Latest blog entries - Legally India Tue, 21 Oct 2014 04:18:16 +0530 Joomla! - Open Source Content Management en-gb My Rhodes dream & journey (from a Tier 2 law school) Applying for the Rhodes Scholarship is a dream which most law students in India harbour, especially those who are studying in NLSIU or NALSAR. Often touted as "THE most prestigious" academic scholarship in the world, it is no wonder that it is also the most coveted among all the scholarships.

I study in one of the lower-ranking national law schools and I applied for the Rhodes Scholarship this year. The most difficult part of the application process, as any former Rhodes applicant would tell you is writing the Personal Statement, which is the make or break segment of the application.

The deadline for the aplication this year was 31st July, 2014.

When I think back to July, I remember that it was only 6 days before my application was due and I was not even close to a decent draft of my personal statement. I was in a terrible state- I was suffering from writer's block and I was sure that all the effort that went into procuring recommendation letters and scanning of academic transcripts would come to naught because I would fail at writing the Personal Statement. Adding to my woes was the sultry weather which is enough to put one in a bad mood for days at end (not the best frame of mind to be in when one is attempting a winning scholarship essay!).

My reason for applying for Rhodes was simple. I wanted to exit college with a bang. I don't know if this is the general milieu of law schools but I am witnessing the proliferation of increasingly brattish batches through CLAT every year- the kind who would treat you patronisingly if you aren't a stud mooter/debater in college or somebody who interned at a big-shot law firm. And although I have always worked towards something for the sense of satisfaction that it would bring me, one of the reasons that I want the scholarship is to break this arrogance that people have about their mooting/internship achievements (somebody who doesn't moot/intern is relegated to the rank of a simpleton).

I was applying for Rhodes because I believe that I could get the scholarship and because the last few years have been so painfully depressing (not in the "law school is depressing" kind of way but because of certain things that I should have realized earlier and I did not) that I NEEDED something as HUGE as a Rhodes Scholarship. It would be my way of starting afresh and giving myself a second chance (as they say 'all is well that ends well') and well, what could be a greater achievement for somebody who is the first from his/her college to win the prestigious Rhodes Scholarship, given that in the NLU circuit nobody outside the Tier-I law school circle has won it.

I sent in my application exactly two days before the deadline. Ever since, I spent the time waiting for the results quite eagerly because I was certain that I would make it. 

Days passed and I did not hear from the Committee. It was on 20th of September, exactly 10 days ago that I called at the Rhodes Office to inquire about my application. One of the possibilities were that I had not made it. (At the time of applying for the scholarship, the guidelines stated that only the successful applicants would hear from the Committee for the preliminary interviews). 

I was told that I had made it to the next round and now I await (nervously and excitedly) for my preliminary interview on 12th of October. 

Today I decided to start this blog because of two reasons: firstly, I want to document the journey from being a Rhodes Applicant to a Rhodes Scholar (hopefully!) and secondly, I want to start writing again. Thirdly, there is only so much that I can write about the Rhodes Scholarship which forms but a part of my life in law school. The blog is a bigger experiment [as would be revealed to you in the forthcoming blogs, so keep reading :) ]

(I have never shied away from voicing my opinions freely but I feel that for now, I need to take on this task anonymously).

Most importantly, I hope to discover myself through the blog.

Read More]]> (RhodesApplicant) Student life Tue, 30 Sep 2014 00:08:18 +0530
Delhi University’s Degree in Law – Whether Legal and Valid? Delhi University’s Degree in Law – Whether Legal and Valid?

Under Section 7(1)(h) of the Advocates Act, 1961, the Bar Council of India (BCI), a statutory body, created under the Advocates Act, 1961, is empowered to promote ‘legal education’, fundamental to the very foundation of the Judicial system, and lay down ‘standards’ of such education in consultation with the Universities imparting such education. Up till 1975, the Standards of Legal Education and Recognition of Degrees in Law for Admission as Advocates, as formulated by the BCI were in force. Rule 3, Section –B, Part IV of the said rules relating to attendance in LL.B. Course provided as under:-

“Rule 3

"The students shall be required to put in a minimum attendance of 66% of the lectures on each of the subjects as also at tutorials, moot courts and practical training course.

Provided that in exceptional cases for reasons to be recorded and communicated to the Bar Council of India, the Dean of the Faculty of Law and the Principal of law colleges may condone attendance short of those required by the Rule, if the student had attendance 66% of the lectures in the aggregate for the semester or examination as the case may be."

On 1/3/2003, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in its verdict dated 1.3.2003 delivered in a Public Interest Litigation petition bearing Writ Petition (Civil) No. 6784 of 2002 titled as  “S.N.Singh Vs. Union of India & Ors’, reported as [106(2003) DLJ 329] directed the University of Delhi (DU) to carry out suitable amendments in its rules so as to bring them in conformity with the Legal Education Rules formulated by the Bar Council of India. The relevant paras of the said judgment are as under:- 

“22.     Since the Bar Council of India recognises the LL.B. Degree Course of the University of Delhi and the Bar Council of India is a statutory body constituted under the Advocates Act 1961, and is empowered to lay down standards of legal education, University of Delhi would be required to bring its rules in conformity with the rules of the Bar Council of India.

23.       The respondent No. 1 is thus issued a direction to amend its examination and promotion Rules in the matter pertaining to attendance to bring them in conformity with the corresponding rules framed by the Bar Council of India.”

But despite the said directions of the Hon’ble Apex Court, the DU did not carry out the required amendments in all of its corresponding rules so as to bring them in conformity with the then Legal Education Rules, 1975, and only amended clause 2(8)(a) of the ordinance 7 of its calendar and did not amended clause 2(8)(b) or 2(9)(a),(b),(c) and (d) of the said ordinance which created an apparent inconsistency in the language of the attendance rules. The amended rule 2(8) provides as under:-

2(8)(a) The students shall be required to put in minimum attendance of 66% of the lectures on each of the subjects as also at the moot courts and practical training course.

Provided that in exceptional cases for reasons to be recorded and communicated to the Bar Council of India, the Dean of the Faculty of Law/ Professor-in-Charge of the Law Centre may condone attendance short of those required by this Rule, if the student had attended 66% of the lectures in the aggregate for the semester examinations.

Provided further that no person shall be deemed to have satisfied the required conditions in respect of his instructions unless, in addition to the requirement regarding attendance and other conditions, he has appeared and satisfied by his performance the Professor-in-Charge of the Law Centre in such test, written and/or oral, as may be held by him in his discretion.

The Professor-in-Charge shall have, and shall be deemed always to have had, the power to detain a student in the same class in which he has been studying, or not to send him up for the University Examination, in case he did not appear at the tests aforesaid or his performance was not satisfactory.

The Professor-in-Charge of the Law Centre shall have power to strike off the name of a student who is grossly irregular in attendance inspite of warning, or, when the absence of the student is for such a long period that he cannot put in requisite percentage of attendance.’’

On 20.4.2007, a Learned Single Judge of Delhi High Court in para no. 12 of his verdict delivered in writ Petition (Civil) no. 18051 of 2006  titled as ‘Smt. Deepti Vs. Vice-Chancellor, University of Delhi’ highlighted the said apparent inconsistency and confusion in the language of the attendance rules. The relevant paras of the said judgment are as under:- 

"11.     The main difference between the amended and un- amended provision is that while the un-amended provision pertained to the number of lectures delivered in a year, after amendment the provision relates to the number of lectures in each of the subjects and has reference, in the proviso, to the aggregate of lectures for the "semester examination". Thus, the Ordinance, by virtue of the said amendment, was sought to be brought in line with the provisions of Clause 3 of Section B of Part IV (Standards of Legal Education and Recognition of Degrees in Law for admission as Advocates) of the Bar Council of India Rules. The implication of this amendment is that rather than requiring an average of 66% attendance in the year, students preparing for the LL.B. Degree must attend 66% lectures in each subject in order to be eligible to sit for semester examinations.

12.       Unfortunately, somewhat of a dilemma has emerged. Although the University amended clause 2 (8) (a) of the Ordinance VII to be consistent with The Bar Council of India Rules, it did not bring about any change in Clause 2(8) (b) or 2 (9) (a), (b), (c) or (d) of the said Ordinance. This has created an apparent inconsistency in the language of the attendance rules. It seems that although amended clause 2 (8) (a) requires calculation of attendance on a subject-wise semester-wise basis, Clause 2 (8) (b) (albeit pertaining to the LL.M. Programme) and Clause 2 (9) (which refers to all courses in general and is not limited to the courses offered by the Law Faculty) continue to refer to attendance calculated on a yearly basis. There is no doubt that the piecemeal amendment brought about by the University in the Ordinance has introduced a certain degree of confusion."

