cohesive team that aligned with the standards and expectations I had set. Another was gaining visibility and establishing credibility in a competitive legal ecosystem where institutional names often carry weight. Financial unpredictability, especially during the initial phase, was a very real concern.
But persistence, the trust of long standing clients, and the support of peers in the profession helped me navigate those early hurdles. Looking back, the absence of a safety net made the process harder, but it also made every milestone more meaningful.
You’ve represented various corporates and associations before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. What are some key strategic and procedural considerations when preparing matters for the Apex Court?
As an Advocate-on-Record, I am closely involved in ensuring procedural compliance at every stage, whether it is curating the record, certifying pleadings, or meeting filing timelines. The smallest procedural oversight can delay a matter or, worse, affect its prospects, so attention to detail is non-negotiable.
Strategically, it’s essential to identify and frame substantial questions of law that warrant the Court’s attention, especially when seeking special leave. The task is not just to argue well but to demonstrate why the matter deserves to be heard at the apex level. This often involves a careful study of precedents, anticipating the judicial approach, and distilling complex factual matrices into crisp legal propositions.
When representing corporates or industry bodies, an added layer of responsibility arises, ensuring that litigation strategy is aligned with their internal governance, compliance protocols, and long-term commercial outlook. In such cases, the objective is not only to secure relief but to do so in a manner that reinforces institutional credibility and legal preparedness.
Ultimately, preparation for the Supreme Court is not about volume of material, but the clarity of thought and brevity in presentation. Every word counts and every argument must serve a precise purpose.
With the rapid rise of technology including AI and digital platforms, how do you see the landscape of dispute resolution changing, particularly in the realms of IP and commercial litigation?
The rapid evolution of technology, particularly artificial intelligence, and digital platforms, is fundamentally reshaping the legal landscape. In the realms of commercial litigation and arbitration, we are already seeing an increased reliance on digital evidence, virtual hearings, and AI-enabled legal research tools.
In the context of intellectual property, technology has created both opportunities and complex challenges. Issues like digital piracy, AI-generated works, and automated infringement detection demand legal interpretations that go beyond traditional IP frameworks. The pace of innovation often outstrips legislative response, placing greater responsibility on lawyers and Courts to bridge that gap with well-reasoned, forward-looking arguments.
From a procedural standpoint, the integration of e-filing systems, hybrid hearings, and digital evidence management has significantly improved access to justice and case efficiency. These changes, initially introduced out of necessity during the pandemic, have now become institutional features, and rightly so.
Looking ahead, I believe technology will not just augment dispute resolution but redefine it. Online dispute resolution (ODR), smart contracts, and AI-assisted decision-making are likely to become more mainstream. For practitioners, this underscores the need to stay agile, continually upgrade their understanding of emerging technologies, and reimagine advocacy in a digital-first environment.
Having said that, while AI can assist in streamlining legal tasks, it cannot substitute the nuanced reasoning, ethical judgment, and strategic insight that human intelligence brings to the legal process. Law is not only about rules, it is about context, persuasion, and the ability to interpret human conduct. These are areas where human advocates remain irreplaceable. It will likely take considerable time, and fundamental shifts in legal philosophy, before AI can meaningfully replicate that depth of analysis and discretion. For Advocates today, the challenge lies in integrating new-age tools without losing the craft of advocacy.
In advising international clients, especially in technology-related matters, how do you navigate cross-border legal systems? Do you feel India’s evolving legal framework is now aligned with global standards in this space?
Advising international clients requires not just legal expertise but also cultural and regulatory sensitivity. I ensure that our advisory is aligned with both Indian legal requirements and the client’s jurisdictional obligations. This involves collaborating with foreign counsel, staying updated on global developments, and contextualizing advice for transnational operations. India’s legal framework, particularly in arbitration, data protection, fintech, and IP, is increasingly converging with global best practices, though there is room for further harmonization. With the evolving jurisprudence in arbitration law, cyber and tech law, India is on the right path to becoming a robust jurisdiction for global business.
Having handled numerous high-stakes arbitrations, what are the key challenges you’ve encountered? In your opinion, how is Alternate Dispute Resolution shaping the future of dispute resolution in India?
Arbitration, particularly in sectors like construction, infrastructure, and real estate, often brings with it layered complexities, voluminous records, overlapping issues, technical details, and multi-party coordination. One of the foremost challenges I have encountered is ensuring that the presentation of evidence remains streamlined and digestible for the arbitral tribunal, especially when dealing with expert reports, engineering documents, or financial data spanning several years.
Coordinating with technical experts, be it structural engineers, accountants, or valuation professionals, also demands careful calibration. Their inputs must be integrated in a legally coherent manner while preserving clarity. Additionally, procedural inefficiencies, such as fragmented hearings, delayed cross-examinations, or challenges in securing timely interim relief, can dilute the effectiveness of arbitration if not proactively managed.
Enforcement remains another practical concern. Winning an award is one part of the battle; ensuring its timely execution, particularly in cross-border contexts, can often test both patience and strategy.
That said, I firmly believe that Alternate Dispute Resolution is no longer just an alternative, it is becoming central to the evolution of commercial justice in India. With institutional arbitration gaining maturity, greater judicial support for party autonomy, and statutory amendments aimed at reducing timelines, ADR is now seen not only as a faster route to resolution but also as one that offers confidentiality, flexibility, and sector-specific expertise.
In my own practice, I have seen clients grow increasingly open to ADR mechanisms, not only for dispute resolution but also for pre-dispute risk management. The shift is encouraging and, in many ways, necessary for a modern, efficient legal ecosystem.
What guidance would you offer to young lawyers who aim to develop a multifaceted practice in litigation and advisory, especially in specialized areas such as intellectual property and arbitration?
Young lawyers have more access today than ever, judgments are online, mentors are more approachable, and the legal market is broader. But with this comes pressure to specialize early.
My advice is to not to rush it. Spend your first few years building a strong base helps immensely. Attend court. Observe. Take notes. I still remember sitting in the back row of a courtroom during my early days, watching a senior counsel argue a simple interim application. The way he positioned facts, paused, and responded taught me more than any classroom could. That moment stayed with me.
Do not hesitate to ask questions or seek feedback. Invest in courses, read beyond textbooks, and keep your curiosity alive. Most importantly, find mentors who do not just teach the law, but help shape how you think. I have been lucky in that regard and I try to offer the same to juniors in my chamber.
Honestly, there is no one-size-fits-all formula. But if you stay honest with your work, remain open to learning, and surround yourself with people who push you to grow, the law has a way of rewarding your efforts.
Being enrolled as an Advocate-on-Record at the Supreme Court is a significant professional milestone. How has this achievement influenced your practice, and what additional responsibilities does it entail?
Becoming an Advocate-on-Record at the Supreme Court has been one of the most defining moments of my professional journey. It has brought me honor and repute. It is both a privilege and a significant responsibility, one that has deepened my involvement in constitutional, commercial, and regulatory litigation at the highest level.
The designation has brought with it the ability to independently file and conduct matters before the Supreme Court, which naturally expands both the scope and depth of my practice. It has also instilled a heightened sense of accountability, not just to clients, but to the institution of the Court itself. Every filing under my name carries the weight of professional integrity and procedural precision.
As a first-generation practitioner, the journey to clearing the Advocate-on-Record examination and earning the trust of clients in this capacity has been particularly meaningful. The recognition has not only enhanced my standing within the legal fraternity but has also opened doors to more complex and high-stakes litigation assignments, often requiring strategic foresight, coordination with senior counsel, and deep research.
Managing a demanding legal practice, especially as an AOR, can be intense. How do you maintain personal well-being amidst professional commitments? What does unwinding and relaxation look like for you?
Managing a demanding legal practice, especially in the role of an Advocate-on-Record, requires more than just professional discipline. It calls for conscious balance, perspective, and self-care. The pace can be relentless, with high expectations and tight timelines, but I have learned over the years that sustainability in this profession depends on how well you manage your energy, not just your time.
The unwavering support of my family has been the bedrock of that balance. Their patience and encouragement, especially during peak court seasons or when critical matters are listed back-to-back, provide a sense of stability that anchors me amidst the intensity of litigation. Knowing that there is understanding and reassurance outside the courtroom makes the pressures inside it more manageable.
I also try to be deliberate about switching off. Reading, particularly outside of law, is something I turn to regularly. Even a short walk or a quiet break during the day can bring a surprising amount of clarity. Setting boundaries around work hours and consciously unplugging when possible has helped me stay mentally alert and emotionally steady.
Ultimately, it is the combined support system at home and at the workplace that sustains consistent performance and personal fulfillment in this profession.
With nearly 12 years of impressive experience in the legal field, what initially inspired you to pursue a career in law? Which aspects of the profession resonated with you the most, and how did your time at NALSAR University of Law shape your legal journey?
I wish I had a more elevated answer to give you on what inspired me to become a lawyer. I think I was 10 years old when I got into a playful argument with my uncle. His son in law watched the entire episode and causally remarked that I should become a lawyer. I said “sure” and from that day I didn’t even conceive of an alternative career. In short, I have my brother in law to credit (or blame, depending on how the day is going).
The way I’ve looked at the profession has changed quite a bit from the time I chose to become a lawyer. Like many other first generation lawyers, my understanding of what a lawyer does was informed by TV shows, movies and books. Of course, NALSAR and my internships during my time in law school made me realise the difference between fiction and reality. During my five years in law school, I was fairly certain that I would litigate – though for the longest time I don’t think I really knew why. Quite naively, I conceived of a career as a lawyer from only two perspectives – litigating lawyer and transactional lawyer. I had tried my hand at corporate law during my internships, and by the process of elimination I knew I did not want to become a transactional lawyer. I also had a keen interest in debating and public speaking, so a career that enabled me to speak to an audience daily for living seemed the right fit.
Your LL.M. studies at the prestigious University of Michigan Law School must have been a transformative experience. How did those studies influence your practice, particularly in the fields of competition law, constitutional law, and criminal justice? Were there any specific courses or professors whose impact on your legal career has been particularly significant?
My LLM program at the University of Michigan Law School was both enriching and perhaps one of the toughest things I’ve done in my life. While I can’t say for sure if the content of the law that I learnt has impacted my career (yet), Michigan Law’s emphasis on teaching you to think like a lawyer definitely has. The professors who taught me the courses were experts at the Socratic method, and each day and each class felt like a very public final exam. Particularly, courses by Prof Don Herzog (Political Corruption), Prof Eve Primus (Criminal Procedure) and Prof Richard Primus (Constitutional Law) were life changing. The professors focused more on making us think of a legal argument from both sides seamlessly and sharpen our legal reasoning abilities. I also got the opportunity to take up courses outside the law school, and had the privilege to be selected for a leadership program by the Stephen M Ross School of Business. So I also got to learn a lot outside the law in Michigan.
Having had the privilege to work with eminent legal figures such as Mr. P.S. Narasimha, the Additional Solicitor General of India, and Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar at the Delhi High Court, what were the key lessons you learned from them? How did these experiences shape your approach to the practice of law, and which habits or skills from these mentors have you integrated into your own professional style?
