Hello folks! I happen to be a first-gen law student who intends to carve out a career in litigation (I’m sternly fixated upon it, or even the disputes team at a law firm shall do fine). I have established 2 small businesses, (by virtue of which I assume that I will be able to sustain my family & initial years as a junior (until or unless a devastating scenario like covid emerges again), and therein I feel that I would be able to avoid falling into a hand-to-mouth situation. However, I am afflicted by a chaotic conundrum: whether to start out in my home ground (Kolkata) or venture towards the riskier waters of Mumbai. I happen to have good political & social connections in Kolkata (we are a middle-class family, but have amassed some influence owing to the efforts of my family), even though I cannot help but love my city more, yet I feel irresistibly seduced by the idea of being a litigator in Mumbai. My internship experience with a Criminal Defence Attorney at the Appellate Side of BHC, along with my childhood visits (my father was employed there for a decade prior to his retirement), & fascination with Bombay contribute significantly to this enchanting (perhaps unrealistic) idea.

You have my sincere apologies for such a long post and my general incompetence with the English language; however, I shall remain highly grateful to any response that could possibly offer me insight (even trollish or satirical ones, for I believe such responses can consist of the greatest wisdom:) into this question.

It's always a wiser decision to start out at your local HC. Why so? Simply for 2 main reasons-

Firstly, you're at the advantage of being at your home so you're gonna save a lot on rent and other expenses. Plus, your circle is probably wider and you are much more familiar with the way things work vis-a-vis say Mumbai or Delhi;

Secondly, Mumbai and Delhi are way too overcrowded with much supply of competent junior lawyers waiting to get a cut. Competition too fierce, rents too high and uncertainty of making it big in litigation- too much.

Better start out at Calcutta itself, don't restrict yourself only to the High Court but also gain experience in the subordinate courts as well. After let's say 4-5 years with a good mix of trial and Appellate experience, you may approach a SA in Delhi or Bombay, former being the better options due to lower costs of living and plethora of forums available. By that time you'll have a much better idea of what you want, a fresh graduate right outta law school is susceptible to making horrible decisions, so better take them when you're more mature.

All the best.

Stick to the city where you have a base.

I am from Bombay and can share some insight about the city, especially the HC scene. Bombay market is oversaturated, and dare I say, overrated. You cannot survive without a jack in the form of an entire family, or at least a family member deeply established in the city's legal scene. Even if your jack doesn't have a roaring practice, but is socially known, it'll help. Otherwise the Bombay scene treats juniors worse than office boys. You'll be paid lesser than an office-boy/ filing clerk if you join some senior. Seniors (by experience, not by designation alone) pass on their briefs to their kids, NOT to juniors. If the kids/ nephews-nieces havevnot yet joined they Bar, they hoard matters drafted by juniors like dragon's gold. Some seniors will make you draft matters from scratch, and won't even let you be in the well with them, forget joint Vakalatnamas. Effectively, you're drafting matters for the undeserving successors-in-waiting of the oldies. Clients gravitate towards those pepper-salt boomers, even if YOU have seen how these boomers are grossly underprepared.