In the year 2008, the BCI, in consultation with Universities and State Bar Councils, formulated, approved and adopted new Rules of Legal Education, 2008 (‘ROLE, 2008’), vide its resolution bearing no. 110 of 14/9/2008. Rule-12 contained in Chapter-II of the said Rules provides as under:-

"Rule 12 - End Semester Test

No student of any of the degree program shall be allowed to take the end semester test in a subject if the student concerned has not attended minimum of 70% of the classes held in the subject concerned as also the moot court room exercises, tutorials and practical training conducted in the subject taken together.

Provided that if a student for any exceptional reasons fail to attend 70% of the classes held in any subject, the Dean of the University or  the  Principal of the Centre of Legal Education, as the case may be, may allow the student to take the test if the student concerned attended at least 65% of the classes held in the subject concerned and attended 70% of classes in all the subjects taken together.

The similar power shall rest with the Vice-Chancellor or Director of a National Law University, or his authorized representative in the absence of the Dean of Law.

Provided further that a list of such students allowed to take the test with reasons recorded be forwarded to the Bar Council of India."

On 25.06.2010, the BCI gave the following public notice:-

“Law schools required to report compliance with Legal Education Rules                        by July 15

The Bar Council of India has announced that all law schools and colleges need to report compliance with the Legal Education Rules, 2008. This was in accordance with the decision of the Legal Education Committee on April 30, 2010 each law school/college is required to report compliance with Legal Education Rules, 2008.

The deadline for the submission of the same is 5 PM, July 15, 2010. The same may be emailed to”

On 30.07.2012, the BCI gave another public notice, which is as under:- 

“The law colleges which have not applied for extension of approval of affiliation of Bar council of India

It is notified for the public that Legal Education Committee of the Bar Council of India in its meeting dated 30.04.2010 had decided that all the Centres of Legal Education (irrespective of their deemed or permanent status) will have to conform to the Legal Education Rules – 2008 and it was also decided that a law college/law school/ institution, which has not been inspected for a continuous period of 5 years, shall have to apply afresh to the Bar Council of India and shall have to seek approval of affiliation on or before 31st July, 2010 itself. In spite of this, it appears that while 80% of such deemed universities have already applied afresh and most of them have got fresh approval as per Rules of Legal Education – 2008. But it appears that due to mistake or otherwise, some of the Institutions (List enclosed) have not yet applied for approval under Legal Education Rules – 2008. It is made clear that without getting approval under new Rules of Legal Education – 2008, it is quite illegal to impart legal education leading to degree in law. In view of the above, it is made clear that the students passed out from such colleges/universities having no approval under Rules of Legal             Education – 2008 will not be eligible to be enrolled as an advocate in the State Bar Councils and would not be entitled to practice in courts.

All concerned are advised to see enclosed list of colleges/universities having deemed/so called permanent status which have not applied for the fresh approval in terms of Rules of Legal Education – 2008. The students are, therefore, advised not to take admission in such colleges/universities, who have not got fresh approval under Legal Education Rules – 2008 of Bar Council of India.”

But most of the law colleges/law schools/universities did not apply and obtain the requisite fresh approval of affiliation under the ROLE, 2008, from the BCI and continued to impart legal education and award decree in law illegally. Even the University of Delhi did not apply and obtain the fresh approval of affiliation under the said ROLE, 2008. The existing rules of the University of Delhi as contained in its “Bulletin of Information” 2013-14, pertaining to attendance, are as under:-  

‘Attendance Rules’

“All the students of LL.B shall have to put in minimum attendance of 66% of the lectures in each of the subjects as also at the moot courts and practical programme.

Provided that in exceptional cases for reasons to be recorded and communicated to the Bar Council of India, the Dean, the faculty of law/Professor-in-charge of the law Centre concerned may condone attendance short of those required by this rule, if the student had attended 66% of the lectures in the aggregate for the semester examination.

The professor-in-charge of the Law Centre shall have power to strike off the name of a student who is grossly irregular in attendance inspite of waning, or, when the absence of student is for such a long period that he cannot put in requisite percentage of attendance.”  

On a plain reading of the above attendance rule, it is evident that the same is apparently inconsistent with and violative of the ROLE, 2008. Even after a lapse of around five years of the formulation and approval and adoption of the said rules, the DU is continuing to allow the law students to take examination with 66% attendance in aggregate and to issue them the degree in law inspite of the fact that as per rule 12, end-semester test of the said rules a law student cannot be allowed to take examination in a subject unless he puts in 70% attendance in that subject.

In the above backdrop of the facts, it is not clear as to whether or not the DU has applied and obtained fresh approval of affiliation under the ROLE, 2008, from the BCI. If the DU has so far not obtained the requisite approval of affiliation afresh from the BCI under the ROLE, 2008, then according to the aforesaid public notice dated 30.07.2012 given by the BCI, is it legal for the DU to impart legal education leading to degree in law and whether the students who have passed out from the DU having no approval under ROLE, 2008, will be eligible to be enrolled as an advocate with the concerned State Bar Council and would be entitled to practice in the courts of law?

Further, a bare reading of the aforesaid rule, it is explicit that a law student can be detained from taking the end-semester examination only in a subject in which he fails to put in 70% attendance. If a student put in 70% attendance even in one subject and fails to put in the requisite % of attendance in other subjects out of the total subjects then as per the aforesaid rule such a student could only be detained from taking the end-semester examination only in those subjects in which he has failed to put in 70% attendance.

In November, 2013, like every year, certain students of First Semester of LL.B three years degree course have been detained by Faculty of Law, University of Delhi, from taking the entire end-semester examination for the first semester (held from 30/11/2013 to 16/12/2013) on account of shortage of attendance and thereby refused to issue admit cards to these students. Resultantly these students could not take the end-semester examination for the first semester. Now these students are being represented by the Faculty of Law that as there is no provision for re-admission to the said course for the students who have been detained from taking the end-semester examination on account of shortage of attendance under the existing university rules, therefore, their admission stands cancelled and consequently, they will have to again appear in the entrance test to be held in June, 2014, if they intend to seek fresh admission in the said course. As per the Dean as well as the Professor-in-Charge of the three Law Centers of the Faculty of Law, University of Delhi, these students have been detained from taking the entire end-semester examination because of the reason that they failed to put in 66% attendance in aggregate in the first semester. However, students who have put in 66% attendance in aggregate have been issued admit cards. 

During the entire session for the first semester, these students were not given any written warring informing them that for appearing in the end-semester examination to be held in November-December-2013, they are required to put in 66% attendance; that they are running short of attendance and if in case they failed to make good the deficiency before the closure of the session, they may be detailed from taking the end-semester examination on account of shortage of attendance. It is germane to mention here that as per the circulars issued by the University of Delhi, all the colleges affiliated to it were directed to upload the status of attendance on the college website.

Kindly read the above article carefully and give your respective opinions in the interest of thousands of law students who have already passed out from the DU and have been awarded law degree; the students who are pursuing their law degree course and are being allowed to take end-semester examination with just 66% attendance instead of 70% and the students who intend to seek admission in the LL.B three years degree course in any of the three law centres under the DU.

