1984

The Formative Years

Sanjay Jain’s legal odyssey began after he completed his B.Com (Hons.), when the allure of law proved irresistible. He chose Law Centre – I, Faculty of Law, Delhi University, for its flexible schedule and illustrious faculty comprising of legendary professors at that time. The timing of the classes allowed him to pursue multiple extracurricular activities which DU had to offer in abundance, in the form of debates, declamation, poetry, creative writing and other literary events. It was here that he encountered extraordinary individuals from various backgrounds, leaving a lasting impact on him. His election as President of the Law Centre – I Student Union in 1984-85, as an independent candidate, was a crowning achievement of these formative years.

1986

Solo Legal Journey Begins

Entering the professional realm, Sanjay faced the daunting task of starting as a first-generation lawyer, without any influential connections. The foremost door was opened by his first mentor, Mr. Satish Chandra Sharda, a seasoned civil lawyer. Under Sharda’s tutelage, Sanjay gained real-world legal experience, working without remuneration but fuelled by a fierce desire for self-reliance and independence. In August 1986, he embarked on his solo legal journey.

Sanjay’s early clientele was referred primarily by his law faculty, peers and lawyers who recognized his potential. A modest financial boost of Rs. 15,000 from his father helped him set up his chamber at the Tis Hazari Court. His office in Jor Bagh, acquired after winning a crucial rent dispute, not only brought him professional recognition but also underlined the importance of a prestigious address in Delhi’s legal circles.

1991

Diversifying the Client Base to Corporate Sector

The initial years saw Sanjay focusing on traditional civil litigation. However, the advent of Mr. Manmohan Singh as Finance Minister opened new opportunities for legal profession in the commercial world, particularly with the entry of MNCs, paving the way and diversifying the client base for trial court lawyers like him. Soon after that, he gained American Express and GE Capital amongst other corporate entities as his major clients.

1998

Expanding Horizons

A unique case in the Guwahati High Court for a lottery distributor further expanded his horizons, leading to a professional relationship with Sh. Arun Jaitley. Between 1998 and 2001, Sanjay’s role as an of-counsel for various law firms, not only in litigation but also in mergers and acquisitions, increased his exposure, body of work and credibility across India.

2005

The Silk Route

In the new millennium, Sanjay’s responsibilities grew. From 2001 to 2004, he served as the Central Government Standing Counsel for the Delhi High Court. His appointment as the presenting officer for vigilance cases against Judicial Officers and his designation as a Senior Advocate by the Delhi High Court in December 2005 marked significant milestones in his career.

2014

Additional Solicitor General of India for the Delhi High Court

As a Senior Advocate from December 2005, he re-invented his wheels exclusively as an arguing counsel and in no time, made his mark in commercial litigation, particularly in the field of intellectual property laws, arbitration law, mercantile laws and high-stake family partition disputes. His appointment as the Additional Solicitor General for the Delhi High Court in 2014 brought a new level of complexity and challenge, dealing with a wide array of high-stakes cases.

2015

Appointment to prosecute Impeachment Motion against a High Court Judge before Judicial Inquiry Committee.

In July 2015, on the motion of impeachment signed by 50 MPs of Rajya Sabha against a Judge of Madhya Pradesh High Court, Sanjay Jain was appointed to pursue / prosecute the same before the Judicial Inquiry Committee (JIC). Impeachment motions being rare, the aforesaid appointment symbolizes an acknowledgment of Sanjay Jain’s eminence as a lawyer of merit, repute and integrity.

2019

Additional Solicitor General for the Supreme Court of India

In January 2019, his appointment as the ASG for the Supreme Court of India expanded his horizons and seamlessly, in addition to his earlier repertoire of cases, as ASG for Delhi High Court, for Government as well as Public Sector Undertakings, he started handling even more diverse cases in the field of constitution, taxation, insolvency and bankruptcy, land acquisition, reservation policy, arbitration, criminal appeals, high-stake bail matters, money laundering, and PILs.

2022

Special Public Prosecutor for CBI in 2G Scam Cases.

In April 2022, Sanjay Jain was appointed as a Special Public Prosecutor for CBI to conduct cases arising out of the 2G Scam, before Special CBI Courts, High Court of Delhi and Supreme Court of India. 2G Spectrum Scam is one of the most talked about events in the post-liberalization era and led to an extremely complex thread of litigation. The case is also known for being one of the rare cases where the Supreme Court not only appointed the Public Prosecutor and approved the choice of the Judge but also monitored the investigation. In that context, the appointment is significant and reflects the profound confidence that the Government reposes in Sanjay Jain’s ability as a lawyer.

2023

Chambers of Sanjay Jain, Senior Advocate

After a distinguished term as the Additional Solicitor General for the Supreme Court of India, Sanjay resumed his independent practice in 2023, drawing upon his invaluable wealth of experience. Additionally, in acknowledgement of his contributions to the legal domain, he was bestowed with an Honorary Doctorate by Dr. K.N. Modi University, further enhancing his esteemed reputation.

