In Conversation with (Dr.) Aditya Sondhi
Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India
Q1. Your journey to becoming a Senior Advocate at the Supreme Court of India is a testament to years of dedication and excellence. Could you take us through the defining moments, challenges, and experiences that shaped your career and ultimately led to this distinction?
(Dr.) Aditya Sondhi:
I was designated as a Senior Advocate by the Karnataka High Court in 2014, where I had commenced my practice in 1998. After practising there for over two decades, I shifted my practice to the Supreme Court in 2021. The designation remains one of the most cherished milestones of my career, especially because I do not come from a family of lawyers and received the honour relatively early in my professional journey.
From the very beginning, I adopted a simple mantra: argue my own cases rather than brief senior advocates. I believe that this approach played a role in shaping my professional identity and perhaps even contributed to my designation.
The most challenging phase for any lawyer is often the transition to independent practice. During those years, one has to deal with the scarcity of briefs, financial uncertainty, and the constant struggle for recognition. It can be an isolating experience. Alongside these practical challenges come ethical dilemmas. When you are young and work is scarce, it becomes much harder to decline briefs that may not align with your principles. Professional ethics are not always fully formed at that stage, but standing by a principled practice ultimately defines one's career. I would like to think that this commitment to ethics also weighed with the Full Court while considering my designation.
My practice has been wonderfully diverse. I initially handled predominantly commercial matters in my senior's chamber. After establishing my independent practice, I consciously made room for more public law matters while also teaching law. This opened the door to significant public interest litigation and deepened my engagement with constitutional law, particularly issues relating to reservations. It also awakened my interest in studying caste from both legal and social perspectives, a subject that remains deeply meaningful to me.
Q2. The legal profession is evolving rapidly with advancements in technology and changing judicial practices. How do you see the role of advocacy adapting over the next decade?
(Dr.) Aditya Sondhi:
Like every other profession, the law is inevitably going to collide head-on with artificial intelligence. While technology undoubtedly offers tremendous opportunities, I would caution against outsourcing our minds to AI merely because it is convenient.
Advocacy must remain fundamentally human. It should preserve its strengths as a humane process that values intellect, philosophy, preparation, and courage. Lawyers should continue taking up meaningful and difficult causes rather than becoming overly dependent on technological shortcuts.
I have already encountered AI-generated briefing notes from some Advocates-on-Record, and they simply do not resonate. AI is certainly the most significant disruptor we have seen, but when I read concise and powerful judgments written over a century ago, I am reminded that the essence of advocacy has never changed. Clarity of thought, thorough preparation, and persuasive advocacy remain timeless. If technology helps us conduct research faster, that is an added advantage—but beyond that, advocates should not lose their essential character.
Q3. Many young lawyers aspire to practice before the Supreme Court. What skills, habits, and experiences should they cultivate in the early years of their careers to build a strong foundation?
(Dr.) Aditya Sondhi:
Personally, I believe that lawyers benefit immensely from first gaining substantial experience before High Courts, trial courts, and tribunals before moving to the Supreme Court. Of course, there are exceptional individuals who begin their careers directly before the Supreme Court and excel.
For young lawyers starting here, my advice is simple: understand every case from the ground up. Begin with the original pleadings—the plaint, writ petition, complaint, or other initiating documents. Study the evidence carefully, identify the applicable statutory provisions and precedents, and only then examine the judgments passed by the lower courts.
Too often, lawyers limit their understanding to the High Court's judgment alone. This deprives them of appreciating the nuances that emerge from the foundational documents and evidence. A thorough, bottom-up understanding enables lawyers to develop more creative, complete, and persuasive arguments.
Q4. Looking back on your journey, is there a case or professional experience that fundamentally shaped your approach to advocacy and legal ethics?
(Dr.) Aditya Sondhi:
I do not believe that any single case defines who we are as advocates.
We are the cumulative product of all the matters we handle, the effort we invest, the lessons we learn, the reflections we make, and even the mistakes we commit. Every case contributes something to our professional evolution, and together they shape both our advocacy and our ethical outlook.
(Dr.) Aditya Sondhi:
I am not quite as old as the question suggests! However, after nearly twenty-eight years at the Bar, I have come to believe that the quality of justice depends significantly upon judges who possess both sensitivity towards constitutional rights and the courage to pass equitable orders in deserving cases.
Access to justice should not merely mean access to a courtroom; it must mean meaningful access to justice itself as a tangible outcome. Much of this depends upon the quality, independence, and courage of the judiciary.
At the same time, the Bar carries an equally significant responsibility. Lawyers must remain willing to represent unpopular, difficult, and even non-remunerative causes. If the Bar becomes complacent or pliant, it would be hypocritical to expect the Bench alone to uphold justice. Meaningful reform therefore begins with us as advocates.
Institutionally, reforms are required in judicial appointments, legal education, and professional leadership to ensure that both the Bench and the Bar are equipped to serve those who need justice most urgently.
As far as efficiency is concerned, the challenges are numerous and complex. I have often wondered whether certain administrative functions of the courts could be managed by professional private institutions with expertise in public administration. Such a model could improve efficiency significantly, although it also raises legitimate concerns regarding the integrity of an essential public institution. The idea deserves thoughtful examination.
Ultimately, better preparation by lawyers, candid legal advice that discourages unnecessary litigation, greater reliance on alternative dispute resolution, thoughtful use of technology, and more timely judicial appointments can collectively improve the efficiency of our justice delivery system.
Q6. What advice would you give to law students and young advocates who aspire not only to succeed professionally but also to make a meaningful contribution to the legal profession and society?
(Dr.) Aditya Sondhi:
Professional success should ultimately be measured by one's contribution to the legal system and society rather than by professional accolades alone.
If, over time, you do not evolve into a thought leader and someone willing to champion worthy causes, the size of your clientele or your income tax returns matters very little.
My advice to every aspiring lawyer is this: build a practice that helps build your character. Let your professional journey shape the kind of person you become. Do not merely become a successful lawyer become someone whose work leaves a lasting and meaningful impact. In short, build your practice, but never become a caricature of success.