Anil Kumar Yadav


Disciplinary Committee

Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana

Read More]]> (adv.anilyadav) Legal argument Tue, 30 Sep 2014 00:01:00 +0530
Privacy Freak? Learn to beat Facebook at its own game!
Hi, are you on Facebook? Me too! Well not much of a coincidence that, right? Nowadays everybody uses social networking sites be it be Facebook, Twitter or Google Plus. Virtual storage is being preferred over physical storage thanks to free alternative such as Dropbox/ Sky Drive/Google Drive and TV has been replaced by Youtube /Vimeo/ Dailymotion.  I could go on but the point I am trying to make is that technology has become a part of our life and almost every time we use this technology we often unknowingly part with some of our essential rights such as PRIVACY. 
Well in this post we will analyse the contract i.e. EULA (End User License Agreement) of Facebook and tell you how the terms affect you.
Also comes free advice to see how you can get better of it!
So we should begin with Facebook’s Data Use Policy.  Now in the ‘Other websites and applications’ section under the ‘About social plugins’ section Facebook states
We receive data when you visit a site with a social plugin. We keep this data for a maximum of 90 days. After that, we remove your name and any other personally identifying information from the data, or combine it with other people's data in a way that it is no longer associated with you.
Whaat? Every site you visit which has a like/share/recommend/Facebook connect (login) etc. button is recorded by Facebook. I mean this is totally ridiculous! To some extent what I do on Facebook is Facebook’s business but snooping on my browsing activities even when I am not using Facebook is not only unethical but totally out of the line. The fix is either to surf internet only when you have logged out yourself of Facebook and cleared all cookies or install Disconnect Plugin from here (Chrome) or here (Firefox). All you need to do is install the plugin and Disconnect takes care of the rest blocking any request by Facebook/Google etc. to track your activities.
Next comes you being responsible for sharing your information with third party apps. Pretty obvious in my opinion.  My advice to you is open the Apps Settings and remove any unneeded or suspicious app. Also remove any junk apps like ‘Who is your Crush’ etc. most of these apps are just there for stealing your data. And it’s time to grow up maybe, you can’t realistically be told about how many years you have left, so please apps like how much are you going to live are complete trash.
 Also you have the option on this page to remove your profile from being indexed by Search Engines, do that if you don’t want your profile to come in search result over Google or Bing.
Next in line is Information we receive and how it is used where under the heading ‘Other information we receive about you’ Facebook states that
Sometimes we get data from our affiliates or our advertising partners, customers and other third parties that help us (or them) deliver ads, understand online activity, and generally make Facebook better. For example, an advertiser may tell us information about you (like how you responded to an ad on Facebook or on another site) in order to measure the effectiveness of - and improve the quality of - ads.
This basically means so every time you interact with an ad you will be targeted even more. Notice how when you visit an e-commerce site say Flipkart for buying an iPad, subsequent to that you come across ads selling iPad at a cheaper price. This is the same thing. The fix is to not interact with these ads. Even better would be to block these distracting ads altogether. (Learn to block these ads here).
Something interesting I came across was on Facebook Pages Terms which prohibits page administrator from inaccurately tagging content or encouraging users to inaccurately tag content (II D – Tagging). So next time a moron tags you to an idiotic image saying ‘friends are forever’ apart from removing the tag do remember to report the page if it asks people to tag people unnecessarily.
Next comes Cookies, pixels and other similar technologies where Facebook informs us that cookies amongst other things are used to deliver, understand and improve advertising. Not of some real help that, right?  Use some good Cookie Manager and remove cookies from time to time. Get Cookie manager for Chrome and Firefox.
Now  let’s start with Clause 2(1) of  Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities which under the heading ‘Sharing Your Content and Information’ states that
subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (IP License). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it.
Not much can be done here. Easy fix is that you change the privacy of any post (Hereinafter post includes comment/photo/video) you don’t want to be available to the world at large to ‘only me’ or ‘friends only’.
Clause 2(2) states that even after you delete your account Facebook may retain some of your post for a reasonable period of time in their backup.
Muddy waters begin from Clause 2(4) which gives Facebook the permission to use your name, profile picture, information etc.  in connection with commercial. So liking that Porn Star’s Page does not seem the best idea if you don’t want something like ‘John Doe and 17 other friends like XXX. Click to like this page’ to pop in your friends’/relatives’/siblings’ feed.
Things get even more interesting from Clause 2(5) onwards where Facebook can unilaterally change its terms and will notify them on its Facebook Site Governance page instead of individually notifying you like Google and your continued use of Facebook for 7 days after change in terms will amount to your acceptance to the new terms. So do like this page so that you are notified every time Facebook changes its policy not that you care.
Clause 2(6) provides for a Forum Selection Clause and states that all disputes are subject to U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California or a state court located in San Mateo County and laws of State of California will govern the Statement. You need not worry much about this as Indian Courts are not much fan of such provisions and one could always invoke cases like Modi Entertainment Network v. W.S.G. Cricket PTE. Ltd. [(2003) 4 SCC 341] where it was held that “in an exceptional case for good and sufficient reasons, with a view to prevent injustice in circumstances such as which permit a contracting party to be relieved of the burden of the contract.” Not being able to go to US to file a lawsuit seems a sufficient reason enough apart from the fact that it takes away the jurisdiction of Indian courts something I doubt Indian judges would appreciate.
Clause 2(7) takes your consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Nothing much you could do in this regard and anyway it doesn’t matter much with NSA spying on you through Heartbleed (bug in OpenSSL encryption) since several years anyway.
To tell you more, Facebook is also fighting a legal battle in India, K.N. Govindacharya v. Union of India ,W.P. (C) NO.  3672/2012, Delhi High Court. The case has helped in getting grievance officer which you could contact here
Pro Tip - Facebook Mobile (Android) - Use Permission Manager and restrict Facebook App's unwanted permissions.
The author blogs regularly about technology for lawyers over here

Read More]]> (neo) Legal argument Sun, 07 Sep 2014 12:30:38 +0530
5th NLIU-Juris Corp National Corporate Law Moot Court Competition 2014

The 5th NLIU-Juris Corp Moot Court Competition is back again. This year the prize money amounts to Rs. 1,10,000. May the best team win!

The break-up of the same stands at:

Winner: Rs. 50,000

Runner Up: Rs. 30,000

Best Speaker: Rs. 10,000

Best Researcher: Rs. 10,000

Best Memorial: Rs. 10,000.

The 5th NLIU Juris Corp Moot Court Competition is probably one of the most prestigious national moots in India, especially within the sphere of corporate law moots. The event is spread out over three days from 5th September to 7th September. On 5th September, the inaugural ceremony was held, closely followed by a tense draw of lots. 

On 6th September, the real action kicks in as the day witnesses the culmination of the preliminary rounds, octa-finals and the quarter-finals, held in around 15 court rooms. The semi-finals and final rounds followed by the valedictory ceremony are scheduled to take place on the final day, i.e., 7th September.

The moot problem has been drafted by the highly experienced partners of Juris Corp. Its intricate structure contains a running theme of various issues under the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, in cohesion with matters pertaining to the Scheme of Arrangement in the Companies Act and the Abuse of Dominant Position under Competition Law.

You may access the problem at:

The current edition of the competition has a plethora of judges from various fields of law that include practicing High Court and Supreme Court Lawyers, High Court Judges along with partners and senior associates at various law firms of national repute. The competition has also adopted the method of dynamic seeding for the teams on the basis of memorial scores that prevents top eight teams from going against each other in the preliminary rounds. This removes bias and manages to ensure a high level and quality of competition.

NLIU, Bhopal is proud to host the following teams from various law colleges across the country:

  1.   Amity Law School I
  2.   Amity Law School II
  3.   Balaji Law College
  4.   Chhotanagpur Law College
  5.   Dr. Harisingh Gaur University Sagar
  6.   Gandhinagar National Law University
  7.   Indian Law School, Pune
  8.   Governemnt Law College, Mumbai
  9.   Government Law College, Thrissur
  10.   Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur
  11.   Jindal Global Law School
  12.   Institute of Law, Nirma University
  13.   National Law School India University
  14.   National Law University, Delhi
  15.   National Law University and Judicial Academy, Assam
  16.   National Law University, Odisha
  17.   National University of Advanced Legal Studies, Kochi
  18.   West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences
  19.   National University of Study and Research in Law, Ranchi
  20.   Pravin Gandhi College of Law
  21.   Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Patiala
  22.   Ram Manohar Lohia National Law University, Lucknow
  23.   Sastra University
  24.   School of Law, Christ University Bangalore
  25.   School of Law DAVV
  26.   Symbiosis Pune
  27.   Tamil Nadu National Law School
  28.   University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, Dehradun

As has been tradition over the past few years, the media team at NLIU shall strive to keep you constantly updated with regards to the various happenings at this competition, ranging from match-ups to details about each speaker and from results to interim events. This live blog shall be a testament to the efforts of the participants, the grueling sessions in the courtrooms and the quintessential experiences of law school. Do follow this blog in order to keep tabs on the performance of your friends, and your college.

You may find us here as well:

In a few more hours, rounds shall start, and the participants, judges and onlookers shall all be reminded why we moot, and why we should never stop.


The Media Committee, NLIU.


Day 2- Prelims, Octas and Quarters

Hello Everyone.

It's a beautiful day out here in Bhopal, and rounds are scheduled to start in a few minutes. The teams are prepped, and their status ranges from completely flustered and at their wit's end to unnervingly calm.

The judges have just been briefed and bench memos have been distributed.

Please stay tuned for real time updates regarding the first prelim round.


 NLU O v. TNNLS - Speaker 1 from NLU O spoke confidently and there has not been much grilling on his issues

RMLNLU v. UPES - The judges are questioning about the CCI and the basic facts related to the moot problem.

GLC, Thrissur v. Balaji Law College - It was pretty conspicous that Speaker 1 from GLC Thrissu was nervous as he spoke. Judges did not  seem to be satifsfied with his reasonings . Speaker 2 from the same team has started presenting his case.

RGNLU v. Nirma- Speaker 1 was grilled extensively . However, speaker 2 isn't being spared either. It seems to be a fun round of mooting to witness.

GLC Mumbai v. NUALS- Speaker 1 is confident but judges are grilling him on his first issue.

11:02 am 

Symbiosis Pune v. NUJS – Speaker 1 for the Petitioners seems to be little confused  .  Judges are not convinced with his arguments.

NLSIU v. Harish Singh Gaur Law College – Speaker 1 has been questioned on facts along with some serious cross questioning by the judges. Extra time granted  to the first speaker. 

Sastra University v. Amity Law College II – Speaker I  responded  well to the questions and the judges seemed impressed .  The judges are not happy with the case presented by Speaker 2 of the same side. 