After NALSAR, I joined Dr. S. Muralidhar, then Judge of the Delhi High Court, as his law clerk for a year. I believe I started to think seriously about the context of the law – and its nuts and bolts – only after joining his office. More importantly, the biggest lesson I learnt during my time as his clerk was that the profession isn’t about me – it isn’t about how I am perceived in court while arguing, how much fame and fortune I get through being a lawyer, or how many important cases I’ve done, but about who I represent and their lived reality.
Carrying this understanding of the profession, I next joined the chambers of Mr. PS Narasimha, then the Additional Solicitor General of India, for two years before I left for my LL.M. In those two years, I had the chance to be part of some landmark cases like the challenge to the NJAC and the challenge to criminal defamation laws. Working with Mr. PS Narasimha — now Justice Narasimha — was a fantastic experience, as I learnt how to at once look at the big picture while handling a case and analyse precedent granularly.
Perhaps most importantly, working under both of them taught me about the value of giving space to a junior lawyer – space to think, to express himself, and to have the freedom to be wrong.
You have represented a Member of Parliament before the High Court of Karnataka in a public interest litigation challenging the orders issued under Section 144 CrPC by the Government of Karnataka in Bengaluru. What were the key legal arguments you put forth in the case, and how did you navigate the complexities and high stakes involved in such a significant matter?
When the client approached us, given the time sensitivities involved, we only had about three or four hours to draft, file, get the matter listed and brief our senior counsel. But despite the short timelines and the pressure of getting the matter heard on time, a bunch of counsel who were representing similar petitioners got together and helped us in the process of filing and listing the matter – exemplifying the collaborative nature of litigation in general, and our bar in particular.
In terms of the merits of the matter, our petition started off focusing on constructing arguments on the values that the Constitution espouses and the meaning of the right to free speech and the right to protest. However, at the time of briefing and during arguments, our senior counsel decided to take a more practical approach to the matter by arguing on administrative law grounds – specifically, whether the orders were issued in a procedurally proper manner, and with reasons. This taught us the value of knowing when to call on a bench to make value-laden calls on the content of rights like free speech and the right to protest, and when to just focus on more objective standards of what the letter of the law permits and prohibits. This approach eventually helped the petitioners win the case, and made me realise the merit of developing tightly reasoned and irrefutable arguments — far from the type that make headlines.
After working with a range of esteemed lawyers and law firms, what motivated you to establish your own practice? What were some of the initial challenges you faced in this transition, and how did you overcome them to establish a successful practice?
Whether I’ve established a successful practice is for time to tell. I suppose I, like most litigating lawyers, always wanted to set up my own practice after working for a few years under someone. And as many litigators will tell you, a big part of being a litigating lawyer is being at the right place and at the right time. Before setting up my own practice, I had the chance to handle some of my own clients while being part of Arista Chambers, run by Promod Nair – now a senior counsel — in 2019. During my time at Arista, I slowly built up a base of clients largely through word of mouth. Then Covid hit and a lot changed. By January 2021, it felt like the time was right to start my own practice.
The real challenge that I faced – and perhaps continue to face – is more internal than anything that involves the actual practice of the law. I don’t know if this is an experience every other litigator has but, for me, I kept (or keep) changing the goalposts. Initially, when I started off, my concerns were about the number of clients and matters I had; this soon changed, and I started to worry about whether I was earning enough to stay on top of things. Very quickly, I moved on to worrying about the kind of matters I was doing and how much of a role I had in various matters. Rinse, repeat. So, essentially, I found myself stressing about different things relating to a career in litigation. Today, I guess I’ve become a bit better at getting some distance from all this, but I would be lying if I said I’ve completely moved beyond these challenges.
You’ve represented an AI startup in the past. How do you see the future of AI and technology law evolving, particularly in relation to intellectual property rights, data privacy, and regulatory frameworks? What challenges do you anticipate in balancing innovation with legal protections in this rapidly advancing field?
This may sound like a cliché, but the biggest challenge, I suppose, will be to see whether the law can keep up with technology that appears to be evolving every few months. We’re already seeing this play out live in the Delhi High Court with ANI taking OpenAI to court for copyright infringement. It’ll be interesting to see how the court applies the current copyright regime to deal with technology that was not even conceived at the time the legislation was enacted. The same goes for data privacy. Machine learning technology is rapidly evolving, and I believe the current consent-based approach to data privacy will be tested. I’m not sure how consent can be practically obtained for every instance of use of data when you consider how Gen-AI repurposes data continuously for new outcomes. We may therefore need to imagine a different, more comprehensive data privacy framework for machine learning – or perhaps a separate regulation policy – which not only accounts for the growth and development of the sector, but also keeps at its centre the individual whom the sector is supposed to ultimately serve.
With your extensive experience spanning constitutional law, commercial disputes, and more, what aspects of the litigation field continue to inspire and drive you? Looking ahead, what vision do you have for both your own career and the future of your firm and how do you balance your personal life with such a demanding career?
Three aspects mainly – firstly, I absolutely love the theatre of it all. I like thinking about the delivery of the argument, what style works before which judge, what the judge is thinking at any given point, how to craft the argument before the delivery, and finally the actual delivery of the argument. Secondly, no two days in litigation are the same. One day we are fighting a contentious shareholder dispute; the next day we are going up against the state to protect a farmer’s rights. I’m not sure there are very many professions that enable such diversity in work. Thirdly, every once in a while, you get to represent someone who has been left out by the system.
My interest in litigation naturally extends to wanting to nurture those who will shape its future (something I’ve gained immensely from thanks to my previous bosses). At Sadananda & Prasad, we’ve been trying to make it a sort of incubation chamber for future lawyers and a safe space to develop as a lawyer. I believe every good litigator eventually has the dream of starting off on their own, and we hope to create a space where lawyers can come, learn, and start to grow their own practice while not being afraid to fail. That is our vision, and we hope in time this vision is realised.
Of course, dedication to this vision, and to the profession as a whole, is demanding. That naturally leads to the question of personal balance. I used to try to unwind by either playing a sport or noodling on the guitar or piano. Now I have a 16-month-old, and I spend a significant chunk of my time pretending to be a monkey for her sake. Truth be told, personally, nothing is more stress-relieving.
What advice would you give to law students aspiring to build a career like yours? What key skills or qualities do you believe are essential for success in these fields? Your journey serves as an inspiration for many, and any advice from you would be invaluable to aspiring legal professionals.
The role of luck is frankly quite underrated. You may be the best legal mind in the room but still not get the opportunities to showcase it merely because it just isn’t your time. I’ve seen far better lawyers than me give up on litigation simply because of this. So my advice to aspiring litigators would be to just wait for it and don’t give up. Be patient and equanimous. Everyone’s time comes in litigation. In the meantime, be prepared for that moment. Observe and learn from your seniors and peers; know the law – the letter of the law, its logic, and finally its actual practice, so that when your chance comes – which it will – you’re ready to take it. And as my ex-boss often insisted, remember, it’s not about you.
Coming from a commerce background, what initially inspired you to pursue law? Was it a long-standing goal, or did your interest in the legal field evolve over time?
Like most 18-year-olds, I had little clue of what I wanted to do with my life. The only streams that most people around me suggested were engineering or medicine, but I knew those weren’t for me. Not because I didn’t respect those fields, but they just didn’t click with who I was. I ended up in commerce because I enjoyed business and finance as it felt naturally coming to me. Toward the end of my degree, I started preparing for CA like most commerce students do. But halfway through, I realized I was just going through the motions. It wasn’t exciting me.
The real turning point was completely random. I was at the canteen at ILS Law College, Pune, chatting with a friend who was studying law. He started talking about constitutional law, contracts, torts and at that point something clicked. The way he described these subjects made me realize law could be the perfect blend of intellectual challenge and real-world impact I was looking for.
I applied to ILS that same year. Best decision I ever made. What I love about this journey is that my commerce background wasn’t wasted, in fact it actually gives me an edge. When I’m advising startups or corporations today, I understand both the legal framework and the business reality. Law isn’t just rules on paper; it’s a tool to make business happen. My advice to young people feeling lost? Don’t panic if you don’t have it all figured out. Stay curious, take calculated risks, and trust that the dots will connect eventually.
You began your legal journey with a prestigious law firm in Delhi. What drew you specifically to intellectual property law, and what early experiences deepened your interest and shaped your expertise in this domain?
I have to credit Prof. Neelima Bhadbade at ILS Law College, Pune for planting the IP seed. Back then, intellectual property was still relatively niche in India, not like today where many are aware of it. She made it fascinating by connecting Indian law with international cases and showing us how IP actually worked in the real world.
Getting campus recruited by an IP firm in Delhi was lucky timing. This Firm then was a small team of 7-8 people, which meant I couldn’t hide in a corner doing research all day. I was thrown into the deep end patent filings, trademark disputes, copyright issues and other wide spectrum of IP practice. My mentor back then, one of the founding partners thankfully gave me real responsibility early on. Scary at the time, but invaluable in hindsight. My personal rule was simple: “never say no to any assignment”. I’d stay late figuring things out, reading cases, calling up senior colleagues with questions. Resources weren’t as easily available as they are now, we had to dig for everything. But that struggle taught me to really understand the fundamentals.
The breakthrough for me was learning to translate complex legal concepts into practical business advice. That’s what clients actually appreciate, not a lecture on case law, but clear guidance on what they should do next. That skill of making law accessible and actionable has been crucial throughout my career.
What keeps me passionate about IP after two decades? The field never stops evolving. From AI-generated content to digital piracy to blockchain, there’s always a new challenge that requires you to think differently.
After beginning in a law firm environment, you transitioned into a corporate role. What motivated this change, and what key differences did you observe in terms of the challenges, culture, and expectations in both settings?
This transition wasn’t something I planned. It happened organically. After several years at the firm, the leadership decided to launch an IP outsourcing company to offer specialized services like patent searches, docketing, and portfolio management. They asked me to lead the IP products division, and I thought, “Why not? This could be interesting.”
The culture shock was immediate and eye-opening. At the law firm, everything revolved around legal excellence. We asked questions like could your argument hold up in court? Would the IP office accept your position? Quality was paramount, even if it took longer. In the corporate environment, it was all about scalable processes, efficiency metrics, and standardized deliverables. Instead of crafting legal strategy, I was building repeatable workflows.
The work rhythm was completely different too. Law firms operate on client urgency and if something’s critical, you work until it’s done. The corporate side was much more structured: 9 to 6 schedules, shift patterns for international clients, strict turnaround times. Frankly, I found it limiting. As a lawyer, I thrive on diving deep into complex problems, which doesn’t always fit neat time slots. What I missed most was the direct client relationship. In a law firm, we were solving strategic problems with general counsels and business leaders.
Having said that, this stint was brief but valuable. It clarified what I really wanted from my career. I realized I am energized by intellectual complexity, client relationships, and strategic problem solving, client facing and all of which led me back to traditional legal practice.
Sometimes you need to step outside your comfort zone to appreciate what you have.
What inspired you to establish your own legal practice, and how did you navigate the challenges of entrepreneurship in the legal field? Were there any pivotal moments that helped solidify your decision?
The decision wasn’t a lightning bolt moment, in fact it evolved over time. After years in firms and that corporate stint, I kept asking myself: “What if I built a practice the way I think it should be done?” The pivotal moment came when I realized if I didn’t try now, I might never get another chance.
