Building an independent practice at the Supreme Court of India demands patience, discipline, and an unwavering commitment to responsibility. In this in depth conversation, Anchit Bhandari, Advocate on Record, Supreme Court of India, reflects on his journey as a first generation lawyer, the early uncertainties of litigation, and the deliberate transition from a structured law firm environment to independent advocacy. Drawing from experiences, he offers a grounded perspective on credibility, courtroom strategy, and the long view required to build a practice rooted in integrity and consistency.
This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team
Before all the accolades and gold medals you received in law school, what early influences first sparked your commitment to pursuing law?
Starting from how this journey started, my inclination towards law developed gradually, largely because it was an unfamiliar territory for me. But yes, I come from a generation that was largely hit by the charm depicted in the courtrooms on televisions. That in itself made the profession intriguing. So, opting law as a career choice was not a difficult decision to make, but it was surely not what I aimed for since my childhood. Being a first-generation entrant into the field, the idea of choosing law was majorly driven by curiosity and the desire to step into a profession that demanded clarity of thought, power, and independent judgment. In a nutshell, law felt like a profession where I could build something of my own, develop a distinct identity, and commit myself to a demanding but meaningful path.
As a young lawyer stepping into practice, what initial struggles or uncertainties shaped your early professional years?
Litigation is uncertain in many ways, particularly in the formative years of practice. A young advocate invests long hours in preparation and effort, yet there is no assurance of when the next brief will come at the desk or whether that effort will translate into tangible work. This persistent unpredictability plays a defining role in shaping early professional journey.
One of the foremost challenges (of course it may be subjective) is earning the trust of clients. In the initial stages, age and limited years at the Bar often overshadow competence. Convincing a client to repose faith in a young practitioner requires time, consistency and demonstrated diligence. And it is not merely confined to clients, but it extends equally, and perhaps more crucially, to seniors at the Bar. For a young advocate, I feel it is a significant milestone when a senior not just rely on your work, but feel assured of your preparation, and confidently entrust you with handling matters independently before the court. In my journey, I was fortunate to find a mentor in Mr. Kashyap Joshi, Advocate, Gujarat High Court. His guidance went far beyond technical instruction. Through his unwavering support and steady encouragement, he placed trust in my abilities at a time when self-doubt often outweighs confidence.
Alongside these challenges, financial realities present their own trials. Income in early years is irregular, while expenses remain constant. Believe it or not, but there is an unspoken pressure to accept modest remuneration, or even unpaid work, in order to remain afloat and visible. Over time, one learns to navigate these strides with balance, striving to preserve professional dignity while working steadily towards stability.
In hindsight, these uncertainties, both professional and personal, quietly mould a young advocate as it instils humility, perseverance and gratitude for those who extend trust and guidance.
What was that one turning point in your career that steered you into a different direction and shaped your practice today?
Well, there was no turning point in my career as such, but yes, the transition from a structured well-paying law firm environment to committing fully to practice before the Supreme Court was indeed a major decision as it involved a lot of adjustments and patience. This decision was not easy for me back then and required a lot of courage back then. But back then, my parents trusted my judgment, encouraged me to take the long view, and stood firmly by me during the initial phase of this transition.
This shift in the trajectory changed the way I approached the law. I moved from a defined role within an institutional setup to complete ownership of cases. This shift instilled a deeper sense of discipline, responsibility and attention to detail. Independent practice before the Supreme Court also sharpened my accountability. With little margin of error, a lot of important things in the process became central to my daily work.
But I would not complain. Even though the journey is slow, results are unpredictable and uncertainty is your best friend, but this turning point was defining. This journey has taught me to value consistency over speed, credibility over comfort and long term professional growth over immediate certainty.
What were the biggest adjustments you faced while transitioning from a law firm role to independent counsel practice before the Supreme Court?
I started my career with Juris Corp, Mumbai wherein I was a part of Securities and Derivatives Team, though the same was for a brief period. For me, working in a law firm was definitely a life changing experience. There is no doubt that law firms are exceptional in terms of exposure that they offer. The reason for the same is in terms of big corporate clients and working on important matters to get a steady and good income, which of course is a boost for any young lawyer when one puts the first step in the profession. However, working in a lawyer’s chamber can be invaluable in terms of building skill set and having independence to learn not just drafting/researching but to handle your own briefs while working.