Chotanagpur Law College v. NLU-D- Speaker was grilled extensively. However, the judges were not convinced by his arguments. The atmosphere is very charged.

NUSRL, Ranchi v. School of Law, Christ University- The first speaker was grilled thoroughly and answered each question. However, his answer to the question regarding creditors and notifs was not considered satisfactory. He asked for an extension. Speaker 2 of the petitioner's side was called to the floor. He was asked to base his arguments on the Indian context. However, some statements were contrary to previous arguments. He too, received an extension. There is a huge amount of cross questioning underway regarding the themes of voidability of contracts in light of the Arbitration and conciliation act.


HNLU v. School of Law DAVV- Speaker 1 was asked to be brief with her argument. Judges were not convinced . Speaker 2 sounds confident . The atmosphere in the courtroom is tensed as the team from HNLU is being heavily grilled by the judges. 

GNLU v. NLUJAA- Both Speaker 1 and Speaker 2 on the petitioner’s side are completing their speeches within their requisite time slots. However, with regards to Speaker 1, there was rigorous cross-questioning. Speaker 2 has requested an extension.


JGLS v. ILS- The petitioner's first speaker was extensively questioned about the issue pertaining to the CCI as well as certain portions of the team's compendium.

RGNLU v. Nirma- Speaker 1 from Nirma handled the questions well . Speaker 2 has been asked to proceed slowly for the benefit of the court . 

Pravin Gandhi Law College v. Amity Law School- I- The round seems to be proceeding well. However, certain arguments were not well-received by the judges

GLC Mumbai v. NUALS - The Respondents have started presenting their case. Its a serious session of mooting. Both the speakers from NUALS have been thoroughly cross questioned. However, the judges don't seem to be convinced.    

TNNLS V. NLU-O- Speaker 2 from the petitioner's side is being asked about precedents regarding his issues. The judges did not seem very satisfied though, and he thus ran out of time. Soon after, the first speaker from the respondent's side came to the floor and was promptly grilled. Speaker 1 kept within his time slot. Speaker 2 of the respondent's side is now undergoing a very serious session in court. Again, the judges do not seem very satisfied.

11:41 am 

NUSRL, Ranchi v. School of Law, Christ University- The first speaker from the respondent's side has come to the podium, and is proving his mettle. He seemed very confident, despite a hard session. He was given an extension. 

JGLS v. ILS - Speaker 2 from JGLS  is presenting his case. He is being questioned on damages and market shares. Judges are asking him questions out of the memorial submitted by the participating team. 

11:46 am 

NUSRL, Ranchi v. School of Law, Christ University- Speaker 2 from the respondent side has been called to the floor. However, judges have stated that he is referring to foreign jurisprudence a bit too much for their liking. 

GNLU V. NLUJAA  - First speaker from the respondent side was unable to convince judges due to insufficient factual analysis. The judges are confused regarding what side Speaker 2 is representing. This session is probably one of the most charged amongst all the match-ups. It is a true test of genuine mooting skills. 


HNLU v. School of Law DAVV - Judges disregard the arguments of the respondents due to usage of legal terms lacking context. The judges have asked the respondents to present fresh arguments because the line of arguments taken by the respondent is pretty similar to that of the appellants. 

Chotanagpur Law College V. NLU Delhi - Speaker 2 from the appellants side argued well and the environment does not seem to be very tensed as couple of light moments are exchanged.  The judges were satisfied with the first speaker from the Respondent side. The speaker confidently dealth with all question asked.  The mooting atmosphere heated up as Speaker 2 from Respondent was not able to tackle the questions posed by the judges. 

NLSIU v. Dr. Hari Singh Gaur Law College- The round is proceeding well, and the first speaker from the respondent time has reached the podium. The round seems tense.

11:59 am 

GLC Thrissur v. Balaji Law College - The judge is explaining the basic concepts to the Respondent 2 as he is unable to answer questions posed to him .

NUSRL, Ranchi v. School of Law, Christ University- The petitioners have approached the podium for rebuttals and have adopted an aggressive approach to the same.


Sastra University v. Amity Law School II- The respondent's first speaker has had to endure a very tough round and was not able to answer some questions adequately. However, the second speaker was also similar. The judges are making them refer the memo time and time again


Symbiosis , Pune v. NUJS – The round has  nearly concluded. Despite a shaky start by the first speaker, the team from Symbiosis bounced back.  Both the teams were confident and have presented strong cases to defend their sides.

12:13 pm

RMLNLU v. UPES - Speaker 2 from the appeallant side was questioned rigorously from the compendium. The Speaker was pretty comfortable in answering. The Respondents started on a confident note , however , they  could not keep up.  The judges told speaker 1 from the respondents side that the contentions from the respondents side are contradictory . It seems to be interesting round of mooting. 


JGLS v. ILS - ' Speaker 1 from respondent side was interestingly questioned on details of citations. The judges also thoroughly questioned the speaker on legislative technicalities. Speaker 2 is also being questioned extensively regarding the memorial and this led to discussions among the judges. They did not seem particularly satisfied. 


The first preliminary round has almost reached its conclusion. This has been a truly exemplary set of match ups. Results for the same shall be released soon.


1:23 pm

After a splendid first round, the judges are back to the courtrooms and the second prelimnary round has commenced.  


                                                                         PRELIMINARY ROUND II


1 : 36 

School of Law DAVV v. NLU O - Speaker 1 from petitioners side  struggled to provide authority for the arguments he  provided. The judges were of the view that the speaker  mixed up  the issues . Speaker seemed  nervous as judges in this round are testing on the participant more on basic knowledge of the law. Speaker 2 from the same side , after witnessing his co-counsel's performance seems nervous as he fumbles while arguing.

NLUJAA v. RMLNLU- The first speaker from the petitioner side has commenced his speech. He is very confident and was able to answer the questions posed by the judges regarding certain distinctions amongst various clauses in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The judges seem quite convinced with his arguments and he was able to wrap up his arguments within the stipulated time. 

1:43 pm

Harisingh Gaur University Sagar vs  Sastra University - According to the judges,  Speaker 1 from the petitioners side is not well versed with the legal terms. However, she is persistent and seems to be confident with a stern voice. 

NUALS v. NUSRL, Ranchi- As it seems to be a major point of contention, speaker 1 from the petitioner's side is being questioned thoroughly on the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. However, the judge is requesting more specificity. Another point of contention seems to be the applicability of the Limitations Act. This seems to be flustering the speaker


NUJS v. Pravin Gandhi Law College- This round started off very smoothly, but with the passage of a certain amount of time, the first speaker from the side of the petitioner started being cross questioned very intensely.

Nirma v. JGLS- Speaker 1 from the petitioner's side has arguments that are heavily laden with case law.However, he is under fire from the bench.

1:53 pm

Amity Law School- II v. NLSIU- Speaker 1 has made a brief statement of facts. The judges are primarily questioning the speaker on basics of arbitration. Extensive reference to the compendium is being made by the speaker.

ILS v. RGNLU – The Judges are questioning the petitioners on arbitration law. The petitioners side seems to be more confident than the previous rounds. 

1:58 pm

NLUJAA v. RMLNLU- Speaker 2 from the petitioner's side concluded his speech satisfactorily, within the stipulated time. The respondent then took over the podium, and his affairs seem rather sorted, which is usually an anomaly in most moots. This was followed by respondent's second speaker who carried on the undercurrent of this round, and did so without getting befuddled.

UPES v. GNLU- The judges seem interested in the technicalities of specific provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Its all about the basics in this court room. Speaker 2 from the appellant side seems flustered as the judges have refused to accept references made to the compendium.

Nirma University v. JGLS- Speaker 2 from the appellant side was reprimanded for proceeding at too fast a pace. The judges do not seem to pleased. The judges seem to find the arguments made by speaker 2 from the appellant's side very vague. This round is very intriguing, as it involved judges questioning the speaker's faith in his own conscience. He further ticked off the judges for cutting them off inbetween.

2:10 pm 

NLU Delhi v. GLC Thrissur - Team from National Law University, Delhi looked  well prepared. This match-up is delving into matters related to arbitration  Judge is pressing the respondents  to prove the validity of the arbitration agreement. 

TNNLS v. HNLU- In consonance with the general trend across court rooms, speaker 1 was interrogated on the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. It is evident that the judges would appreciate more engagement from the speaker. The judges disregarded the submissions of speaker 2 saying that there was no prima facie case established.

2:14 pm 

NLUJAA V. RMLNLU- This round has concluded as planned, with the rebuttals going smoothly, with no extensions granted

NUALS v. NUSRL, Ranchi- Speaker 2's turn from the petitioner's side has come. However, the judges do not seem to satisfied by his arguments. Extensive references are being made to recent landmark judgments.

School of DAVV vs. NLU O -  The respondents have submitted the rebuttals .  It was a successful and satisfactory round of mooting . 