Let me be blunt about what entrepreneurship in law really looks like:
Entrepreneurship is lonely. You can have great mentors and supportive family, but at 2 AM when you’re stressing about payroll or a difficult client, it’s just you. Nobody shares your failures, and the tough decisions are yours alone. Accept this reality upfront.
Think long-term or don’t bother. If you expect quick wins, you’ll be disappointed. Building a respected practice takes years. I tell lawyers considering this path: if you can’t commit to a 10 to 15 year horizon, stay in your firm job. Legal entrepreneurship is about compound growth. Trust builds slowly; reputation takes time.
Client relationships are everything. In a big firm, you inherit institutional relationships. As a founder, every client relationship starts from zero. I treated every matter, no matter how small, as if it were my biggest client. That approach led to repeat business and referrals.
Vision with flexibility. I was clear about wanting to create an IP practice that truly served business needs, not just legal technicalities. But I had to adapt constantly because of the client’s changing requirements, the evolution of the legal landscape and market dynamics shift.
Resilience isn’t optional. There will be lean months, difficult clients, and moments when you question everything. What got me through was believing deeply in what I was building and never compromising on quality.
My advice to aspiring legal entrepreneurs is “don’t rush it”. Master your craft first, understand the business of law, and build relationships. Then, when you’re ready, jump with both clarity and courage.
You’ve advised a wide range of clients, from startups and creative agencies to pharmaceutical companies and academic institutions. How do you adapt your IP strategies to meet the unique needs and growth stages of such varied industries?
After 20 years of practice, I’ve learned that one-size-fits-all IP strategies don’t work. My approach is what I call “protection with purpose” – every IP decision must align with the client’s specific business goals.
Startups and creative agencies need agility and smart prioritization. They’re usually cash constrained but need to show IP value to investors. I help them identify their crown jewels i.e. what IP assets will matter most for funding, partnerships, or market differentiation. We might focus on key trademarks, core provisional patents, or critical copyrights first, building the foundation they can expand later.
On the other hand, pharmaceutical companies require sophisticated, multi layered strategies. We’re managing global patent portfolios, complex licensing deals, regulatory considerations. Here, it’s about creating patent thickets around key products such that it covers the compound, formulation, manufacturing process, methods of use. The goal is sustainable competitive advantage across multiple markets.
Academic institutions have unique challenges – they want to commercialize research but maintain an open academic culture. The strategy focuses on identifying commercializable innovations early, filing strategic patents that don’t hinder further research, and creating licensing frameworks that benefit both the institution and industry partners.
The key is spending time upfront understanding each client’s business model, competitive landscape, and growth trajectory. I’m not just filing patents or trademarks – I’m helping build strategic moats around their most valuable assets. What remains constant across all clients is the principle that IP should enable business, not complicate it. Whether I’m talking to a first-time entrepreneur or a Fortune 500 general counsel, the conversation starts with understanding what they’re trying to achieve.
In your experience, what are the most common misconceptions businesses have about intellectual property protection? How do you guide them toward a more accurate understanding?
After two decades of client conversations, I see the same misconceptions repeatedly. Here are the big ones:
IP is only for big companies – Wrong. Some of the most valuable IP I’ve worked on came from small startups. Your trademark or patent could be your most important business asset, regardless of company size.
One filing protects me everywhere – IP rights are territorial. A US patent doesn’t protect you in India. A trademark registered in India doesn’t automatically work in Singapore. Global protection requires global strategy.
Once filed, I’m protected forever – IP requires active management. Patents expire, trademarks need renewal, portfolios need monitoring. I’ve seen valuable rights lost simply because nobody was paying attention to deadlines.
My company name gives me trademark rights – Company registration and trademark rights are separate. You can register “XYZ Private Limited” but that doesn’t give you exclusive rights to use “XYZ” as a brand.
How do I fix these misconceptions? Education and real examples. I show them competitors who got it right and ones who didn’t. I explain IP not as abstract legal concepts but as business tools. How a well-crafted patent portfolio helped one client raise Series A funding, or how trademark vigilance saved another from expensive rebranding.
The conversation always comes back to business strategy. IP isn’t just legal housekeeping, it’s competitive advantage, asset value, and risk management rolled into one.
How do you foresee IP law evolving over the next five years, especially considering emerging technologies, shifting regulatory landscapes, and global geopolitical dynamics?
IP law is entering one of the most dynamic periods in its history. As we look ahead to the next five years, I believe several major forces will reshape how businesses think about and manage their IP and how lawyers will need to adapt their counsel to serve clients effectively.
The rise of emerging technologies particularly AI and blockchain is challenging traditional IP frameworks. Questions such as who owns AI-generated content, or how blockchain can be used for IP rights management and enforcement are already pressing issues. I foresee regulatory bodies around the world moving to update and harmonise IP laws to address these new realities, though this evolution will be gradual and will require active dialogue between industry, policymakers, and the legal community.
We are also witnessing a shift toward a more strategic and data-driven approach to IP management. Businesses increasingly see IP not just as a legal shield but as a core business asset i.e. the one that supports valuation, drives licensing revenue, and enhances market position. In this context, IP lawyers must evolve from being pure legal technicians to becoming strategic advisors who can help clients align IP strategy with business goals. This is where my mantra of “protection with purpose” will be even more relevant going forward.
Geopolitical dynamics and regulatory fragmentation will continue to pose challenges for global IP strategy. With shifting alliances, evolving trade agreements, and varying national approaches to data protection and IP enforcement, businesses will need tailored, jurisdiction-specific advice. I also expect greater emphasis on IP enforcement and brand protection in digital environments, as e-commerce continues to grow, and cross-border infringement becomes more sophisticated.
In short, the future of IP law will be more complex, fast paced, and integrated with business strategy than ever before. As lawyers, we must be prepared to continuously learn, collaborate across disciplines, and help clients navigate this evolving landscape with foresight and purpose.
My advice to clients: don’t wait for perfect regulatory clarity. The companies that adapt quickly to these changes will have sustainable advantages. Those that wait will be playing catch-up.
Managing a demanding legal practice can be intense. How do you maintain a healthy work-life balance, and is there a personal philosophy or motto that has consistently guided you throughout your professional journey?
Let me be honest, work life balance in legal practice isn’t about perfect equilibrium every day. It’s about sustainable intensity over decades.
There are times when the practice demands everything like a major litigation heating up, international deals with tight deadlines or crisis management for key clients. During these periods, I’m all in. But I’ve learned to be equally intentional about recovery periods. When things are quieter, I actively recharge, usually with cycling, hitting the gym, watching mindless TV, or just sitting quietly doing nothing.
Building a strong team was crucial for long-term sustainability. Early in my practice, I tried to handle everything myself. That’s a recipe for burnout. Learning to delegate and trust others was one of my biggest growth areas. A well-functioning team isn’t just good for business, it’s what allows you to have a life outside the office.
My personal motto has evolved over the years, but what guides me now is “Do your best, let go of the rest, and expect less.” In a profession where perfectionism is expected, this mindset keeps me sane. I focus on delivering excellence where it truly matters, accept that I’m human and will make mistakes, and maintain perspective about what really counts in life. Law is what I do, not who I am.
Physical and mental health aren’t luxuries, they’re business necessities. You can’t serve clients well if you’re constantly stressed or burned out. I’ve made peace with the fact that some periods will be all-consuming, but I actively protect time for renewal.
What advice would you offer to young lawyers who aspire to work on IP law? Were there any specific habits, values, or resources that played a significant role in shaping your professional growth in this field?
For young lawyers aspiring to build a career in intellectual property law, my foremost advice is this – develop both depth and breadth. IP is a wonderfully multidisciplinary field, it sits at the intersection of law, technology, business and creativity. IP law is constantly evolving whether through landmark judgments, international treaties or emerging technologies like AI. Develop a habit of reading widely not just case law, but also industry reports, scientific advancements and business news. Always act with professionalism and respect for confidentiality. Develop a mindset of “protection with purpose”, understand why each IP asset matters to the client’s business, and align your advice accordingly.
Lastly, invest time in building mentorship relationships and learning from peers and seniors. In my own journey, I gained immensely from working under exceptional mentors who challenged me and gave me opportunities to grow.
After 20 years in IP practice, here’s what I wish someone had told me when I started:
1. Develop both depth and breadth: Master core IP law principles but also understand the business and innovation contexts you’ll be advising.
2. Adopt a mindset of continuous learning: Stay ahead of evolving IP law, emerging technologies (AI, blockchain), and global IP trends.
3. Build strong values early: Always practice with integrity and diligence
4. Embrace every opportunity to learn: Take on diverse assignments, large and small, and see every task as a learning opportunity.
5. Learn from inspiring seniors and build trust-based networks. These relationships will shape your growth.
After completing your Bachelor’s in Technology in Electronics and Communication, you decided to pursue a career in law. What inspired this shift, and how has your technical background contributed to your legal career?
While I was doing my undergraduate studies in Electronics and Communication Engineering, I developed a strong appreciation for structured problem-solving and analytical thinking. A pivotal moment came when I worked on a project involving video capturing and recognition technology for identifying letters and numbers on car plates. After dedicating significant time and effort to develop this innovation, I discovered that a subsequent batch had replicated my idea for their project. This sparked a deep curiosity in me on how I could protect my work and ensure exclusive rights over something I had created.
This realization led me to explore the legal frameworks that govern innovation and ownership. While I thoroughly enjoyed the technical challenges of engineering, I found myself increasingly drawn to the interplay between technology, commerce, and human interaction—how ideas are protected, commercialized, and integrated into society. This marked the beginning of my journey into the field of law and specially, intellectual property law. I decided to pursue law, with a clear objective to practice IP law once I graduate.
When I began my legal journey, I recognized a clear gap in the market—clients, much like myself in my engineering days, were increasingly seeking nuanced, technology-driven solutions to complex intellectual property challenges, particularly around ownership and innovation. In that moment, I knew I had found my calling.
How did your L.L.M. at Boston University School of Law shape your perspective on Intellectual Property law, and how have the skills and experiences gained there influenced your approach to high-stakes International and domestic IP litigation and advisory?
My LL.M. at Boston University School of Law was a transformative experience that significantly shaped my approach to Intellectual Property law. Beyond the rigorous academic curriculum, one of the most valuable takeaways was learning how to move beyond theoretical understanding and apply legal principles in a practical and commercial context. I had taken classes on trial court advocacy, legal writing, and related practical modules, the insights from which continue to guide my approach to legal practice even today.
Having students from all over the world, not only helped me build lasting professional relationships which I continue to maintain to this day, but also fostered a global legal mindset that has helped me while advising or litigating matters involving international stakeholders.
I strongly encourage those looking to specialize in a particular field of law to pursue a Master’s degree, as it offers both depth of knowledge and invaluable exposure to diverse legal perspectives.
Having worked with various prominent IP law firms, what motivated you to transition to establishing your own practice, what were the hurdles that you faced while founding Nikhil Chawla and Associates?
When I founded Nikhil Chawla and Associates, like with any new venture, the initial phase came with its share of challenges—building a client base, establishing credibility, and navigating the uncertainty that comes with stepping out independently. There were days where I found myself questioning my decision of starting on my own.
