Juspay SDE Intern Interview experience

Recently, I went through a 7-round interview process for a Software Development Engineer Intern role at Juspay.

the experience was one of the most intense and rewarding learning opportunities I’ve had so far.

What stood out to me wasn’t any single question — it was how each stage tested a completely different skill set.

Stage 1: Online Assessments

The first three rounds focused on core problem-solving and fundamentals:

• DSA assessments involving Trees and Graphs • MCQs covering Aptitude, Physics, Operating Systems, and CS fundamentals • A Hackathon challenge centered around a tree-locking problem

At first glance, the hackathon looked like a standard data structures problem. Looking back, it was my first exposure to thinking about synchronization, shared resources, and the challenges that arise when multiple operations interact with the same data structure.

Stage 2: Elimination Round

The first interview consisted of DSA problems followed by a deep dive into my resume and projects.

This round taught me that solving a problem is only half the battle. Being able to explain design decisions, justify trade-offs, and communicate clearly is equally important.

Stage 3: Hackathon B — Concurrency & Systems Thinking

This was probably the most unique and enjoyable round of the process. My personal favorite.

The original tree-locking solution now had to be optimized and made thread-safe.

During the course of the 7+ hours of discussion, I was challenged with edge cases and questions around:

• Concurrency • Race conditions • Atomic operations • Mutexes and locks • Shared vs exclusive locking • Synchronization strategies • Performance trade-offs

For the first time, I felt like I was solving a real engineering problem rather than an interview problem.

This round completely changed how I think about software systems.

Stage 4: Systems Round

I expected questions on DSA, Operating Systems, Networking, and System Design.

Instead, I was given puzzles, reasoning problems, and another deep discussion around my projects.

What I learned here was that interviewers often care less about memorized facts and more about how you reason through unfamiliar situations.

Stage 5: Final On-Site Round (Part 1)

This round consisted of probability and mathematical puzzles followed by discussions around system design in one of my projects.

Rather than defending existing decisions, I had to think about how I would redesign and improve the system.

It was an exercise in engineering trade-offs and iterative thinking.

Stage 6: Final On-Site Round (Part 2)

The final discussion combined probability, DSA, and data structure design where I had to design a data structure for some given conditions.

Question was to design a data structure to store key-value pairs with a TTL for each key-value after which they must get deleted automatically.

The last problem pushed me beyond my comfort zone and exposed gaps in my thinking that I still want to improve.

Ironically, that may have been the most valuable lesson from the entire process.

What I Take Away

Across seven rounds, I was tested on far more than coding.

I was tested on:

• Problem solving • Communication • Concurrency • System thinking • Design trade-offs • Mathematical reasoning • Handling uncertainty under pressure

I ultimately reached the final stage but fell short of the offer.

And honestly, that’s okay.

One thing this process taught me is that interview outcomes are not always a perfect reflection of potential. Beyond preparation and effort, there are often factors you can’t fully control — hiring limits, the specific questions asked, the competition in the pipeline, or simply how a particular discussion unfolds on a given day.

What you can control is how well you prepare, how deeply you understand your fundamentals, and how you respond when faced with unfamiliar challenges.

After the process, I had the opportunity to discuss the outcome with the interview panel and was told not to be disappointed, as sometimes decisions are made to limit the number of hires. Hearing this reminded me that hiring decisions are often influenced by many factors beyond the candidate’s performance, like timing, hiring requirements and constraints at a given point in time.

Looking back, I genuinely believe I gave it my best effort. Some rounds went exceptionally well, some exposed areas where I can still improve, and all of them taught me something new.

So while the final decision wasn’t the one I hoped for, it doesn’t change what the experience gave me: stronger fundamentals, better problem-solving skills, greater confidence, and a much clearer understanding of the kind of engineer I want to become.

Because after seven demanding rounds, I walked away with something equally valuable: confidence.

Confidence that I can discuss systems beyond textbook knowledge.

Confidence in my problem solving abilities.

Confidence that I can reason through unfamiliar problems.

Confidence that I can survive a process that constantly pushes me outside my comfort zone.

Every interview leaves you with a result and some reflection.

The best ones leave you with growth.

This one did both.