Having said that, one of the biggest adjustments in moving from a law firm role to independent counsel practice before the Supreme Court was the sudden shift in responsibility. In a firm setup, work is structured and supported by teams, systems and there is a continuous flow of work. In a law firm, the organization often speaks for you. As an independent practitioner, every simple aspect of the case rests on your shoulders, from client communication and strategy to drafting, filing and follow-up with the Registry. In short, everything is personal and is earned slowly. That transition demands a higher level of self-discipline and accountability from day one.
Personally, the idea and feeling of standing in court and persuading the sharpest mind in your field gives me an immense satisfaction and pride and I don’t shy away from admitting that I don’t see any other field that can be more enterprising and challenging than this. With each passing case, I see myself growing and learning. Overall, the transition tested resilience, patience, and judgment and forced me to grow not just as an advocate, but as a professional who understands responsibility in its fullest sense.
How has your experience across diverse areas of law shaped your courtroom strategy, and which case proved to be the most challenging for you personally?
My exposure to different areas of law has shaped my courtroom strategy in a very practical way. But sometimes in courts, merely practicality does not work, there are few cases where emotions and compassion work more than practicality. But yes, no two cases can be approached with a fixed formula. Therefore, no matter what strategy you adopt, there are cases where you need to think beyond the black letters of law. And of course, in matters where the question pertains to personal liberty, livelihood, any matrimonial disputes or basic human rights, I feel strict rigidities don’t work, or rather it should not work. This cross-disciplinary experience helps me anticipate the court’s concern, balance strict legal submissions with equity, and know when to press the law and when to invite the court to look at the larger picture.
I remember one matter that stood out which was not challenging in the conventional sense, but was deeply satisfying professionally and personally. It involved a government servant who was convicted for an offence that had taken place more than 22 years earlier. As a result of the conviction, he lost all his terminal service benefits. I pleaded for the benefit of probation, but the Supreme Court was not inclined to grant it. At that stage, I had to change my strategy instantly and instead shift my focus from contesting the conviction to addressing the consequences flowing from it. I placed before the Court the peculiar facts of the case: for over two decades, the Petitioner, who was now a senior citizen, had not received a single rupee from his service, and his wife was hapless, bedridden and was entirely dependent on him even for her daily chores. His son was mentally disabled who too required proper full time care and protection. The submission was not to dilute accountability, but to ensure that the punishment did not become disproportionately harsh in light of the long delay and the present circumstances.
The Supreme Court was persuaded to interfere to a limited extent and directed the concerned government department to consider my client’s case. Though the conviction stood, the order opened a window for relief and acknowledged the human cost involved.
That case reinforced for me the importance of proportionality, especially in long pending matters where legal outcomes have severe personal and professional implications. It also underscored the judiciary’s effort to balance the rule of law with compassion, ensuring that justice remains firm, yet humane.
In your view, how has legal research and academics complemented and strengthened your litigation practice?
Legal research and academic engagement have played a deeply complementary role for me in strengthening my litigation practice. Even in academics, legal research is something which you have to incorporate every now and then. In that sense, I never confined academics to mere theory but I have consistently translated it to form clear strategies and more persuasive courtroom submissions. Every legal research requires a different structure and depth and that is what you require in advocacy. Once you have a habit of digging deep, it encourages you to move beyond the surface of statutes and precedents and instead understand other narratives also. This habit has always helped me to anticipate possible counter-arguments, identify subtle distinctions in precedents and rely on authorities that truly advance the client’s case.
Academic exposure during law school time had instilled discipline in me. While reading, writing and engaging with scholarly work demands precision in language and clarity of thoughts, over a period of time, it has helped me refine my skills and helped me articulate complex legal issues in a coherent and persuasive manner.
At the same time, I give significant credit to my first mentor and my guru, Mr. Rishabh Sancheti, Advocate, Supreme Court of India, who had played a pivotal role in shaping my approach to court drafting. His guidance bridged the gap between academic understanding and courtroom realities.
In essence, the combination of strong legal research, academic engagement, and hands-on mentorship has given my litigation practice both intellectual depth and practical effectiveness. Together, they have refined my analytical ability, strengthened my drafting and enabled me to assist the court in a meaningful and responsible manner.
Becoming an Advocate on Record is a significant milestone. How did you prepare for this role, and how do you manage the responsibilities that come with it in practice?