2:19 pm 

ILS v. RGNUL -  Speaker 2 from the petitioners side is presenting his case while Speaker 1 performance was satisfactory as the judges looked happy with the arguments advanced.

2:24 pm

Christ v. GLC, Mumbai- Speaker 1 had a splendid start, citing all relevant provisions. Judges are taking a keen interest in clarifying the accuracy of cases cited. As the round progresses, she gets more aggressive in her approach. This seems to be a very engaging round. Speaker 2 is also able to deal with the pressure when the judges scrutinize of her authorities and present several hypothetical questions.

2:26 pm 

Nirma University v. JGLS- This round is proving to be one with quality mooters. Speaker 1 from the respondent's side is very confident, despite being under fire. He does, however, lack authorities, much to the displeasure of the judges. There was a slight scuffle where speaker 1 wasn't retiring when asked to. After this concluded, Speaker 2 from the respondent's side took to the floor. His points were not able to meet the standards of the judges

Balaji Law College v. Chottanagpur Law College- Speaker 1 from appellant side is unable to put forth relevant submissions when questioned on the crux of the subject matter in dispute. Judges were very strict with speaker 2 when he wrongly stated certain facts.

2:32 pm  

Amity Law School- I v. Symbiosis Pune- The judges asked Speaker 1 to present facts and answer questions relating to creditors. However, the speaker is unable to persuade the judges with his arguments.

NUALS v. NUSRL, Ranchi- from the respondent's side, Speaker 1 is being questioned about the vey existence of the company in the problem. The judges are reacting negatively. This round is proving to be extremely gruelling.


Harisingh Gaur University Sagar vs  Sastra University - This round has not been particularly remarkable with no extraordinary developments. However, the parties are making coherent arguments.

NUALS v. NUSRL, Ranchi- The round has concluded after a swift, but unsatisfactory session of rebuttals.


ILS v. RGNUL  - Abuse of dominance essentials are being stressed upon in this round. The respondents contend that abuse of dominance has happened as could deduced from the facts of the case. 

NUJS v. Pravin Gandhi Law College- In this round, speaker 2 and the judge had a difference of opinions regarding the role of the Competition Commission of India. She seemed rather evasive and the judges were not satisfied.

Harisingh Gaur University Sagar v.  Sastra University- Speaker 2 from the respondents side is presenting arguments backed by sufficient authority . The judges seem pleased .

2:52 pm

UPES v. GNLU- After heated argumentation by the appellants, the atmosphere is now calm. The judges listen to the respondents' submissions carefully and seem convinced. Speaker 2 remains confident and is able to persuade the judges of her case with ease.

2:59 pm

Amity Law School- II v. NLSIU- The respondents were asked to answer questions relating to the purpose of arbitration clause and the intention of parties to arbitrate. Speaker 2 seems confident and versatile as the judges look convinced

3:03 pm 

NLU Delhi vs. GLC Thrissur -  After an intense round of questions and answers, this match- up has concluded. NLU Delhi has put up a strong case. 

NUJS v. Pravin Gandhi Law College- This was a very theoretical session where speaker 1 from the respondent's side was questioned on the difference between creditors and lenders. He was given an extension.

ILS v. RGNUL  - The respondents exceeded their time limit by 11 minutes . The judges have ordered them to sum up their arguments.

3:12 pm

Amity law School- I v. Symbiosis Pune- Speaker 2 submitted the provisions of the Competition Act with respect to abuse of dominant position. The judges asked speaker 1 from the respondent side questions pertaining to the evidentiary aspects of the problem and the enforcement of the arbitration, but they don't seem too satisfied with the responses. Speaker 2 was thoroughly interrogated and the round seemed to get increasingly tense.

3:18 pm 

Balaji Law College v. Chottanagpur Law College- Speaker 1 is confident until the judges tell him to refrain from referring to Companies Act 1956. He tackles the issue and moves on to further issues. The round continues to progress in an ordinary manner.

NUJS v. Pravin Gandhi Law College- The second speaker from the respondent's side was left very hassled by the end of the round and took too long to answer certain questions. No rebuttals were granted. 

3: 28 pm 

Christ v. GLC- The judges are very particular about the legal terminology used by the respondents. Speaker 1 is constantly cross- questioned but judges and the speaker seem to be going off at different tangents due to a misunderstanding of the questions by the speaker. The judges style of questioning is different for Speaker 2, who is also asked to provide the years in which the cited judgments were passed.

Harisingh Gaur University Sagar v.  Sastra University- After a detailed discussion on IPR and arbitration issues, the judges have left the court and the round has concluded. 

TNNLS v. HNLU- Speaker 1 from the respondent side had to mainly argue the issue relating to scheme of arrangement under the Companies Act. The round seemed to be going well, until the judges noticed contradictory clauses in the respondents' compendium. Speaker 2 was able to salvage the situation with her knowledge of the law and illustrative argumentation.

The Second Preliminary Rounds are finally over. Its finally time for the media committe to go and have lunch. 



Attention everyone, the list of breaking teams has been announced by our tireless tabbing committee. They are as follows, in no particular order:

  • National Law University- Odisha     
  • Symbiosis, Pune
  • Hidayatullah National Law Institute University
  • Ram Manohar Lohia National Law University
  • Sastra University
  • Indian Law School, Pune
  • National Law School of India University
  • Government Law College, Mumbai
  • Jindal Global Law School
  • School of Law, Christ University
  • Gandhinagar National Law University
  • Institute of Law, Nirma University
  • National University of Study and Research of law, Ranchi
  • Amity Law School- I
  • National Law University, Delhi
  • West Bengal National University of Juridical sciences

Congratulations to all breaking teams. Your hard work, oratory skills, quick thinking and research has begun to pay off. But remember, the best is yet to come. In a few minutes, the Octa-Finals shall commence. Stay tuned for live updates!

5: 27 pm

Here are the match-ups . Our team would be reporting you live action from every courtroom .

NLU-0 v. Symbiosis Pune 

Speaker 1 from the Appellants side has been asked to directly come to the issues. It seems like judges are well versed with the factual intricacies of the moot problem after having judged two rounds through the course of the day.  Speaker 1 from NLU-O is not exhibiting even a speck of hesitation and is tackling every question with grace and confidence. 

Speaker 2 from the appellants side is fairing better in the octa-finals. The preliminary rounds seem to have help him find trust in what he is speaking. While Speaker 1 dealt with the first issue, Speaker 2 is dealing with the second and third issue. He has been granted  extra time. 

The first speaker from the respondent side is now presenting his case. However, he has been asked to stop while the judges are going through the memorial of the respondents.  The judges are not happy with the interpretation of law from the respondents side . However, it is unknown if the judges are actually unhappy or are only  trying to test the knowledge of the participant. 

Looks like Speaker 1 from the Respondents side is building up a strong case now as the judges seem to agree with what he is arguing. Its looks like he knows the authorities well.  He has been asked to move on to the next issue. Speaker 2 does not seem to have nerves as strong as Speaker 1 from his side as he fumbles and makes it very explicit that he is nervous as the stakes have increased . The Speaker is being grilled on the issue of abuse of dominance. 



It is evident that the expectations of judges from the teams have increased in the octa finals. Soon after Speaker 1 from HNLU began her submissions, the judges asked her for to refer to the compendium to explain a case in detail. They require detailed authorities for all her submission. While on one hand, such interrogation regarding the technicalities continues, the judges ensure that basics such as difference between place of arbitration and seat of arbitration are also asked. She is unable to adequately satisfy their queries and seems nervous as the judges become more strict and threaten to punish her for contempt.
Speaker 1 from RML begins making submissions but constantly refers to a male judge on the panel as “Your Ladyship”. The judge turns irate and asks the speaker to address the bench appropriately. The speaker further submits a handwritten judgment that the judges refuse to accept. They don’t seem too convinced with certain arguments made by the speaker. Speaker 2 exudes confidence and tackles the questions posed by the judges.


After preliminary issues of jurisdiction have been resolved, Speaker 1 from the side of the Appellant had to answer a lot o questions regarding the basics, such as the difference between creditors and lenders, and conceptual questions about arbitration. As the rounds progress, the problem is examined in more detail and the compendium gets put to better use. Even intricate definitions in the CPC are being spoken of. However, the judge often interrupts the speaker with supervening points. Despite this, the authorities the speaker presented to resolve such doubts satisfied the judges. Speaker 1 from the Appellant’s side’s confidence is very commendable. After this, issues about libel and remedies for the same are being debated. Finally, the second issue is broached. Cross-questioning in the octas is twice as intense as the prelims. However, after meandering around jurisdiction again, all the time and the extension lapsed and the first speaker from the Appellant’s side was obligated to conclude.