During this time, I had the opportunity to interact with several senior advocates. One piece of advice from Swathi Sukumar, Senior Advocate, particularly stayed with me—she said, “you just have to show up at the office every day, the work will eventually come.” That simple yet profound advice became a guiding principle for me in the early days, reinforcing the importance of persistence, presence, and consistency in building a practice.
6 months of feeling doubtful about everything and no sign of progress is the entry price that you have to pay before things start to move in the right direction. Having said that, with relentless hard work and unwavering dedication, you will find yourself moving in the right direction—without it, you risk getting lost in the vast sea of lawyers around you.
As a dual-qualified lawyer and an AI enthusiast and Certified Information Privacy Professional, how do you see the intersection of AI, data protection, and privacy laws evolving in the near future?
The intersection of AI, data protection, and privacy law has become, if not already, the most consequential area of legal and regulatory evolution in the modern era.
With the enactment of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, India has taken a foundational step toward codifying privacy rights and data protection obligations. However, the law still leaves several gaps when it comes to regulating AI-specific concerns such as algorithmic transparency, automated decision-making, and the right to explanation. In parallel, India is also formulating its National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence and has published ethical AI guidelines through NITI Aayog. These developments signal the government’s intent to promote responsible AI while safeguarding individual rights.
All of us are already aware that AI has become omnipresent and part of our everyday lives. However, its widespread adoption also raises critical legal and ethical questions ranging from informed consent, purpose limitation, and data minimization to algorithmic accountability. In parallel, concerns around bias, discrimination, and automated profiling are becoming more pronounced. These issues are steadily making their way to the forefront of legal discourse, and our legal systems will soon be called upon to adjudicate upon this, drawing a clear Lakshman Rekha between what is permissible and what is not.
Going forward, professionals with a grounding in both law and technology will be key to shaping this transition, ensuring that innovation does not come at the cost of civil liberties. I believe the future will require lawyers who understand code, technologists who understand rights, and courts who can bridge both worlds.
Could you share your experience while representing a leading music label in a high-profile copyright infringement dispute against an internationally renowned hip-hop artist. How did you prepare for such a case and what were the key outcomes?
When I started my private practice, the first case I was entrusted with involved handling a dispute against the renowned hip hop/rap artist Bohemia. I was representing a music company that had entered into an exclusive artist agreement with Bohemia, which he breached by collaborating with other parties in violation of the agreement’s terms.
During our preparation for this case, we knew that seeking specific enforcement of personal service obligations was not permissible under the Specific Relief Act. However, we were able to identify a negative covenant in the agreement that prohibited him from collaborating with third-party labels during the term of the agreement. We also found legal precedents supporting the enforcement of such negative covenants in agreements involving personal qualifications.
As a result, on the very first day, we secured an ad interim order restraining Bohemia from working with any third-party labels for the remainder of the agreement’s term. This interim injunction ultimately paved the way for an early settlement.
After the settlement, Bohemia even released a track referencing the litigation. The success in the Bohemia matter opened the door for me to handle other high-profile media and entertainment disputes, including cases involving prominent artists such as Badshah and Satinder Sartaaj.
What advice would you offer to young professionals aspiring to follow in your footsteps and build successful careers in intellectual property, technology law, and commercial litigation?
Law is a profession that demands dedication and discipline, it is meant for those who truly love the law. Without that passion, it’s difficult to sustain the commitment the profession requires.
Talking from my own experience, when I had started my legal career, I sometimes relied on shortcuts instead of diligently reading statutes and studying case law. Over time, I came to realize that true success in this profession requires depth, being thorough with the law and cultivating a strong understanding of legal principles. Unfortunately, I see many young professionals today falling into the same trap. What we truly need are students and professionals committed to rigorous legal study and a genuine passion for the craft of law.
It is important to be working with a good mentor, someone who can guide, challenge, and shape you. Equally important is being at the right firm/advocate, where the work culture, values, and opportunities align with your long-term goals.
Coming from a commerce background, what inspired you to pursue a career in law? In what ways has your academic foundation in commerce complemented your legal journey, particularly in corporate or commercial legal matters?
While I began my journey in commerce, my deeper purpose was always rooted in empowerment—especially through education. I saw law as a transformative tool, not just to resolve disputes but to elevate people’s understanding of their own rights. That vision pushed me to transition into the legal field.
During my B.Com, I worked as an Internal Stock Auditor and Stock Researcher. That experience grounded me in the practical workings of the corporate world—from compliance intricacies to financial accountability. It didn’t just teach me numbers; it taught me how businesses breathe. So when I entered law, especially corporate and commercial law, I wasn’t looking at statutes in isolation—I understood the business realities behind them. This dual perspective has helped me serve clients with both strategic insight and legal precision. At every step, law has enabled me to blend purpose with profession—using my legal acumen to educate, empower, and break barriers, whether it’s through my professional practice or through initiatives like BLU.
How was your experience pursuing an LL.M. in Intellectual Property Rights and Information Technology? What drew you to this specialization over others, and how has it shaped your perspective on law and innovation?
Growing up as a millennial, I witnessed the Internet evolve from dial-up modems to streaming platforms, memes, and digital marketplaces. That transformation fascinated me. I was always curious about how technology shaped communication, expression, and even identity. At the same time, I was a budding writer—scribbling short stories, blogging, and researching how books get published. That’s when I stumbled upon the concept of Intellectual Property. It felt like unlocking a new superpower—realizing that ideas, like inventions or writings, had legal lives of their own. Back when I was in law school, IP wasn’t yet the buzzword it is today. But I could see its future relevance—how creativity and innovation would increasingly become the currency of our generation. That foresight, combined with my natural curiosity for tech and content, made IPR and IT Law a very intuitive choice for my LL.M. Pursuing this specialization gave me a profound appreciation of the balance between innovation and regulation. It shaped my ability to not only advise creators and tech companies but also advocate for ethical, accessible, and inclusive innovation. Today, whether I’m working on a deal, mentoring students through BLU, or speaking on digital rights, my perspective is shaped by that early blend of passion, foresight, and learning.
In the early phase of your career, you were drawn to academics. What were some of the key experiences during that time that deepened your understanding of law and the subjects you taught? What eventually motivated your transition from academia to law firm practice?
I’ve always had the heart of an academician. Even while pursuing my Master’s, I found myself teaching, mentoring, and constantly questioning the “why” behind every legal principle. That dual role—as both a student and a lecturer—helped me look at law from both sides of the lens: as a learner and a guide.
Among all the subjects I engaged with, Contract Law left a lasting imprint. It’s one of those timeless areas of law—centuries old yet constantly evolving. No matter how advanced technology becomes or how industries pivot, contracts remain the language through which businesses and individuals build trust. Teaching contracts made me realize how theory and practice often diverge, and that’s when the spark was lit—I wanted to experience how these doctrines come alive in boardrooms, negotiations, and deal-making. That desire to move beyond the black-letter law and engage with the real-world intricacies of business is what eventually drew me to law firm practice. I wanted to see how contracts function under pressure, in dynamic sectors, across jurisdictions—and how I, as a lawyer, could bring both legal integrity and commercial sensibility to the table. Even today, that academic lens hasn’t left me. Whether through social work or mentorship, I continue to teach—but now with the added richness of my experience and applied insight.
Transitioning to an in-house counsel role marks a significant shift in a legal career. You’ve worked with some of the biggest names in the media and entertainment sector. How have these roles differed from one another, and could you share one of the most challenging cases you encountered along the way?
Having worked both at a law firm and as in-house counsel, I’ve come to realize that the shift isn’t so much about a change in career—it’s a shift in perspective. In a firm, you operate as a specialist—often brought in to solve a specific legal problem. But as an in-house counsel, you’re a strategic partner. The role demands that you understand the pulse of the business, anticipate risks before they arise, and offer solutions that don’t just check the legal box, but help the business move forward with confidence. What’s unique about the media and entertainment sector is that it may appear as one unified industry, but it’s actually a convergence of many touchpoints—IP, contracts, advertising laws, digital platforms, privacy, broadcasting compliance, and more. Each company I’ve worked with has had its own rhythm—some with a strong content-first approach, others more tech-driven or distribution-led. Understanding the nuance of each business model has been essential, because legal advice isn’t one-size-fits-all; it needs to be context-aware and commercially sound. As an in-house lawyer, I see my role as that of an enabler—ensuring the legal function supports innovation, protects creative vision, and helps the business build sustainable value while staying compliant. That blend of law and business strategy is what makes this role both challenging and deeply fulfilling.
As in-house counsel, how do you navigate the ever-evolving legal landscape especially with regard to content licensing, intellectual property, and digital media regulation in a fast-paced, highly regulated industry?
Law, by its very nature, is in a constant state of evolution. Even as we speak, it’s shifting—adapting to new technologies, redefining old principles, and responding to societal and business needs. As a legal professional, evolving alongside it isn’t optional—it’s essential. In an industry like media and digital content, where disruption is the norm, my approach has been to be informed. I don’t believe in simply forwarding the latest update or echoing headlines. For me, it’s about pausing, reading deeply and asking—what does this mean for our business? That habit of consciously engaging with the law, not just reacting to it, helps me filter noise from relevance. It ensures that when I advise on licensing structures, IP risks, or platform regulations, the counsel is not only current but also considered. The joy is in doing the work, not just knowing the jargon.
Ultimately, being an in-house counsel is about bridging change with clarity—guiding your team through uncertainty, while staying rooted in both principle and practicality. Your expertise spans IPR, media, and technology laws, with a focused interest in data privacy. In your view, what steps can India take to strengthen its data protection regime and bring it closer in alignment with global frameworks such as the GDPR?
India’s journey toward a comprehensive data protection framework is both necessary and timely. As the world’s largest democracy with a rapidly digitizing population, our approach must be inclusive, scalable, and rooted in our constitutional values. Frameworks like the GDPR have certainly set global benchmarks, and there is much we can be inspired by—particularly in areas like user consent, accountability, and transparency. But our legal and societal landscape is distinct, and that calls for a framework that is uniquely Indian in its design and delivery. One key difference lies in the scope of government exemptions. Our law, in its current form, allows certain leeways for the State in matters of data processing. While this reflects the need for governance flexibility, it also places a greater onus on transparent implementation and robust oversight. As citizens, we must remain aware of our rights and engage in the legal process, so the law can evolve to reflect the democratic ideals it’s built upon. Ultimately, the goal isn’t to replicate GDPR—it’s to build a framework that works for India, encourages digital trust, and empowers every citizen in this data-driven age. And I believe we are well on our way to achieving that.
As an author and a mentor deeply engaged with the next generation of legal minds, what gaps do you observe in contemporary legal education? How does your initiative, Basic Law Understanding(BLU), aim to bridge the gap between academic theory and practical legal application?
We often say that the next generation is tech-driven—and that’s a wonderful strength. But in a world shaped by AI and automation, we need to ensure that not just GenAI is well-trained, but also that Gen Next of professionals are trained to think independently, apply critical reasoning beyond just algorithms.