When I started practicing in the Supreme Court, I came across this designation and this became the next professional goal which I wanted to achieve as this is one distinct designation which is given only by the Supreme Court after testing the candidate’s aptitude and thorough understanding about the Supreme Court practice. As I reminisce the process of preparation for the Advocate-on-Record examination, it was a test of discipline. My preparation for the examination was continuous as I gained a lot of exposure while I was practicing. This examination does not test your theoretical knowledge at all but requires a deep understanding of Supreme Court Rules, drafting and procedural nuances which is internalised from day-to-day practice. Regular revision, drafting, and spending time at the registry to file a case to ultimately get it listed helped me align theoretical preparation with practical requirements of the Registry and the Court.
In practice, managing the responsibilities of an Advocate-on-Record requires a high degree of accountability and precision. Advocate-on-Record is not merely a designation, but it is a responsibility that begins from the very first filing one makes independently. In practice, I manage the responsibilities of an Advocate-on-Record by treating procedural compliances as non-negotiable. Adherence to timelines, clear communication with clients and briefing counsel, and accountability for every filing are central to my approach. I consciously invest time in double checking filings, anticipating registry objections, and maintaining clarity in pleadings, as these small but critical aspects often determine the smooth progress of a matter.
On a personal note, this journey would not have been possible without the unwavering support of my wife, Shruti Jain. She stood firmly by my side throughout the preparation period, often absorbing the pressures that come with long study hours, uncertainty and professional stress. Her patience, encouragement and confidence in me played a crucial role in keeping me focused and grounded. To be honest, it was only because of her confidence that I was able to decide on starting up with my independent practice. So, I shall always be grateful for her invisible support and belief that changed my destiny. She understood and accepted all the impediments and uncertainties with a huge smile, which made things a lot easier for me. My family and my in-laws were exceptionally supportive and they understood what it means for an advocate to start with his independent practice. It wouldn’t have been possible for me to transition to independent practice without their backing as well.
Overall, becoming an Advocate-on-Record has made me more conscious of responsibility, made me more disciplined. It has also reinforced my belief that credibility before the Court is built through consistent effort, integrity and the support system that enables one to give their best, both personally and professionally.
How do you envision the future of your practice, and what goals guide your professional journey going forward?
In my limited experience at the Bar, I would always prefer a steady, experience driven journey rather than a rapid or headline oriented one. My focus is on building a litigation practice that is known for reliability, sound judgment and smart advocacy. It’s still a long way to go and it’s too early to envision something concrete when you are learning every single day. I always prefer to make small doable goals which I can achieve and I don’t expect a lot from myself. I believe that there is no end to expectations and I know my strengths and weaknesses and I am happy to improve every day with no worry about being judged or being compared with anyone else’s journey.
But yes, in the long run, my goal is to build a practice marked by integrity, intellectual rigour and service to the system. I see litigation not as a race for quick visibility, but as a long-term pursuit where consistency and preparation ultimately define professional standing.
What advice would you offer to aspiring lawyers who view your journey as a model of perseverance and long term success?
Any area of law you practice comes with a horde of challenges be it corporate practice, in-house counsel or litigation practice. For a career in litigation, one should always have an appetite for patience and of course learning. And by learning I do not merely refer to academic learning but one should always be ready to learn all sorts of work, including spending time in court registry to understand practical nuances, which no law school would teach. Another important aspect is to stay grounded and humble with utmost humility. There are days where you are at your peak in terms of getting favourable orders from the court, at the same time, there are few days where you are in your hard times.
Early years can feel slow and uncertain, and it is easy to measure progress by comparisons or quick outcomes. I would strongly recommend to resist that urge. Therefore, every young counsel should be willing to improvise with belief in oneself and no one should become complacent about their trajectory in the field of law.
Seek good mentorship and remain teachable. As stated earlier, I was blessed to have a mentor like Mr. Rishabh Sancheti, Advocate who showed me the ropes of the field and who gave me room to travel in my own growth path, which is ultimately helping me in my independent practice.
However, an important advice to all my young readers. There will be periods of self-doubt and many other uncertainties revolving around. But that is part of the journey, not a sign of failure. Therefore, surround yourself with people who believe in you, and do not be afraid to lean on them when the path feels heavy. Aim to become a good lawyer before you aim to become a known one.
Get in touch with Anchit Bhandari –
What a clarity of thoughts !