From Small-Scale Business to the Courtroom: A Surprising Beginning

Panduranga Acharya never set out to become a lawyer—his journey unfolded almost by accident. After graduation, he wasn’t sure which professional path to choose. While running a small business and working on social initiatives, he found himself interacting closely with lawyers. Their confidence, fearlessness, and the respect they commanded left a deep impact on him. What began as admiration slowly turned into a calling, drawing him toward the world of law.

In his early years, Panduranga trained under a senior counsel in Bangalore, gaining hands-on exposure across a wide range of cases—from family courts and consumer forums to civil courts, magistrate courts, quasi-judicial bodies, and even the High Court. He drafted petitions, argued matters, and learned the discipline of courtroom practice. These formative experiences grounded him in the realities of the legal system and shaped his approach to the profession.

Shifting From Courtrooms to Corporates: A Tough but Transformative Transition

Panduranga’s move into the corporate legal world happened almost by chance. One of his litigation clients—a real estate company—offered him an in-house role, and he quickly discovered that he enjoyed the structure, independence, and balance it provided.

His real turning point came at Essar Telecom Retail, where he had to shift from thinking like a courtroom litigator to functioning as a corporate counsel. It wasn’t easy—he suddenly had to adapt to SOPs, standardised drafting, performance reviews, and team-driven decisions. Moving from being the sole legal strategist to collaborating within a large organisation required a complete mindset shift.

But as he began to understand the purpose behind corporate processes, the transition became smoother. He learned to blend legal accuracy with business practicality, manage external counsel, and navigate organisational expectations. This phase became the foundation for his growth into a seasoned in-house legal leader.

Understanding India’s Evolving Startup Landscape

For Panduranga, the heart of legal problem-solving lies in matching business challenges with regulatory realities. Each sector has its own governing ecosystem—telecom has TRAI and the Telegraph Act, consumer-facing companies deal with companies law, labor codes, food safety standards, legal metrology, and more.

But the law rarely evolves at the speed of business. Many modern business models exist in grey zones where legislation hasn’t yet caught up. In such cases, he believes legal teams must determine where they stand on the “grey spectrum”—whether they are in the lighter, more defensible zone or the risky, darker zone.

This gap between innovation and regulation is exactly why he advocates strongly for policy engagement. When industries participate in policymaking, it results in better clarity and more realistic frameworks. He cites the evolution of India’s e-commerce laws and the formal recognition of gig workers as strong examples of how industry-government collaboration can transform entire sectors.

Recent Policy Changes Impacting Businesses

According to him, while India has made significant progress in regulatory clarity, certain procedural inefficiencies still slow businesses down—especially licensing timelines.

He gives the example of weighing scales used for personal or kitchen use. While the government exempted them from calibration requirements under the Legal Metrology Act—a progressive move—retailers still technically require a dealer’s license to sell them. The licensing procedure is often slow and impractical, leading to a mismatch between policy intent and on-ground implementation. Such small but meaningful reforms can ease the compliance burden on startups and small businesses.

The Mistakes Founders Commonly Make

Panduranga categorises startup mistakes into strategic and operational.

Strategic Mistakes

Founders often ignore balanced negotiating during early fundraising. They may dilute control too much or fail to negotiate investor-reserved matters properly. Investors deserve protection and clarity over financial interests—but founders must also safeguard their autonomy in day-to-day business decisions.

Operational Mistakes

Startups tend to postpone crucial compliance steps—labour law adherence, establishment registrations, trademark filing, and even patent considerations. Although these can be fixed later, the effort required multiplies over time and exposes the company to unnecessary risks.

For Panduranga, good governance from day one shapes stronger, more resilient companies in the long run.

Advice to Founders Navigating India’s Legal & Regulatory Maze

Panduranga believes that every founder needs strong legal guidance from the very beginning—someone who understands their industry and can help them build the right foundation. The right counsel, he says, can save startups from avoidable mistakes by clearly explaining what regulations apply and what boundaries should never be crossed.

He stresses one thing repeatedly: avoid shortcut compliance. It may seem convenient early on, but it usually creates bigger problems later. Instead, founders should invest in simple, fundamental compliance structures that can grow along with the company.

For Panduranga, the goal is balance. Startups exist to grow, innovate, and create value—not to be buried under compliance. With the right systems and advisors, he believes founders can stay focused on their vision while remaining legally protected.

– By Tanishka Dutt