BLU is not just a knowledge exchange—it’s a purpose-driven initiative to empower. It is designed for the masses—to bridge the gap not only between classroom and courtroom, but between citizens and their rights. Whether it’s a student understanding broadcasting rights or a citizen decoding consumer rights. The aim is to be ‘Aware’.
Having actively contributed to grassroots activism, corporate legal affairs, academic publishing, and mentoring while also leading social initiatives, how do you maintain a balance between your professional responsibilities and personal well-being?
For me, the idea isn’t to chase balance—it’s to create blend. I don’t see my life as separate compartments of “work,” “passion,” and “personal time.” Instead, I try to design my day—and my purpose—in a way that all these facets flow into one another. But at the core of it all is one intention: to use law as a tool to empower.
This blend helps me stay connected to what I do and why I do it. I’ve learned that personal well-being doesn’t come from disconnecting from work—it comes from doing work that is aligned with your values, surrounded by people who believe in impact over optics. Of course, I have my “DND” moments too—where I switch off, read something that has nothing to do with the law, or spend time with the people who keep me grounded. But I don’t put pressure on myself to perform a balance like a checklist. Instead, I remind myself: if what you do fuels you, then you’re already living in alignment. Whether it’s Gen Z finding their calling or seasoned professionals reinventing their role, I believe the future of law lies where empathy, and empowerment coexist naturally.
What advice would you give to aspiring lawyers at the beginning of their careers? Are there any key habits, mindsets, or resources that you found particularly helpful in shaping your own path in law?
My biggest advice? It’s that idiom
“Jack of all trades, master of none, but better than being stuck mastering just one.”
Law is a vast and layered field, and the more you expose yourself to its different shades—be it contracts, litigation, dispute resolution —the clearer your own voice and direction will become.
In the early years, don’t rush to define your niche. Explore, assist, volunteer, write, question. “The legal profession isn’t a linear path—it’s more like a mosaic. Each experience, even the smallest one, adds depth to your understanding.” It’s okay to not have all the answers at the start—curiosity will take you further than certainty ever can.
What helped me most was following what intrigued me.
And finally, stay rooted in empathy and purpose. Read beyond the law, fuel your hobbies. Listen to voices outside your echo chamber. Do something that connects you to yourself the most.
Your journey is your own, so don’t fear the unconventional. Walk it with awareness, and you’ll find not just success, but meaning.
*All views and responses mentioned here are personal.*
While you reflect on your diverse career you are certified as a PoSH trainer, also a certified mediator, policy consultant, analyst, and IPR enthusiast, as you have done your PhD in that what was the reason behind you choosing law as your career? And while you were doing so, while you were pursuing your legal career, how did you plan on becoming such an ardent academician as well as legal researcher? We would love to hear that.
I guess this journey is more of a cinematic type of journey.
The reason for taking up law—and I’ve said this on various forums, I guess that’s how my first introduction usually goes too—is that I come from a family of lawyers. My blood group is LLB positive. And the reason for saying this is very clear: I’m a fifth-generation lawyer. I’m a first-generation academician. So, from my great-great-grandfather to everyone else, my father is currently practicing in the Gorakhpur district courts—it’s been more than 42 years of his practice.
My brother is in the Allahabad High Court; he’s practicing. So that was the first step for why I took law. I guess the answer is very plain, clear, and simple. And yes, as everybody thought—being the youngest in the family, with my father in the district court, elder brother in the High Court—Deevanshu’s gateway to the Supreme Court was already opening by the end of his final years.
But that made me take a point: okay, everybody in my family has done this. And being the youngest, it was like what everybody’s doing, and it came to me as a baggage itself—oh, you’ll have to practice because your father is there, your elder brother is there. Your way is too easy for those things.
And then I came to know of this subject called intellectual property rights in my fourth year—thanks to my teachers then. At that time, I was the first in my entire family to pursue an LLM. So I wrote my CLAT examinations for the PG and I got an All India Rank of 49, and, at that rank, I was able to get into top nationals
But the reason for opting for NLIU Bhopal was because I had already spent five years in Bhopal for my graduation, and the subjects of intellectual property rights were very much fascinating to me. As I said, during my graduation, I was inspired by the articles and words of Professor Shamnad Basheer Sir, who unfortunately, is no longer with us physically.
But I guess his way of teaching, how IPR took a place, is something that still stays with us. And that helped me take up IPR in NLIU Bhopal under the guidance of Professor Dr. Ghayur Alam sir, another stalwart of IPR. And that is how I felt fortunate to be under the guidance of Professor Alam and Professor Dr. Mona Purohit Ma’am, under whom I pursued my PhD in intellectual property rights. These are the two people who not only inclined me toward intellectual property rights but also toward becoming an academician. The purpose of law, as we all say, is only to convince.
Rather than being the king, it’s better to be the kingmaker. So now, with so many years—more than a decade—coming up on that, I can proudly say that there isn’t a district court left in Madhya Pradesh or in Uttar Pradesh where my students are not present—as advocates, judges, or legal officers.
So through them, I relive this particular domain, and intellectual property rights are again one thing I still say I am a student of. I can never say that I am an expert in IPR, but being a student has helped me not only to do research but to understand the nuances of how even in the coming times, technology is evolving and how these things are developing.
All these things come together.
You’ve been deeply involved in IPR, AI, and cyber laws—fields that weren’t as prominent when you started. What challenges did you face in choosing such a niche area at that time? How did you handle the uncertainty around whether to go into practice or academia? What helped you stay confident in your choice despite limited awareness and acceptance of the field? How did you convince both yourself and your loved ones that you could succeed in this path?
Thank you so much for that question. I could just say one thing: what majorly turns out to be a challenge, I guess in my case, was more of an opportunity. I guess no law school in our country is left out of the scenario where, in your third year or fourth year, one of your professors comes in really pissed off at the entire batch for making noise or not doing something, and they say, “You know, each year 10,000 advocates come out of the country. Where do you see yourself?” and all those things.
So I’ll tell you honestly, by that time I was deeply and madly in love with IPR. This was, again, during my two years of LLM—and in my days, it was a two-year LLM. I guess I was part of the second-last batch before the two-year LLM was on the verge of being phased out.
By then, research had already taken a hold of me. I felt that research and IPR were going together. And the best part—my PhD in IPR, in law—was titled Online Infringement of Trademarks. I’m talking about having chosen this topic in 2013–2014. Now imagine that online Infringement of Trademarks makes sense to everyone in 2025.
Back in 2013–2014, everyone was like, “Okay, this topic hasn’t yet been taken.” I said, “Thank you so much for validating that. Okay, my PhD topic is good to go.” Second thing—I did a comparative study. This comparative study was on the US, India, and China. By the end of 2017, I submitted; by 2018, I was awarded.
By 2018, I was very clear about the laws relating to online infringement of trademarks—a provision that is absent in the Indian Trademark Act of 1999. There isn’t much talk about online infringement. This is similar to how there’s no express provision for e-contracts under the Contract Act of 1872.
They say we are guided by the same principles, wherever the contract happens. And the same thing was told to me—that wherever trademark infringement happens, whether it’s online or offline, the rules remain the same. Now, this was the point where I felt out of the league because I wasn’t taking constitutional law or criminal law.
So that was one thing—and a very funny story I’ll share with you: there were only five students in my LLM specialization of IPR and Business Law—just five. Out of a batch of 60 students, only five took this. The rest were in criminal law or constitutional law.
So I’d say 90% of my batchmates were either in criminal law or constitutional law. And the rest? “Okay, IPR? Are you sure?” And believe me, the syllabi at that time for the two-year LLM—that’s why I’m still a big advocate for keeping the two-year LLM—was comprehensive and beneficial.
Then came the journey of PhD with research. It helped me understand the laws of countries we are already engaging with. As we say, China and the US are nearly 15, if not 20, years ahead of where India currently is. So, this helped me work on something we knew would eventually come to India, because the US, EU, China, and other countries had already adopted it.
As always, something that comes to the world first reaches India later. But I guess the perspective is changing. Today, at par, when I look around—that foundation helped me. Even recently, as we speak, I completed my second arbitration, which was in the domain of IPR.
So IPR has always been the core, and I’ve kept aligning everything else around it. This is also one of my messages to all of you out there: never feel that just because you’ve chosen one domain, you can’t explore others. This was something I told my students the year before last, when the three new criminal laws were introduced in our country.
They asked, “Sir, what will happen to us? We haven’t studied them.” I said, why are you seeing it as a challenge? Why not see it as an opportunity? A 20-year senior lawyer who studied IPC, CrPC, and the Evidence Act is now on the same footing as you when these new laws are enforced.
So, it’s not about the laws—it’s about how well you’ve understood the jurisprudence behind them, and how well you’re going to take that forward. Anything that is posed as a challenge—if you are capable enough to identify an opportunity in it—I guess you’re already in the right place, irrespective of where the crowd is going.
So, don’t follow the crowd. Stand at a point where the crowd will follow you. And that, I guess, would be the best way to conclude my answer.
You’ve clearly shown how IPR aligns with many fields, and your academic journey reflects that.But while doing all this, you also became the founding head of the Jagran School of Public Policy and International Affairs.How did that transition happen from a core legal and IPR background into public policy?What key challenges did you face as a lawyer stepping into the public policy space?
Sure, I’ll just tell you one thing very clearly. For me personally, I’m saying this—there were only two positives out of COVID. One was that I took the headship of the Public Policy School, and the second one was online platforms, which I generally say, thanks to COVID—Zoom interactions and other things increased significantly at that point.
And as I said in my previous answer, I’ll relate it here as well. I’m not saying that I’m ahead of time. I’m just telling you that 2019 was the first time I came across the concept that there is something called a think tank. Now, a think tank for me at that particular time was a very fascinating term.
The reason is, I’m a very big fan of arcade games, PS5, and playing assassination games and all those things. So I said, “Okay, think tank—well, tanks do not think.” And then I came to know about law and public policy. That’s how I came across PRS Legislative, the LAMP fellowships, and other things.
I was too late for it. But as a teacher, you are never too late. The reason is very clear—because I get to relive that through my students. And I’ve always been a follower of one particular statement in my entire life: you should be the version of yourself that you want to be with. So whether it’s a PhD, whether it’s any small IPR subject to be understood, whether it is good eating joints, whether it is good places to move around, things to do in Banaras, places to eat there—whatever it is—be a person who, if I was alone at that place, could help myself out.
So with this, when it came to think tanks and public policy, I thought there is a very, very close-knit relationship. I wouldn’t even call it a first cousin—it’s more like a sibling to what law as a domain entails.
And even today, if you look at the major think tanks in our country—you name them, you’ll find vacancies—and the people working there are majorly from political science, law, or economics backgrounds. Major assistance given to Members of Parliament today comes from people with these academic profiles.
Because we’ve all studied that a law exists. But the question always popped up for me—why do we need a law? And that’s how the policy angle always came into play. For example, there’s a debate today about revamping colonial laws and introducing new criminal laws with desi Hindi names.
What about students from the South who can’t even pronounce those names? A good friend of mine, when she was an HOD at Central University in Tamil Nadu, mentioned a new act called Bhartiya Vayuyan Adhiniyam. And she asked, “What is this all about?”
