It all started with Aneja receiving an e-mail from co-writer Khanna that explained the story. As he delved into the material, he realised the potential and found himself captivated by the legal world. Aneja recalls, “I had not seen such a take on the legal world. Generally, in films and series, the story is based on one case, and it ends when the case ends. Our approach was to treat it like a workplace comedy, with the background of a sessions court. [It focuses] on the everyday lives of a lawyer, a judge and how the court managers deal with things. The idea was always to make a binge-able comedy series.”

While they began scripting in 2022, it took the duo a year-and-a-half to lock the cases. They drew inspiration from real-life court cases, which took them to the district courts in Delhi. “[We came across] so many bizarre cases because the right to legal remedy cannot be denied to anyone. In the first case, wherein a husband files for divorce because his new bride didn’t shy away on the first night, a regular person can ignore it, but the judge has to listen. We went to almost all the district courts in Delhi. Khanna has a friend who is a lawyer in Saket court, so we went there several times,” shares the writer, who was also in touch with other lawyers for information.

Poll

Who will win the Punjab Elections?

BJP 32.79%

AAP 42.62%

INC 24.59%

Submit

View All In Poll

Anant Joshi and Naila  Grewal in Maamla  Legal Hai

Characters and the cases

While many shows and films focus on lawyers and judges, Aneja also examined the workforce behind the scenes. “A staff of almost 100 people is running the show; it is their job to manage cases, send the public attending cases to the right courtroom, and manage parking. That is how the character of Vishwas [played by Anant Joshi] came to be,” he explains.

For director Pandey, who was brought on board by showrunner Sameer Saxena, it was initially difficult to believe that such cases existed. The selection of the cases was a meticulous process that had to match the character’s trajectory. “By the time I joined [the team], the cases were more or less locked. There were a lot of cases that didn’t make it to the final eight,” says Pandey.

Aneja gives one instance—in a weird turn of events, a daughter had sued her father for cheating in a game of Ludo. “Our cases had to be such that they went with the character’s journey. For example, the case of the parrot using abusive language was to show Sujata’s [Bisht’s character] journey of finally fighting a case on her own. There was a case between Starbucks and [another brand] called Sardarbucks. As a citizen, I can easily say it’s [blatant] copying, but in court, you have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the name has been copied. But we didn’t use it [as it didn’t take the narrative ahead].”

Kunal Aneja

Calling action

Before facing the camera, the cast underwent workshops and rehearsals. The exercise gave Pandey the opportunity to finalise the series’ treatment. “I had decided that between the punchline and realistic treatment, I would go with the latter. Sometimes, the jokes that are landing very well while shooting might not work on the edit table, and vice versa. So, we had to be careful of that,” he shares.

As a director, he claims there are three things he would never compromise on, the first being the support of the cast. He was grateful when veteran actors contributed to making the scene look better. He remembers how Kishan, who had missed a few rehearsals, would give suggestions that would elevate the sequence. “My favourite scenes were the ones with Brijendra Kala. In the scene where Sujata suggests to Tanvi Azmi’s judge character that the prosecutor has also [used profanities] for her, BK responds with a quick ‘no, no, no’. These were nuances he added to the character.”

The second factor was the set production. He recalls reading an article about a case in a Dhanbad district court where a person refused to testify in the absence of a dock. “The opening scene is where the [courtroom clerks] cart a dock for a witness to testify. That idea was to keep the look and feel real. The last factor is the edit. We even kept the bit when Ravi Kishan’s character fumbles in one of his speeches to [make it more] realistic.”

Co-writer Saurabh Pandey

The verdict

While navigating the comedic landscape, Aneja and Pandey were careful not to offend the legal community. They say that lawyers have applauded the series for its authenticity and humour. “While writing, we wondered if we were offending anyone because that was never the intention. Luckily, the lawyers who have reached out to us have liked the show,” assures Aneja. Pandey adds, “No matter which community got offended, we were sure the lawyer community would not because their notions of right and wrong are also legally driven.”