Abhay Chitravanshi is an Advocate practicing before the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court of India, with a focused practice in criminal and white collar litigation, commercial disputes, and arbitration. Having appeared across constitutional courts and arbitral forums, he approaches advocacy with structure, commercial awareness, and measured persuasion. As a Partner leading the Litigation vertical, his work reflects credibility, discipline, and composure in high stakes matters.
This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team
What inspired you to choose law as a profession, and what experience ultimately convinced you that litigation was your calling?
Law, for me, was never merely a professional choice, it was an intellectual calling. I was drawn to the intersection of creativity, expression, persuasion and principle. The courtroom is one of the few places where language, logic and temperament converge in real time to shape outcomes.
What ultimately convinced me that litigation was my calling was the first time I realised that it requires intense devotion and unparalleled preparation, which can only ultimately translate into favorable results. Standing in court and witnessing how clarity of thought can shift judicial perception was transformative. Litigation is not about argument; it is about structured persuasion under pressure, and that environment felt instinctively natural to me.
In your early years at the Bar, working alongside some of the country’s leading legal minds, which experiences most strongly shaped your foundation as an advocate?
The most formative experiences were not the headline matters but the discipline behind them, brief reading at 2 a.m., refining drafts repeatedly, watching seniors argue without raising their voice yet commanding complete attention.
Observing how leading counsel think several moves ahead, anticipate the Bench, understand the opposing strategy, and subtly shape the narrative taught me that advocacy is an art or rather poetry in motion. You do not recite in court; you reveal what has already been crafted.
The emphasis on preparation, restraint and credibility formed the bedrock of my foundation.
As a JAG 23 merit candidate and later a qualified Supreme Court Legal Researcher, how did you navigate such demanding milestones, and what resources can law students use to achieve similar ones?
Those milestones demanded structured consistency rather than bursts of motivation. I treated preparation like daily training: disciplined and cumulative.
For students aspiring to similar paths:
- Read judgments end-to-end, not summaries.
- Develop command over bare acts, it is the skeleton of litigation.
- Use resources like SCC Online and Manupatra for research depth.
- Appreciate different perspectives coming from everywhere.
- Study past papers and maintain writing discipline.
- Most importantly, build analytical stamina. Competitive milestones reward endurance as much as brilliance.
Success in such examinations is less about talent and more about sustained rigor.
Was there a particular case or courtroom moment that fundamentally transformed how you understand advocacy and legal strategy?
Yes. In my 3rd year of practice, it was an admission hearing in a criminal quashing matter before the Delhi High Court, where I was pressing for an interim stay. From the outset, the Bench appeared unconvinced and had almost indicated that no interim stay would be granted. The Hon’ble Judge candidly acknowledged limited engagement with criminal law and seemed inclined to proceed with issuance of Notice without staying the matter.
For the next 20-25 minutes, I focused purely on structure. I walked the Court through landmark judgments of the Supreme Court of India, followed by binding precedents of the Delhi High Court, carefully demonstrating the factual basis for interim protection in such cases.
Gradually, the Court’s posture shifted, from resistance to engagement. Questions became exploratory, and ultimately, interim stay was granted.
In that moment, I realised something enduring: no courtroom outcome is ever completely predetermined. With composure, clarity, and authority of precedent, even a seemingly closed mind can open. That day fundamentally reshaped how I understand advocacy, it is not about pushing back; it is about persuading through structure.
When representing large corporations, how do you balance commercial objectives with the practical realities of courtroom litigation?
Corporate clients think in terms of timelines, risk matrices and cost exposure. Courts operate on procedure, persuasion and judicial discretion.
Balancing the two requires translation. My role is to convert commercial objectives into legally sustainable strategies. Sometimes the most commercially sound advice is to avoid prolonged litigation. At other times, firmness is essential.
The key is managing expectations without diluting courtroom integrity. Credibility before the Bench is non-negotiable, even for the largest client.
Now as a Partner, what defining turning point shaped the direction your career has taken?
While working on a complex commercial dispute, Mr. Amit Manchanda had the opportunity to closely assess my approach to Litigation and courtroom strategy. That engagement eventually led to my entrustment with leading the firm’s Litigation vertical. The defining shift was moving from being an executing counsel to also being a strategic decision-maker. When you become a Partner, you are not merely arguing matters, you are building teams, managing risk, shaping client relationships and setting standards. The transition from individual performance to institutional excellence fundamentally shaped my trajectory.
Having appeared before the Supreme Court of India, the Delhi High Court, DIAC and other tribunals, what inner discipline keeps you motivated to practice across forums?
The forum may change; Whether before the Supreme Court of India, the Delhi High Court, District Courts, or arbitral institutions such as DIAC, the discipline remains identical: clarity, preparation, and composure. Consistency across forums comes from respecting process. I approach each matter as if credibility must be freshly earned. That internal reset sustains motivation.
Across trials, cross-examinations, arbitrations and white-collar matters, which case has challenged you the most and why?
The most challenging matters are those where law, fact and perception intersect. White-collar and commercial disputes often carry reputational consequences beyond monetary stakes. In such matters, every procedural step has strategic weight. The difficulty lies not in complexity alone but in consequence. When the margin for error is minimal, discipline becomes paramount.
That said, if there is one aspect of litigation that I find uniquely challenging, and deeply energising, it is cross-examination. To me, cross-examination is the truest test of a lawyer’s creative prowess. It is not merely about asking questions; it is about extracting truth from within the existing factual framework. It requires mastery over the record, anticipation of the witness’s responses, and a sharp command of procedural law. You must think three steps ahead while remaining composed in the present moment.
It is perhaps the most intellectually intense exercise in advocacy, and I will admit, it gives me a certain professional kick.
After years of focused litigation and handling cases before multiple forums, how do you envision your next phase of growth?
The next phase is about depth over dispersion. I intend to consolidate expertise and arguments in White & Blue Collar Crimes, complex Civil & Commercial litigation and Arbitration while building the firm’s structured litigation practice that emphasizes research, mentoring and institutional credibility. Growth, at this stage, is not about volume. It is about impact and influence.
What advice would you offer to students who aspire to build a litigation career similar to yours?
Litigation rewards patience.
- Do not chase visibility; chase competence.
- Read more than you speak.
- Protect your credibility fiercely.
- Develop financial resilience in the initial years.
- Seek mentors who demand excellence.
Litigation is not a sprint. It is a career of endurance.
How do you like to spend your time outside the law, and what keeps you grounded beyond the courtroom?
Outside the profession, I am deeply drawn to mountains, cultures and words.
I enjoy climbing mountains, not just as a physical pursuit, but as a reminder of scale and silence. High altitudes have a way of dissolving ego and sharpening perspective(s). I also enjoy exploring different cultures, observing how people think, live and express themselves beyond professional frameworks.
And perhaps most personally, I write poetry. I have been writing since the 10th standard. Writing allows me to process intensity in a different language, one that is not adversarial or strategic. It keeps me grounded and rooted to something beyond vocation. In many ways, it balances the sharp edges of litigation with introspection.
Get in touch with Abhay Chitravanshi –