She questioned why they couldn’t include both names, or alternative English terminology. If you look at Article 1 of the Constitution, it says “Union of India, that is Bharat.” So they were giving similar formats. Yes, Hindi is one of the prominent languages of our country, but we must acknowledge there are nuances. I’m not getting into the language debate or what Tamil Nadu thinks about Hindi, but the key is understanding where these things are coming from.
As law students—and this is my message again—you need to understand the context. For example, it’s always said: to understand why something was made a fundamental right, read the Constituent Assembly debates. That will absolutely help you.
That’s why, when we saw the Waqf Amendment Bill being introduced and a late-night debate happening in both houses, these debates held importance to understanding the text. The reasoning behind them is often mentioned in Supreme Court judgments.
This helped me understand how laws are made—identifying a problem and reaching the root cause—and that’s where public policy comes into play. So it was an opportunity for me.
By that time, I was already immersed in the legal domain. But with public policy, the major challenge—especially in Central India—was that people didn’t consider it a proper subject. They thought public administration was fine because it’s an optional in UPSC. But public policy? “You’ve created your own subject,” is what some parents told me.
In response, I reformulated the course. At the undergraduate level, the course was called BA in Public Policy and Administration. My way of explaining it was: in one course, I’m giving you two degrees—public policy and public administration. That’s the advantage of being in a private university, I would say.
The master’s course was an MA in Public Policy and International Affairs. Both these courses were unique in Central India. No other university or institution in Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Uttar Pradesh, or Uttarakhand was awarding these degrees.
That’s how it started. Yes, it began in July 2020, during the first phase of the pandemic and lockdowns. It was affected, but I’m proudly saying this today: when the first batch graduated and the first postgraduates completed their course, the students were either serving with the government or pursuing higher education abroad.
These efforts helped them. We also introduced a very important component—something we, as law students, know as a dissertation in the final year. We introduced, for the first time, a capstone project. This project involved identifying a root problem and formulating a policy to address it.
It was majorly a fieldwork-based study, and the students learned these intricacies before moving forward. That’s how I transitioned into public policy, and then eventually returned to law. That’s how things unfolded.
Now that you’ve started as the Dean and Founding Dean of GL Bajaj, do you think India is ready to allow academicians to actively practice law and practicing attorneys to take up full-time teaching roles, not just as visiting faculty? In developed countries, this dual role is common and beneficial. Wouldn’t such a model greatly enrich student learning and bridge the gap between theory and practice? Given your experience launching innovative programs, do you foresee such a shift happening soon? Especially now, with rapid changes in law due to AI, IoT, blockchain, and other disruptive technologies?
Okay, so I would like to answer that, I’m not going to tell you something that has not been happening.
So all credit, and I’ll just take you back with something called as the National Education Policy. We all have been hearing this NEP 2020, if not many, then once in a day. That comes across to our ears as well. Also, I’ll really compliment what you just asked me, that I’m not the first person to answer that.
UGC, the University Grants Commission, has introduced a concept of professor of practice. There is an entire portal which is available on UGC’s site and there are two particular sub-tabs to it. First, any professional who has completed a minimum of 15 years—one five years—of his practice in the field, which excludes teaching.
So this automatically, like for example, I’m an academician. I have retired after serving for more than 30 years. Now I cannot go back as a POP to an educational institution. Completely banned. But what has been there is that a person who has been in the industry—and this industry can be private practice, served as a judicial officer, served as a legal officer in any of the companies, served as a corporate lawyer in any of the law firms—with a minimum of 15 years of practice can enroll on that portal as a professor of practice, and major universities can adopt them with that particular thing.
As a professor of practice, the POP thing that comes onto, number one. Number two, now you asked me the flip side of the question was that you being an academician, don’t you feel like, so I’m also telling you that I have seen, and a couple of my teachers have been, and I’ll name one who’s presently the Vice Chancellor of National Law University Delhi, respected professor, Dr. G.S. Bajpai, sir, he served as an amicus in one of the Delhi High Courts. So what I’m trying to let you know is that this venue is also getting open now. And one critical thing that I’ll say on that point, for example, any advocate, I’m just giving an advocate because I posed this question to my own father who has been practicing for more than four decades now.
So more than 40 years, 43 years on the civil side. So I have seen him put a bookmark without any note on it. And I have my own library where I put a bookmark and I scribble a note on it. Okay, why am I putting this bookmark here? Is it a case law? Is it something valuable? And he puts a blank bookmark even today.
And I just randomly said, why a blank bookmark? Because I know what is written on that page. I said, is it? So he says, Yes. So it’s just a blank page that I can remember why you’re seeing the AIR of 1978. This is why I would’ve taken that. Now, I asked him, why don’t you come and teach them? My law students will require you.
And he is like, look, I only have 24 hours in a day, where I’m spending more than 12 hours or nearly 10 hours in the court and then coming to my chamber and spending more than 4 hours there, you give me more than 24 plus anything hours, I’m ready to come and teach for that plus hours in your law school.
So it’s not like I can’t, I have to sit with my client. I have to study the file. And as I’ve been always saying to my young people who are in their 11th and 12th and are planning to take law and medical, the only answer is why are these practices called as a practice—because you never become with this practice as a perfect, and you have to study your entire life, whether it’s medical, whether it’s legal, so whether it’s case laws, whether it’s new law books, whether it’s precedents.
You name it, you’ll have to study it. So I’ve seen my father, even after having his dinner late, he goes back to the chamber. I see my elder brother. Okay, no, I have to prepare a brief for tomorrow and it should go like this. And I guess that is also one of the ways I’m answering that will AI change the perspective and you’ll not be requiring—the answer is a big no.
So the only perspective to see that if a successful advocate, whether it’s in a corporate law firm, whether it’s a private practice, asking them to come back to the law school, they can only dedicate a small time because they cannot leave their plan A first. And that is why they have earned that stature where we are requesting, yes, retired judges, a lawyer never retires.
So this is one thing that my father has always told me. I have asked him various times. Look, now your son is a dean, your elder son is a practicing Advocate in Allahabad High Court. You leave your practice, you come and live with us. And he said, no, no, no. I have more cases than what you people would combinedly ever have.
I still have that. And that’s how the point is very clear that yes, if you are growing, the purpose of introducing such a system by UGC is yes—to bridge that gap between industry and the academic colleges. And this is not merely limited to law, but open, inclusive of law, which includes engineering, management and all those things.
So yes, it is already prevalent and I’m pretty confident next five years you will find more of it. And I’m so happy. A couple of my very good friends in the law firms today who are at a senior partner level and they’re like, Deevanshu, enough of what we have done, now we’d like to come. Your life is very easy.
We’d like to become an academician. I said, the grass is always greener on the other side. I would like to live a life of a law firm partner as well. So they say, yeah, we understand that payment-wise we might be on a very higher scale, but ask us—is it the payment or, in the end, the relaxation or the comforting thing that we come onto?
We generally do a thankless job, but you are surrounded by gratitudes and other things. And that, I guess, is something that we require in our lives as well. So answering your query and to cut it short again, to conclude—yes, the opening of professors of practice, and not merely as guest faculties, adjunct professors and all those things.
Even the Bar Council of India has allowed us that we can have the people from the local bar, from the bench, to be part of our law schools. And that definitely is not only shaping up a good law student but also a young lawyer for that particular perspective.
The UGC has introduced many reforms, but real change is needed at the grassroots level, especially in a populous country like ours. Moving on, I’m curious how you managed to publish 43 papers and present at over 60 conferences. Your topics are cutting-edge and highly informative—how do you tackle and anticipate these challenges? Since foresight is your strength, especially in your niche PhD field, how do you maintain this momentum? And how many more papers and books do you have in the pipeline?
Again, one thing I’ll say that every time you pose a question, which is revolving around challenges, I’ll answer you as an opportunity with that.
So I’ll tell you honestly, the base of writing a good research or base of doing a good research, I have said it, and I know many of your viewers who have been my students or who have heard me at various forums. Would re-agree to me by saying, if you read well, you write well. Plus whenever I get a newspaper in my hand and I still get a newspaper in this era of digital, where all my apps are there, so I have a Times of India app as well. I have all my apps ready, but I still get a newspaper in my hand. That’s the first thing that I would really want and I search as I was told, and I recall again, an IPR thing.
So I was told by my professor, which was surrounded by IPR, right in the morning, the toothbrush and the toothpaste that goes in your mouth is an IPR. And by the time you go back to your sleep and you switch on your AC, it itself is an IPR. So you are surrounded by it. I urge and I request young minds, young legal fellows here to have this habit of searching law right at the front page news to even the sports news.
To even the editorials that you wrote and you missed out. I’m now writing more of the editorials for newspapers. Now this is helping me because I have to read it, I have to read it well, I have to understand, I have to curate it well, and then I need to focus that particular thing ahead as well. So if you read well, you get these ideas, don’t just stop it there.
Have that habit of jotting down those ideas. And sooner or later, today or tomorrow, you might get to expand those particular ideas as well. So this helps me to write, parallelly I’ll be very honest, and if you’ve asked me how many are in pipeline, so I’ll tell you honestly, this afternoon itself, I presented a paper.
And it’s not like I have become a dean. I should do that. I guess this is only and I recall that I’m still a student. Don’t let that student and a young researcher inside you ever die. So the moment I’ll see, okay, I’ve already done this, what’s the need of it? So I’m not presenting in conferences for certificates.
I’m not presenting that thinking I should write that in my CV. But I’m presenting because I get peers. I get some ideas from my peers who are presenting. I get some wonderful chairs to share those ideas. And I get some critical analysis as well.
One more, and a very special request to all of you out there. Be open to criticism and do not take it as how dare somebody tell me, okay, I’m a dean and he’s an assistant professor here and he told me that I should incorporate this, what he thinks or what she thinks. No, take it gracefully and you should ideally thank them that he or she has given you that idea.
That can be a next research paper or a research idea for you. And as it has been said, nobody copyrights the idea. It’s the expression of the idea which is copyrighted. So parallelly you and me might be thinking on the same idea, but the expression of Divya ma’am and expression of Deevanshu, would be completely too copyrightable items on our table as well.
So read well to write well, and just don’t read and do not write. So when you’re reading whatever idea is coming to you, and I have said this thing as a researcher as well, that the easiest thing to start for a young law student as a research is to write a case comment. And why I’m telling you this is that gives you a leverage, that you can criticize based on reasoning that this judgment could have been a better one.
Borrow the minority judgment. Read the entire judgment, not half of it. Read the entire judgment. Nowadays, the young lawyers are blessed with apps like Live Law and Bar & Bench, and I do not take any such thing. They’re doing a fabulous job in what is happening at Supreme Court at 2.30 is being reported at 3.30 or 4.
What else can we ask for? It’s not like us where we have to report that when the SCC or AIR would come, then only I’ll come to know for that particular matter. So that is very, very helpful. The e databases like Manupatra, LexisNexis, be it Supreme today with AI versions of it, have enhanced the researchers as well.
So time is being saved, things are getting onto, I even promote usage of AI. So believe me, there is hardly any AI app, which I have not used in my personal life. You name it. And I have been using it at all above level, like Chat GPT 4.0. Perplexity, Gemini, you name it, I have used it all. So the purpose is when I go and teach that thing in the classroom, I need to be up to date.