Key Legal Matters Argued by Sanjay Jain, Senior Advocate

Sanjay Jain has appeared in a myriad of cases pertaining to the interpretation of the Constitution and/or challenge to the vires of an Act, Rule, Regulations, Notifications and/or delegated legislations. Some of the key matters include the following –

  • Governance model for UT of Delhi and Puducherry;
  • Levy of tax on water and petroleum products by State Legislature
  • Imposition of Infrastructure Fee by State Authorities;
  • Appointment conditions of judicial and technical members in State and District Consumer Forums;
  • Restrictions imposed, under the FCRA, on NGOs in receiving foreign contributions;
  • Challenge on various provisions on the powers and the composition of the Competition Commission of India;
  • Challenge to the various Drug Price Control Orders in respect of various pharmaceutical compositions and apparatus;
  • Challenge to the disinvestment policy;
  • Challenge to the dilution/withdrawal of subsidy regime in the fertilizer sector;
  • Challenge to various provisions of regulating the Gas Pipeline infrastructure under the PNGRB Act, Rules and Regulations;
  • Challenge to various provisions of Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Act, 2015 particularly in disputes relating to reallocation of blocks through reverse auction mechanism, payment of compensation to prior allotees and impact on power plants, both captive and non-captive;
  • Challenge to the Master Plan of Delhi and the enactments to maintain the status quo regarding unauthorized constructions in Delhi.
  • Private Entities

Since the inception of his career, Sanjay Jain has handled a wide variety of commercial disputes for prominent commercial entities such as GE Captial, American Express Bank Limited, Punjab National Bank, State Bank of India PayTM, USHA International Ltd, Woodland, Google, Blackberry, Timken, ZKL Group, Maruti Suzuki, Tata Chemical, Viacom Media (passive infrastructure in telecom), John Distilleries, Procter & Gamble, Financial Times, Rolex, Polo Ralph Lauren, Xerox, Charted Financial Analyst (CFA Institute), Woodland, Exxon, Baker-Hughes, Gillette, Timberland, Woodland, Schott, Dr. Willmar Schwabe and Dr. Reckeweg, ELF,  Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI), Fortis Hospitals, Eli Lilly, Mylan Laboratories, Symed Labs, Cricbuzz etc.

Sanjay Jain has not only handled matters pertaining to constitutional vires of various amendments and notifications under the Companies Act but also Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Under his guidance, a new dimension to the landmark Arcelor Mittal case is currently pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the question of law being as to whether the “clean slate theory” also applies to a guarantor for a guarantee which has not yet arisen.

  • Public Sector Undertakings

On the PSU side, Sanjay has handled high stakes disputes for DFCCIL, CONCOR, RITES, DMRC, GAIL, THDC, NHPC, NTPC, SJVN, Coal India Ltd, PowerGrid, Power Finance Corporation, ONGC, Indian Oil, Bharat Petroleum, Numaligarh Refinery Ltd (NRL), Indraprastha Gas (IGL), Haryana and Karnataka and Arunachal State Utilities, SAIL,  STC,  Engineers India Limited (EIL), Airport Authority of India (AAI),  NBCC, HUDCO, National Textile Corporation (NTC), NAFED, MMTC, BHEL, EESL, MTNL, Rural Electrification Corporation (REC), Shipping Corporation India, NALCO, India Trade Promotion Organisation (ITPO), New India Assurance Corporation, etc.

  • Industry Regulators

Besides representing PSUs, he has also represented industry/ sector regulators such as SEBI, Competition Commission of India (CCI), PNGRB, IRDA, Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), NABARD, Medical Council of India, Pharmacy Council of India, University Grant Commission, Central Board of Secondary Education, National Council for Teachers’ Education (NCTE), Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and EPFO.

Sanjay has handled high-stake international arbitrations, including enforcement of awards, for corporate entities of South Africa, Thailand, UK and South Korea besides those for the Government of India in various sectors, such as petroleum, telecom, power, construction and pharmaceuticals. In the spectrum of domestic arbitration, he possesses enormous experience in handling commercial arbitrations of all types at multiple states, including enforcement of awards.

Sanjay has played an instrumental role in numerous high-stakes criminal law matters. He has represented various state departments and law enforcement agencies, as well as private citizens, in criminal matters that have set precedents in India’s jurisprudence. Below are a few of the noteworthy matters he has acted in:

  • Represented the CBI in the matters pertaining to the Urea Scam, 2G Spectrum Scam and Antrix- Devas Scam.
  • Represented the State in the Lajpat Nagar Bomb Blasts Case in Supreme Court, resulting in reversal the acquittal of many accused persons.
  • Represented, besides CBI, other investigating agencies including NIA, EoW of Delhi Police, SFIO, State Police and Enforcement Directorate in various high-profile matters.
  • Represented the Central Government before multiple tribunals constituted under Unlawful Activities Prevention Act to justify the Central Government’s decision to ban anti national organisations like IRF, Jamaat-e-Islami, ULFA, LTTE, NDFB and some other ultra units in the North-eastern States.
  • Represented various MNCs, builders, individuals and victims in large number of criminal matters before the trial courts, tribunals, high courts and the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
  • Represented state agencies as well as private individuals, before the Tribunal set up to deal with the offences covered under the PMLA, Black Money Act, FEMA and Benami Transactions Act.

Sanjay has witnessed notable success in handling complex tax disputes in both direct and indirect tax streams before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, Delhi High Court, Madhya Pradesh High Court (Indore and Jabalpur), Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur), Orissa High Court (Cuttack), Uttarakhand High Court (Nainital) and Himachal Pradesh High Court (Shimla).

His experience in tax matters include disputes pertaining to validity of raid proceedings, reopening of assessment proceedings, exemption in relation to cash transactions, transfer pricing issues, review power of ITAT, levy of tax on re-insurance transactions etc.

In the GST regime, Sanjay Jain has handled complex and unique issues such as issue pertaining to the hypothetical claim of input tax credit refund by a company for its SEZ unit also on the basis of input service distribution, without such unit actually having earned the same.