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