And I have always said it. And with your forum, I’m also utilizing it, and I know you are a big fan of AI, so I say it is a tool and let it be a tool. Do not let it become your master. It’s not like you’ve given the command. Whatever output comes, you copied and you pasted it. Don’t do that. Take ideas from it.
Okay? And that is what I’m saying. It gives me varied opinions. Okay. On this line, I can also think on this line, I can also think, and on this line, I can also think. So read well and write so that you can write well. And that is the basic motto for me to do these researches. And I don’t count with numbers, it’s just one point.
I know major of them have not been reflected in my CV as well, so it’s not about putting numbers in the CV, it’s more of how and what I’m learning about it.
Thanks for the insightful response! As a policy consultant for Cyber Peace Foundation, how do you see emerging fields like cybersecurity and digital law shaping public policy in India? Given rapid global developments, how do you ensure these advances are integrated into both theory and practice? How effective are Indian think tanks compared to international ones in influencing legislation? And how do you bridge this gap to prepare students for real-world challenges?
Thank you so much for that particular question because the answer that I’m going to tell you is exactly what we have been practicing.
So the entire thing that I’ve told also in the past or in the coming time is not that I’m just a creature for that particular matter, it’s all have been practiced and been taken around. Now just understand, I’ll take a minute to make people understand the concept of think tanks is what I have seen.
So think tanks are the catalysts. Think tanks are basically research agencies. And what are the basic two objectives? Number one, is to do that ground research about something, to something that I call a base of a policy, and to bring it ahead, number one. Number two is to create awareness. So these are the two majors of what a policy or a think tank is generally revolving around.
Now, it’s not merely the legislative that is taking on. Now, why I’m saying this, yes, the think tanks submit their report, which is taken by a member of parliament, whether it’s opposition, whether it’s from the government. The new trend in India is that even these prominent think tanks reports are cited by the judiciary as well.
Now, this is something when in a judgment, the base of such a thing is being done. So think tanks are, as I used the word catalyst, and we all know what catalysts do. Catalyst just enhances the reaction in a faster time. And that is what these important think tanks in our country are doing.
And to name a few, they have identified their areas. Now, I was a consultant with the Cyber Peace Foundation. How institutionalized and why they are getting educationists as a part of their think tanks as well is number one, how these awareness would be gone. And I’ll tell you small examples. For example, the maximum number of cyber frauds.
And one small thing as a caller tune, which was a very well acknowledged initiative by TRAI that you’ll get these things have created an awareness, talking on those things that these are the new ways how these things are being taken up. Now what I’m trying to tell you is that these think tanks alongside institutions are also launching.
And we have launched, we have done international conferences. We have done international working paper series, podcasts. And launch certificate courses in addition to law and other perspectives. So at my institution, it’s not merely a BA LLB or an LLB that a student would get, but during the tenure of that five years or three years, in the case of a three year LLB, the student is also earning two certifications in each semester.
And that is an all choice based thing. So I know that is not possible. But if Divya is coming as a student to me, I know her inclination is towards IPR and AI. And in her three years law course, she can have an LLB course plus a difference of six certifications in the parameter of six semesters that you can have, number one.
Number two, if she’s not interested and it’s more of a criminal law and other perspective, how additional certifications in the criminal law perspective can be given . So the think tanks are in collaboration and all have to work not in silos, but in collaboration. So think tanks in collaboration with academic institutions, think tanks in collaboration with NGOs and together how they are bringing it on.
Nowadays, the think tanks have also collaborated with national law schools to establish a dedicated center for research at their law school itself. And these are the small initiatives which are on the verge of togetherness, they are bringing a change of practical changes, which no law school is teaching.
The Bar Council of India and I must acknowledge and applaud the efforts of The Bar Council of India, in May, 2024 they came out with a regulation, which is a mandate to all law schools, to teach subjects like AI and tech law and financial laws, FinTech laws. Their law schools. I understand, and I know that smile on your face is so they came out with a regulation, but how many law schools in the country have actually followed it?
And my answer to you Divya for that would be one step, even as I say in my classroom as well, when I go and teach a subject in a batch of 60 students. And even if six have grasped and they’re on a good path, I guess my role as a teacher gets fulfilled. Similarly, not all but few who will do and believe me, it’s not many times the teacher or the body who will be directing and the people who do it, but it is always with the peers.
So out of 1800, if 18 institutions in the country follow that regulation or that compliance from The Bar Council of India and couple of years down the line, they come out as the Centers for Excellence in this particular matter. Out of the major 1800, at least 180 would again be inspired to do and to bring that thing.
And you see, forensic labs. So the National Forensic Science University, a great initiative again by the government of India. Each state should have one. They should have a forensic law lab, something we would’ve never thought of. I was very happy in seeing that In FBI, there was a series that used to happen, way back when no Netflix and other things were there and I was very inspired.
Oh wow. And then we had the Indian version of CID happening. So our aspiration was not of that of forensic doctor. You are a good example again that from an engineer background doing law and then taking AI law or FinTech law, I guess that’s the best example that I can cite right now in front of me as well.
So similarly, the newer avenues, the bodies like The Bar Council of India, who are the parent body for legal education, I would say they are the guardians of legal education in our country. And the establishment and the way they’re taking it up is something which is commendable. I know major law schools in our country are lacking, but I’m on a very hopeful and a very positive approach that yes, coming years are going to be where we are going to have unified systems of teaching.
Couple of things are coming on a very good prospect for legal education. These things are no more, something that will be kept on a background, but something that the student would demand on his own. So while choosing a law school, it’s not merely an LLB course or a BA LLB course, but how well the industry driven certifications and add-ons, skill add-ons are given to a law student should also be taken.
And I guess where think tanks would be coming above the catalyst role and would be an equal partner in disseminating these particular subject knowledge.
Your clear explanations could transform at least 10% of law schools, creating a more international and skilled legal workforce. This shift will likely encourage greater global collaboration and intervention. As you mentioned, it’s not just about think tanks, but also understanding why lawyers need these tools to enhance their practice. The Supreme Court’s adoption of AI, thanks to the former Chief Justice, is a great example. This progress reflects how technology is becoming integral to the legal field.
I’ll just add, sorry, I’m pausing you in between. So I came across this, so I’m a big, big fan of DYC. And it’s been like four occasions where I’ve met him, such a down to earth person. Now one very important instance that I’m sharing, yesterday, he rolled out a junior associate and in brackets, it’s written retainership , for his own office. So it’s the office of DYC. And I’ll tell you, a junior associate, Divya, guess the salary. The salary is one lakh rupees per month. And you know it, I know it, his tenure at the Supreme Court, the young researchers, something that we used to call it the Articleship, the legal clerkship thing.
They were young and number of publications that were out. Whether it is the Supreme Court handbook on addressing women, what words should not be used , even for that smallest thing that I’ll say. And he shared that thing. I was a part of it last month itself, and he said even addressing the issue of women washrooms at the Supreme Court, he was one of those particular things, the standard of food items at the Supreme Court.
He made sure that those things were there. The corridors had chairs for juniors to sit there. Now, as a chief justice, if he’s thinking about junior advocates, I guess something, if all of us can imbibe onto to that particular thing, and I’ve learned it, I might be the dean and other such things, but I still see, okay, if my student is walking, it’s very warm, like it’s on 41 right now in Delhi. Can I have a closed path for them to walk from the gate to my building? Now I know this is not a big thing, but yes, this is making you apathetic. This is making you humble and this is making you think about the future and you’re raising it through your teaching itself. I am sorry that I interrupted you in between, but I guess this was one point whenever DYC’s name comes, with all respect, like, I can say a fanboy moment again, for me, when it comes with Justice DYC, for that matter.
I’m a huge fan, not just for his work but for his focus on gender sensitization, which is essential for everyone. Despite his legacy as a 5th generation lawyer, he remains grounded and humble. How does he ensure his messages truly impact not only lawyers but also everyday people who often don’t know their legal rights? In India, awareness of the Constitution and rights is limited, so how does he address this gap? Lastly, how does he stay calm and humble while handling such diverse responsibilities?
Okay, so I’ll answer that part first. How to keep yourself humble and calm. So I’ve always been a big advocate of a fact that there are only two teachers, which a student generally faces.
So first of all, you’ll have to believe you are a student. The moment you start believing, okay, I have crossed this age, I’ve crossed that student thing, I guess your learning stops. So for me, I was blessed. To have teaching both with my parents and my elder brother. And I really like to mention my elder brother because what I see today, myself as a dean or as a student of law, and the best part, we share common among me, my elder brother and my father.
We have our own libraries and we hate sharing books. So each book, the moment it comes, the first thing that we used to do is to put an OM on it and write our names there. So that’s one thing because we hate it, like it’s my book. It needs to be there in my library. And the reason is I have my own habit of underlining and reading.
And his books are very neat and clean. He said, why to make the books dirty. And I said, this is not dirty. It’s like, I’ve read this book. So that’s how, so we disagree. So what I’ve learned is from my parents, my elder brother and my teachers, and the lot that I took the name as, and many more to add to that, they are all humble.
And so what I have learned is what I was trying to tell you, that not all things are taught with textbooks. Some things are by your gestures as well. Fortunate enough, when I started teaching, fortunate enough, the law firms that I went for my internships, I met people who were very humble.
They’re still, I just mentioned about DYC, that why am I a fanboy thing? It’s not like I’m a regular practitioner to the Supreme Court. But there would be hardly any judgment of his, if it’s his name, I’ll have to read it. This is as simple as this. He has always said, and I will quote him again.
He was speaking and he said, I know you all would love to buy the books, and I can see at your background as well, you love to buy the books of your own choice. We all have our own genres to read. This type of book is something I want, this, that, and all those things. But always have this habit of what somebody’s gifting you as a book.
Because it is, and this is where I’m putting a base of my next answer, the second part of your question as well, how you make things understand to people, whether it’s legal, whether it’s non-legal or something like that, is when somebody gives you a book, he actually is giving his particular genre to you, which is an area for you to explore because you have already cleared and mastered your own genres.
And you asked me what is the best way to understand a person’s perspective, so I’ll be very honest and these questions were not pre shared with us that we are trying to script it up and bring it out. These things are not paid enough by either part of us.
So the point which is very clear, is that the questions that Divya, you are posing to me. I am trying to step into your shoes to make you understand that answer and that satisfaction with a smile on your face is something that I’m achieving as well. Now this, whether it’s my student around the table corner, it’s my elder brother, it’s even his daughter.
When she asked me why this Disney character has longer hair and why I do not have that long hair. I’m standing at the first floor of my balcony and my ponytail should go at the ground floor. Now these are exactly the things are, and then the other day she was watching my favorite cartoon Popeye.
And so she asked me why Popeye is called Popeye. Now, this is where my research would come into place. I said, look, his eyes popped out and that is why it’s Popeye. And she was convinced. And this exactly is where I’m not made that cartoon favorite of mine, only because of the fact that it is my favorite.
But I have to research about it. So interested in those particular things. And my answer would be the same. So whenever you are asked something, try to step into the shoes of that particular person, whether it’s your client, whether it’s your student, whether it’s your friend, whether it is anybody for that matter.