Speaker 2 from the side of the appellants has now approached the podium. He was cross-quested thoroughly about the definition and elements of an FIR. This speaker’s confidence is slowly waning, despite a soundness of content. Again, jurisdiction becomes a factor. Allegations of baseless charges were leveled against the speaker by the judges. The judges are also a little displeased by the lack of judicial precedent cited in the memo. The speaker then broaches the IPR issue. An integral precedent stated by the speaker during his oral arguments was not present in either the memo or the compendium.

The first speaker from the respondent’s side was called to the floor.He is concise and there is not much to be said on the side of the cons towards the beginning. His first issue proceeds as such. However, there was a lot of intensity surrounding the second issue, where both the speaker and the judge kept cutting each other off at crucial points. There is a tone of evasiveness in the arguments, according to the judges. The second speaker from the respondent’s side was thoroughly grilled. The researcher was an integral support system. The first point of contention that was peacefully tided over was that of arbitration clauses. The speaker knew her memp like the back of her hand, a rarity this time! This speaker subsequently addressed all the pertinent issues and the judges did not have too much of an issue. The rebuttals were granted to both sides. Thus, the round was concluded



Speaker 1 from NLSIU is being grilled on the facts and even the Constitution! (Oddly enough, none of the participants in the court room had a copy of the Constitution…) Judges are grilling the second speaker on his submissions. He is confident, but the judges don’t seem to budge. They continue questioning him on his authorities. However, he fumbled towards the end while answering questions on arbitration.

The first speaker from GLC starts well but invites a catena of questions by mentioning a landmark judgment on arbitration. Speaker 2 on the other hand was primarily interrogated on the basics of arbitration and concepts like prospective and retrospective laws. Judges do not appear convinced by an argument on foreign awards. The speaker is continuously cross questioned throughout the submissions. The round finally ends with some light comments by the judges that relaxes the tension reverberating across the court room



The first speaker from the side of the appellant has clearly stated that he will deal with the issues of arbitration and and breach of contract. He seems to be highly confident. It seems that the teams have all decided to bring their A- Game to the post-break rounds. However, the Limitation Act seems to be an important facet of the problem as well. As the round progresses, the speaker is not able to answer a question or two about arbitral awards and the appellant’s vested interests. This displeased the judges to a certain extent. This was promulgated by the sub-issue of the recalling of schemes. The judge even criticised the drafting of the memo. The contract issue was avidly fleshed out.

Speaker 1 from the the Respondents side is calm and composed and the judges seem to have developed a like for his arguments are coherent and logical. He responded skilfully when asked about dispute resolution mechanisms.  Speaker 2 from the same side cited the Raghavan Committe report . However, the judges feel that he is giving far fetched arguments which have little relevance to the case at hand.




The GNLU speaker 1 is calm and maintains good composure while addressing questions. The judges seem convinced as they aren’t cross questioning too much. In the end, the speaker also manages to provide a good summary of all submissions made to seal the deal. Things are going well for the second speaker as well. Speaker 1 from Nirma is confident while presenting facts and citing authorities. But, he seems confused while answering a specific question of the judges. But, judges catch the speaker on an error with the prayer and ask the respondents to take a clear stand. However, things progress and the judges seem convinced on at least two issues.

Speaker 2 is questioned on the basics with respect to CCI as well as abuse of dominant position. But the speaker argues well and remains calm and composed. The judges aren’t question much this time



Placing focus on factual analysis, the judges ask Speaker 1 from NUSRL to state facts that go against their case. This question throws the speaker off guard but he moves on. He answers legal questions well and manages to convince the judges. However, when an answer to his question irked the judges, he becomes slightly nervous. But, he gets back on track and manages to clarify his submissions well. Speaker 2 keeps up this pace and in fact, manages to impress our hard- to- please judges. Way to go!

The judges find a slight conflict in the arguments of Amity. The point of contention was in relation to creditors and debtors. The proceedings then turned towards jurisprudential issues as well as intellectual property rights. Scheme of arrangement in company law formed a large portion of the speaker’s submissions. However, the speaker seemed flustered on the issue of arbitration and was unable to answer the queries of the judges on a recent landmark judgment



While both the teams look charged up and looking forward to move on to the next round, this one looks like one that would be ahotly contested round. Speaker 1 from the Appellants side is discussing the issue related to arbitration and the validity of the arbitration clause.  The judges seem to be strict and are demanding authority for every point that the Speaker is attempting to prove.  Not much could be gauged from the facial expression of the judges. 

Speaker 2 of the appellant’s side was commended for his ability to withstand the pressure of the questioning of the judges. He kept his cool. If anything, the judges seem dissatisfied with his inability to address the core issue at hand, the lack of an arbitration agreement.

Speaker 1 of the respondent side started off with jurisdictional issues, which he handled very smoothly. This was the first round in which the Delhi High Court rules played a large role in the arguments advanced. There was constant support meted out by the researcher for this side. Speaker 2 on the other hand was not able to answer the questions of the judge adequately, and evaded the main point of the proceeding


Congratulations to the following teams that have made it to the Quarter Finals (in no particular order):

1. Nirma University

2. NLU, Delhi


4. Symbiosis, Pune

5. ILS, Pune

6. GLC, Mumbai


8. NUSRL, Ranchi


The Quarter Finals have finally begun. Watch this space for more updates.

Nirma University v. NLU Delhi 

The first speaker has had a difficult time answering the tough question posed the judges. The participant is being tested on his understanding of the nuances of arbitration. Speaker 2 is getting aggressive as he entered into a little disagreement with judges . The team might be marked down because of digressing from the ideal court manners. Speaker 2 is unable to find a case law in his memorial and he asks permission from the bench to take help of his researcher. Speaker 2 trying to dodge has asked the permission from the bench to move on to the next issue.

Speaker one from the respondent is being showered with questions from the very beginning. It has all come down to the basics where judges are trying to gauge if the participant while showing their advocacy skills on complex legal issues are able to still keep the fundamentals intact. The Speaker started confidently however the pressure of quarters is evident on her face. 

Speaker 2 too is having a hard time and is struggling to convince the judges. Its a crunch situation and everyone in the court room is listening attentively to every word spoken. As the stakes are increasing , its becoming more and more difficult for the participants to answer as they succumb under pressure. 


JGLS v. Symbiosis, Pune

The speakers begin quite confidently with brief submissions of facts and relevant laws. The judges constantly attempt to refute their contentions. But, they maintain their composure and continue with a steady pace. The judges calmly continue with their questions. Overall, the round went quite well for JGLS

The first speaker from the respondent side was luckily allowed to present his arguments with minimal questions from the judges. He seems extremely confident and clearly manages to get the judges to agree with his submissions. The judges towards the end objected to his argument but he managed to maintain his stance throughout and tried not to get harrowed by the questions. The judges maintain the same attitude towards speaker 2 and refrain from excessive interrogation. There is a calm atmosphere in the courtroom.

ILS Pune v. GLC Mumbai 

Speaker 1 from the side of the petitioner got off to a confident start. However, the issue of the arbitral award was soon brought up, after which matters got heated, and confused. A certain question about contracts was left open. Precedents were also contended


HNLU v. NUSRL Ranchi 

The first speaker convinces the judges on factual questions and issues relating to limitation. As in the previous rounds, this speaker was also subjected to gruelling questions on basics of arbitration law. Speaker 2 was constantly interrupted with questions relating to the most recent developments in the relevant issues. The judges seem partially persuaded but they do not question more on this and allow the speaker to move on with the submissions. However, the judges seemed more convinced with the submissions of speaker 1.

Speaker 1 from Respondent side is able to answer questions satisfactorily. Judges seem convinced but are reluctant to cross question every submission since they are strictly complying with the time limit. Speaker 2 is asked detailed questions relating to competition act.


Attention everyone! The results of the quarter-finals are out! The teams that have qualified for the semis are:

1. NLU-D

2. Symbiosis, Pune

3. HNLU, Raipur

4. ILS, Pune


Congratulations to all the teams. More updates regarding the round are due the next morning.

Good night for now. :)



Good Morning everyone! Its a beatiful day that began with slight rains but nothing can dampen the moods of the teams today! They are all set and determined to win.


9.30 a.m

The rounds have begun. Kudos to the Moot Court Association for their puncuality. 

9.45 a.m



Speaker 1 from ILS starts off by defining the relevant terms and providing sufficient reasoning for his arguments. The judges refrain from excessive scrutiny of every argument. The judges continue with their routine questions regarding consensus ad idem and the provisions of Companies Act. They seem satisfied with the answers of the speaker.

Speaker 2 was questioned on the principles of natural justice but now, seems confused while answering questions related to CCI. He tries his best to tackle the various questions posed by each judge. But, they don't seem too convinced. 

All speakers in this court room are guys and this is probably the only time when one can witness such a polite fight among Pune boys! 

Speaker1 from Symbiosis starts off by rebutting the submissions made by the other side. This is an interesting style of argumentation that could probably make his arguments more convincing. But, will the judges fall for such clever tactics? They ask him questions on fraud and arbitration and he continues submitting case laws to prove his point. The judges carefully scrutinize the cases too. The Researcher smiles knowingly as the speaker answers these questions well.