And humility and humility I guess, goes hand in hand. So it is nothing like, it is one dinner that I had and I’m more humility, or I can mix it with Horlicks milk in the night, drink and in the morning I’ll become a humble person . So be humble is, again what I’m saying, it’s not by learning from me or you, but we have grades in our country.
In legal domain one again is again, I’ll repeat his name,Justice DYC . So these are people who are existing and being on the top position of the country. And even if you meet him today, if it is not that crowded, he’ll not hesitate to shake hands. He’ll come sit right next to you without any such thing.
And that speaks volumes about him. And again, one thing I’ll tell you, and this was one challenge that I faced when I was a POSH trainer and I got my certification. I went for my first training. Everybody was like, you are a male, and will you be a good POSH trainer?
And I said, okay. So where it is written that only females can be a POSH trainer. No, I know your reaction is saying everything to me, Divya. But again, this is where the point was coming on, and this is where I’m answering the third part of your question: that I was a student in my class eight.
We had compulsory subjects like civics, which was clubbed with history at that particular time. And civics was nothing but preamble, the constitution, part three, part four. And that is how law was something that we’ve taken off. Even today, I ask each of my students who all remember the preamble. And this is, again, I could have posed this question to you Divya, as well.
So you need not open a book and tell me the preamble. And this is simple. So it’s not about the people of India. There is one wonderful line that I’ve always like I have opened that line clearly to everyone, is the liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith, and worship. Now, as an English student let’s say liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith, and worship.
So belief, faith and worship are synonymous terms. And in law we do not have synonyms. So when the words are used, they are used for a proper intent. And tell me, and this is again, I’m giving some homework, as a good teacher, even if my interviews do not have homework, I guess I’ll not be a good teacher.
I just want the students to understand what is this expression of thought, belief, faith, and worship. So they need to understand why this particular thing is there. And the preamble uses the term liberty. The entire constitution lacks the term liberty. This converted into freedom. Now, what’s the difference between liberty and freedom for that matter?
Now these are small things that we as law students should dive into. Okay? If this word is used, why this word is used? And my advice to all young law students out there, two books that I would definitely recommend. One, please buy a Government of India legal Glossary. Don’t buy a legal dictionary.
And there is a difference between a glossary and a dictionary. Glossary never gives you the meaning. Glossary would put you to the place where the word is defined. For example, consideration, which is in Hindi and the best part of legal glossary, government of India, gives you the exact legal Hindi out of it, which is helpful for my students who are preparing for their main exam for judiciary, where you get a Hindi English translation.
So consider, the meaning is pratiphal in Hindi. And it says Section 2D, Indian Contract Act 1872. So as a law student, you know that you need to open the Indian Contract Act, section 2D to understand the definition of consideration, and this is exactly how the glossary and dictionary differs. So answering all the three parts, I guess I have answered all three parts for you as well.
You are being a true academician, true teacher, professor, doctor, everything. Amazing! I’m loving the interview with you. One last curious question. How do you nurture your students not only better and good professionals, but the best human beings as well?
Number one, I never ask my students to follow what I am saying.
I know I might be criticized on this particular line, but we at law schools, we are a buffet provider. A buffet of what is kept on the table and where I know all my 60 students in one particular batch, that’s a maximum that I’m talking about are not of the same likings.
And this is also one of my messages to all my young students. Don’t just take it up because your best friend is taking it up, and think okay we are going to the same intern place so that one month we can be together. No, try, see what suits you and what doesn’t suit you. And this again, as I say, we see our favorite actors wearing a particular outfit.
We go, we try the same outfit on our own and we are not satisfied. That was looking good on that particular person. Now you need to identify your own path. The only thing that I create to my students is whichever path you are taking. And I have said that if I wouldn’t have been in an academician, and as rightly said at our times when we were scolded by our parents, that if you can’t do anything, at least run a samosa stall..
I’m telling you very honestly, if that would have been my career objective, I would have been the best samosa sales person in my entire locality. Now, the reason I’m saying this is only to achieve your excellence, whichever domain it is. Whether it’s criminal law, whether it’s civil law, whether it’s IPR, whether it’s, I do not know what new laws are coming up as well.
Today anything that we are talking about will involve a law. And I came to know, somebody asked the other day on aviation, it was a good talk that birds fly. There is no law governing them. When humans fly, there is a law governing them.
And he said, wherever you’ll find humans, you’ll find a law, simple. Now, when I say this, what I mean is very clear that if it is human anything that we as humans see books, water, air, laptop, technology, whatever it is, it would be accompanied with a law. Just identify your domain. There is no obsolete domain in law.
Law can never be obsolete and there is no thing which many are taking. Even if many are taking, you are the competitor. And that’s where I conclude by saying we only practice in the legal domain. Whether it’s forty years of practice, whether it’s five years of practice, whether it’s one year of practice.
If you practice it well, you can practice well. So that would be all from my end.
Get in touch with Prof. (Dr. ) Deevanshu Shrivastava –
You’ve built an impressive legal career over the years, beginning your journey at the Chhattisgarh High Court alongside your father. How did that early mentorship influence your legal perspective and shape your advocacy style?
Being a second-generation lawyer, I was fortunate to learn the basics of litigation from my father, Shri Prakash Tiwari. At home, I was his son—but in the office, I was treated like any other junior, and I always referred to him as “Sir.” From the very first day of my legal career, I felt the responsibility of carrying forward his legacy. So, I made sure every brief I held on his behalf was thoroughly prepared. That discipline helped shape both my drafting and advocacy skills.
Early in your career, you argued the landmark Aditya Tiwari vs. State of Chhattisgarh case. What moments stood out during that experience, and what were some key challenges you faced in handling such a high-profile constitutional matter?
When the Ordinance was promulgated by the Hon’ble Governor of Chhattisgarh—raising the reservation in government jobs from 52% to 82%—several petitions were filed, including Aditya Tiwari vs. State of Chhattisgarh. Many of them were led by some of the most prestigious Senior Counsels practicing in the High Court. But seeing my enthusiasm and excitement, they allowed me to lead the challenge.
The subject of “reservation” is complex, sensitive, and incredibly important—so the stakes were high, and there was no room for error. I had just three days to prepare the entire brief. I was guided through the drafting by Learned AOR Kaustubh Shukla (Supreme Court), whose mentorship was invaluable.
On the day of the hearing, I was both excited and nervous—especially being the youngest lawyer in the courtroom. That nervousness intensified when I saw who was on the other side: Senior Advocates Vijay Hansaria and Manish Singhvi. But I composed myself and began my arguments, which I continued for about 45 minutes. After I concluded, I turned to my Senior with a nod—and in return, he and two other Seniors gave me a “thumbs up.” That was a moment I’ll never forget. Later, Sr. Advocate Manish Singhvi placed a hand on my shoulder and said, “Well argued, young man.” That’s something I’ll always carry with me. The Ordinance was eventually struck down.
In 2022, you assumed prestigious roles representing the Union of India, SECL, the State Bar Council, and most recently, the Competition Commission. How have these shaped your legal approach?
These appointments—especially my role as Central Government Counsel and as Standing Counsel for SECL—exposed me to a whole new side of litigation, where I primarily had to “defend.” This helped me understand how public institutions function and the protocols that must be followed. It wasn’t just about gaining designations—it was about learning how to operate within structured frameworks. I was also introduced to newer areas of law like Land Acquisition and Mining Law, which broadened my legal understanding beyond service law.
Service law has become a major focus in your practice. What initially attracted you to this area, and how do you view its evolution today?
It was my Senior who introduced me to Service Law. He holds a substantial number of briefs in this area and possesses a deep understanding of its nuances. Whether it’s about promotions, reservations, pensions, terminations, or departmental inquiries—he guided me at every step. While I don’t claim to know everything about this vast subject, I know where to look, and I know whom to ask. That guidance has shaped my confidence in handling service matters.
Your public interest litigations have covered areas from internet accessibility to environmental protection and road safety for animals. What motivates these efforts?
Being a lawyer isn’t just about representing clients—it’s also about serving your surroundings. That may sound cliché, but it’s true. Many young lawyers aspire to land big clients early on, and there’s nothing wrong with that—but we must also remember the voiceless.
For example, in the Fly Ash PIL: Chhattisgarh is among the top states in power generation from coal, leading to widespread and illegal dumping of fly ash near thermal plants. While urban residents can avoid these areas, villagers are forced to live with the consequences—health hazards, pollution, and more. I had to fight for them.
The cattle-on-roads PIL is still sub judice, so I can’t comment much, but I strongly believe the state must adopt a robust mechanism and a zero-tolerance approach toward stray cattle. Too many lives—human and animal—have been lost due to administrative apathy.
Establishing LexLoft Legal Advisory LLP and stepping into Media and Entertainment Law, especially from a tier-two city, is unique. What inspired that journey?
My passion. I’ve always loved music. In fact, I was once a DJ and music producer during college—infamously known as “DJ Palash.” Some of my songs are still floating around on Spotify and other platforms. That passion inspired me to stay connected to music, but from a legal perspective.
Interestingly, the contacts I made during those early days helped me a lot when I started. And over time, many of my clients came through referrals—people liked how the firm functioned. While we’re based in Bilaspur, most of our clients are from Mumbai. Of course, sometimes I lose out on potential clients due to the “proximity factor,” but at the end of the day, I know I’m on the right path—doing what I love.
Not to mention, my Partner, the other co-founder “Prasoon Agrawal” has always stood along with me whenever, in any situation – boldly.
Having worked with artists and events like MTV Hustle and BMW Joytown Festival, what are the recurring legal challenges in entertainment law?
The most common challenge is getting the other party’s legal team to agree even on basic terms. I believe most media lawyers face this—statements like “Sorry sir, this can’t be changed, it’s company policy” are all too familiar. The frustrating part is that neither side truly “wins”—because in the end, the client or commercial team just wants the deal closed “as soon as possible.” Navigating that deadlock is where the real skill lies.
You’ve managed to balance high-stakes litigation with running a growing law firm. How do you maintain focus, energy, and time across these roles?
That’s probably the hardest question! Honestly, I dedicate most of my time to the profession—and I’m incredibly grateful to my wife, Nidhi Purohit and mother Gayatri Tiwari for their unwavering support. My workday includes not just two but four major areas: my individual practice, daily matters from institutions like SECL, Railways, and Legal Aid; cases assigned by my Senior; and then the law firm itself.
It gets hectic. In fact, my wife has strictly banned me from touching my laptop on Friday evenings! But I’m actively working on building better time management.
Looking ahead, what are your goals for your practice and for LexLoft? What advice do you have for young lawyers blending traditional and modern legal fields?
As a lawyer, I’ve always aimed to give my best and carry forward the legacy my father and Senior built. There’s no “end goal” in this profession—it’s a constant journey.
But when it comes to LexLoft—I’m greedy! I want it to grow into one of the most recognized names in Media and Entertainment Law. And for starters, I’d love to see “LexLoft” mentioned in an aftermovie’s end credits.
To young lawyers: This profession may look glamorous from the outside—but it truly tests your patience. It’s not about just one big client or one case—it’s a slow, consistent process. If you remain loyal to the profession, all your hard work will eventually pay off. Just be patient and continue doing the work with consistency.