Speaker 2 was not very animated when he began but eventually picked up his pace. He seemed to get slightly unnerved when several questions on competition law were thrown his way. The judges then ask very few questions and allow the speaker to make his submissions. They did accuse him of trying to mislead the court but he managed to speak his way out of it.



The entire court room has an extremely intense atmosphere. Speaker 1 starts well and looks prepared to answer any question thrown by the judges. The Consortium of creditors is a primary issue in contention. The speaker discusses the interests of the parties during the merger in a coherent and persuasive manner. Judges seem satisfied.

Speaker 2 has begun making submissions and the judges nitpick on every landmark case cited. The speaker doesn't seem as assertive as his co- counsel evident from his repeated page turning and reference to his prepared material. The judges on the hand know the field like the back of their hand and are prepared to engage in a battle of wits! The speaker finally argues the issue on abuse of dominant position well, before resting his case. The judges wouldn't let him go easily and even at the tail end, managed to ask several questions on the appellant's prayer.

The Respondents have begun with their submissions. Speaker 1 spends quite some time with initial formalities before beginning with her actual submissions. Full points for court room manner! But, hope this doesn't eat up too much of her speaking time. She argues well on jurisdiction and clubbing, and is definitely able to deal with the pressure. But, the judges know the facts too well for the speakers' liking. The speaker manages to submit authorities for everything she submits and her assertive attitude helps in proving her point well. However, she had to hurry up with the last submissions. Guess time management did become a hurdle.

Speaker 2 is allowed to make all her submissions without much interruption from the judges. They do interrogate her on bad faith litligation in relation to IPR. But, the speaker was ready to deal with this. This only all- girls team in the semi finals put up a good show today. Girl Power!!


11.15 a.m

Both rounds are officially over. There's a nail biting silence everywhere as the wait for the results continue.


The Results are out! The Finalists for the 5th NLIU- Juris Corp National Corporate Law Moot Court Competition 2014 are:

  • HNLU




This round is to be judged by Hon'ble mr. Justice A.K. Patnaik, former Supreme Court judge, Hon'ble Mr. Justice V. Gopala Gowda, Supreme Court judge, Mr. Mustafa Motiwala, Senior Partner, Juris Corp Advocates and Solicitors, Mr. Sandeep Mahapatra, Partner, Juris Corp Advocates and Solicitors and Prof. Dr. S. Surya Prakash, Faculty, NLIU.

12.00 p.m

The Final round has begun. The atmosphere in the NLIU auditorium is electric. 



Speaker 1 from the appellants' side has reached the podium. His facts are summarised. His issues are stated. He is confident, yet a subtle aura of nervousness surrounds him, as is natural, considering the prestigiousness of making the finals of this moot. 



The judges start asking questions about FEMA. They seem to be answered adequately well. Soon, the nervousness heightens. But his time runs out and he is granted an extension.



She is questioned about foreign arbitral awards, and answers these questions with valid precedents. Former Justice Shri A.K. Patnaik delved into this issue. The validity of an award passed in Hong Kong was tabled for discussion. His extended time has run out.



Speaker 2 from the appellants' side graces the floor.



The main issue she starts off with is the breach of contract. The judges are cross-questioning her about them rather thoroughly.



This girls v. boys match up is proving to be very interesting. The second speaker is proving her mettle, despite the pressure exerted by the bench, specifically Former Justice Shri. A.K. Patnaik.



The second speaker from HNLU is a very eloquent counsel. Her legal accumen and delivery both seem very sound. She manages to cover her issues and maintain her flow.



Second speaker's time has run out, but she is granted an extension, where she wraps up all loose ends. The prayer is submitted before the judges. 



Speaker 1 from the respondents' side has commenced his delivery. His issues have been stated, and the formalities are wrapped up.



He picks up the first issue, and the prevelant theme of arbitration is jumped into, headfirst. This was dealt with reasonably well, with the speaker provided adequate precedents and legislative standpoints.



He is then made to flesh out the consortium of creditors issue as well.



His pace is steady, and words are measured. He navigates the cross-questioning in a skilled manner.



Speaker 1's time has lapsed and Speaker 2 from the respondents' side takes the floor



The second speaker is at a loss for words when asked for authorities proving the existence of an arbitration agreement in the present scenario.



The intricacies of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and the need for the express mention of the term "arbitration" in the agreement are being debated intensely. Speaker is trying his best to hold his own against the bench, but the nervousness might get the better of him.



He is questioned about the concept of intention of parties to arbitrate, both theoretically and in relation to the problem. The judges are thoroughly grilling this speaker.



His time runs out in the process.



The rebuttals have begun. Will they make a difference? Especially in such a a close, competitive round?



The Appellants manage to establish a certain aspect of his argument, and clarify some doubts regarding it. Guess rebuttals have a legitimate value after all!



The Finals are finally over. Hats off to the teams that braved through all the questions throughout the competition. 

We will be up with the results soon. The Valedictory Ceremony will commence shortly.


Dear folks, we are very proud to announce that after two days of splendid mooting and impeccable show of advocacy skills, the team that stood out and is the winner of the 5th NLIU-Juris National Corporate Moot Court Competition is ILS Pune. The trio- Yash Bansal, Mohith Gauri and Vivek Narayan from ILS truly deserved to win!

Vatsla Bhardwaj, Akshata Singh and Deergha Airen from HNLU have finished as Runners Up after the fabulous show of mooting skills they displayed today!

The winners of other prestigious awards are:

Best Researcher -Mounica Kasturi (Symbiosis Pune)

Best Speaker- Yash Bansal (ILS Pune)

Best Memorial - NUSRL Ranchi

Congratulations to the Winners!!

The Valedictory ceremony  commenced with floral welcome of Chief Guest Hon'ble Justice Mr. Gowda, sitting judge, Supreme Court and the Guest of Honour  former judge of Supreme Court Hon'ble Justice  Mr. A.K. Patnaik, Prof S.S. Singh , Director of National Law Institute University  congratulated the participants for their hard work and persisitence. Juris Corp was represented by Senior partner by Mustafa Motilal who talked about the association of Juris Corp with NLIU in organizing the prestigious tournament.The guest of honour spoke on the importance of mooting in the life of law student. He inspired the students by sharing with them his experiences in the courtroom.  The Chief Guest on the occassion congratulated the winners and emphasised on the importance of hard work in an advocate's life.  The vote of thanks was given by the MCA co-convener Shashwat Sharma.






Our efficient Moot Court Association has worked tirelessly for this event. Their efforts surely paid off!



We'll be back next year. This is the media committe signing off. Thank you.

Vaishali Vinod 

Anubhav Raj Shekhar

Rajeswari Mukherjee


Read More]]> (NLIUJURISCORP2014) Mooting Premier League Sat, 06 Sep 2014 01:55:07 +0530
Violence against Dalit Women By Yashi Mishra, Author

and Nishith Pandit Advocate



Dalit is a designation for a group of people traditionally regarded as untouchable. The highest population of this class of people have been recorded in India. Dalits are those classes of people who are not only considered as untouchable but also deprived of their basic right to life. According to Ancient Indian System, Dalits, basically are those people which does not belong to any of the four castes i.e. Brahmin, Vaishya, Kshayatriya, Sudhras. They are outcasted or does not belong to any of the four castes and tend to do such impure works such as sweeping roads, cleaning toilets, removal of rubbish etc. They are not a particular caste or class of people but are divided into many small groups. Due to their nature of work, they have been, on many occasions, deprived of their basic necessities and rights.

Although, in modern times, their rights and necessities are seriously being considered by the government of India and many rules and regulations have been made to protect people who are called Dalits. Dalits does not have, in particular, any religion especially in modern times but the origin of the word 'Dalit' and these class of people where originally named and considered in Hinduism1. In ancient India, the upper class of people have always neglected and prejudiced Dalits.

But Dalit women are more burdened and discriminated on the basis of caste, class and gender. Dalits were considered to be lower class people and therefore Dalit women are even further deprived not only by upper class but also by Dalit males. They had been discriminated many times on the basis of gender and were used by almost all class of people including Dalits itself.

Caste System in India

The caste system in India had been formed ages ago and traces of this caste system have been observed in various religious and literary works of ancient Indian society. According to this caste system, people were divided into mainly four castes i.e. Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya, and Shudra. But apart from these four castes, there was another class of people known as Dalits which was considered to be lowest caste in all. These people were those who are neglected and outcasted by all the class of people and also they tend to do impure works.

Since ancient times, this system is followed in Hinduism by all and therefore it has become an integral part of the religion not only in India but also in other countries and religions such as Christianity, Sikhism, etc.

Dalits Women and their dilemma

Since ancient times, there had been many instance recorded where women were discriminated on the basis of caste, race and gender. The ancient male dominant society is still influential in today's casted divided culture in many parts of India. Although many steps have been take to prevent discrimination against women. Earlier, through history, women have been victim of many offences such as prostitution, murder, rape, human trafficking etc. And till date, many of such offences are repeatedly committed in many parts of India. This region mostly covers rural areas where discrimination on basis of caste has been highest.

Perhaps, it is the quandary nature of women that made them suffer more as neither the higher caste including the officials in judiciary in ancient India helped them nor the public at large accepted them which made women more vulnerable and hence the present state.

But the situation of Dalit women, which earlier referred to 'untouchables', made the case worst as they were mostly neglected by the society and forced to work as prostitutes. The scenario in modern world did not made any difference to Dalit women and they are still being discriminated and forced to work as prostitutes, also involved in human trafficking etc. According to 2010 survey, every 18 minutes, Dalit women are becoming victim of forced prostitution, murder, rape etc2.

Also, not only they are abused and discriminated by upper caste of the society but also they are being abused by Dalit men also. The triangular combination, (being women, lower caste and Dalit), have made the scenario worst for Dalit women. As Dalit men are becoming victim of various crimes and socio-economic conditions, they release all their frustrations and tension on Dalit female, generally their wife, and therefore the condition is becoming more and more serious.

As Dalits are often denied entry to religious places, access to sources of water, governance and education, the scenarios is catastrophic for Dalit women as they are sufferers of injustice and oppression. National Crime records Bureau data records that more than four Dalit women are being raped every day3.

There have been many cases where Dalit women are tortured or murdered or raped just because of they belong to a caste or a class of people called Dalit. In Bihar, a woman had received money from government as part of yojna and a policeman borrowed that money for short period. When woman went to get her money back, she was raped in front of her family and burnt alive4. These types of acts in societies show the level of cruelty and arrogance in the society that just because a woman belongs to Dalit class, she becomes victim of crimes no normal prudent person can imagine.

Another case of Haryana, where the victim is just a school girl. Here, when the victim was going to school, some men came in car and forced her to get into car with them. There, she was gang raped by those man, and they threatened girl not to tell anyone otherwise accuse will kill her parents. This went along for 10-15 days when she was again gang raped as and when those men called so. After some days the victim told her mother about incidents, and so those accuse took her mother, raped her too and then killed her. When the father filled the suit, he was forced to take Rs. 70,000 and take the case back. The victim belongs to Dalit class of people5.

Another shocking case of Orissa, where a 13 year old Dalit Christian girl was gang raped and murdered by accuses. All the accuse are juvenile and are now arrested for gang rape and murder of the girl6. These type of incident rises to the question whether the person who can rape or murder or even sexually abused can be considered Juvenile or whether any person who can attempt or commit such grievous acts which a reasonable man cannot imagine of doing such acts.

In Rajasthan, when a Dalit girl was working with her mother on field, she was dragged and then raped by a nearby villager. Though the victim's brother was nearby and he tried to save her, the accused manage to escape on bike. The disturbing part is, when the family went to police for filing complaint, police beat the girl and recorded the statement that the accuse did not raped her and she had sexual relationship with her brother.7 These acts of police constantly raise questions in mind whether the law enforcement mechanism can be trusted.

According to 2010 statistics, in every week, 21 Dalit women are being raped and 13 Dalits are murdered. The crime against Dalits are increasing since 20008. According to survey, in 2003, there were 1089 cases of Dalit women being raped by Dalit men while it increased to 1346 in 20099. The conviction rate in case of Dalit atrocity is just 5.3% in 200610.

Legal regime and Dalit women

The Constitution of India is considered to be the lengthiest Constitution in the world and it contains legal base of everything from fundamental rights and duties to directives of states and powers and functions of Executive and Judiciary. Under Constitution of India, 1950, Right to Equality has been guaranteed under article 14 to article 18 of the Constitution. Article 14 states that 'the State shall not deny to any person equality before the law and equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.' Therefore by the virtue of article 14, it has been specified stated that every person is entitled for protection of law irrespective of caste, religion, race, sex etc.

Article 15(2) of the Constitution of India, 1950 declares no citizen shall be restricted or disabled from access to any public place or places of public resort etc on the ground of race, caste, sex, place of birth or religion. Also, Article 17 of Constitution states that 'untouchability is abolished and its practice in any form is forbidden'. The enforcement of untouchability shall be punishable offence in accordance with the law. Article 17 specifically protects 'Dalits' from being discriminated and also forbids the practice of untouchability.

Initially, Untouchability (offences) act, 1955 had been passed. But in 1978 old legislation was amended and also its name was changed to Protection of Civil Rights, 1955. As, cases of atrocities on Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe were not covered under the old legislation, parliament passed a new act called Scheduled Caste and Schedule Tribe (prevention of atrocities), act, 1989.

In Asiad Project Worker’s case11, the Supreme Court held that the fundamental right under Article 17 are available against private individuals and it is the constitutional duty of the State to take necessary steps to see that these fundamental rights are not violated.

In State of Karnataka v. Appa Balu Ingale12, the Court held that the object of Article 17 and the Protection of Civil Rights, 1955 is to liberate the society from blind and ritualistic adherence and traditional belief which has lost all legal or normal bases. It seeks to establish new ideas for society-equality to the Dalits at par with general public, absence of disabilities, restrictions, or prohibitions on grounds of caste or religion.

Article 21 of Constitution of India, 1950 guarantees every person right to life and personal liberty. According to article 21, every person has right to live his/her life without any disturbance and it shall not be deprived except the procedure established by the law. It is available to the entire person living in India including minorities and Dalits but on looking at the cases, it can be said that people, whether upper cast or Dalit males, are in continuous violation of basic rights of Dalit women and despite of making law enforcement mechanisms, people still violates lawful rights and liberties of Dalit women.

International Scenario

Internationally, there have been many covenants and treaties made in order to protect women rights. Mostly covenants enacted by United Nations and resolutions passed by United Nations are been accepted by most countries including India. Initially, the United Nations have passed Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)13 which consists of basic rights of people all over the world and it has binding effect on all the nations. According to UDHR, right to life has been granted to all the individuals of the world and it is considered to be the basic and most important right of every human being for survival. Except from right to life, many other freedoms and rights such as right to movement, right to speech, right to personal liberty, right to equality, etc. Have also granted under UDHR. It has accepted that such rights and freedoms are necessary for all the human being to live life with liberty and prosperity.

After UDHR, came International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)14, came into force on March 23, 1976 consist of civil and political rights of all the individuals in human family. It includes right to life, freedom from inhuman and degrading treatment, right of detenu to be treated with humanity, freedom of movement, freedom of opinion and expression, right to take part in public affairs, etc. It has been accepted universally that, these right are given to all the human being including Dalit women. Although the enforcement of such rights are still in question. India, being a signatory, have ratified in its domestic laws and accepted almost every right as fundamental right of every citizen, as codified in Constitution of India, 1950, but the abuse and inhuman treatment to Dalit women are still continued to be in practise.

Along with ICCPR, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) have also been accepted as one of the instrument of Bill of Rights and it has been widely accepted by nations who also accepted and ratified ICCPR. ICESCR includes right to work, right to social security, right to physical and mental health, right to adequate food, clothing, housing and standard of living and freedom from hunger etc. Like ICCPR, Constitution of India, 1950 have also accepted many of the provisions of ICESCR and accordingly implementation procedures have been made. But they are still not enforced properly and Dalit women are becoming victim of vigorous crimes such as rape, murder, etc.

Both covenants lacks on specifying individual complaint system and it have become impossible to enforce such rights in certain conditions. In order to fill this gap, the United Nations have accepted optional protocol to the Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women15 which will enable women victims to file individual complaints against any types of discrimination. This is also applicable to Dalit women in India but despite of such mechanism, Dalit women are still discriminated and abused due to lack of awareness.

Proposal: Solving burning issues

Perhaps this is not quandary of Dalit women, that they can get protection from law enforcement nor can any help from other caste or class of the society as they are not aware of their rights and they are constantly abused by other sections of society. In order to help Dalit women, there are many steps which have to be taken in order to protect them such as:-

  1. Effective implementation of government policies made specifically for the protection of Dalits: In number of debates that had been held, it was agreed though there has been policies made by the government, dalits are not getting benefit of all of them and therefore proper implementation mechanism is necessarty.

  2. Government should take effective policies to remove caste based conflicts and discriminations: there is necessicity to make such policies which removes caste based conflicts. Although some of them are present in current legislation, but it is necessary to enact strict rules.

  3. Mass campaign programme which will spread knowledge about rights and freedoms of Dalit women: Apart from government, mass campaign programmes by media and NGOs will add to the efforts of government to remove caste based violence.

  4. Limited use or prohibition on alcoholic drinks as they work as catalyst in increasing violence: more strict rules should be made for consumption and use of alcoholic drinks are they tend to make people more violent.

  5. Making effectiveness policies to increase literacy rate in Dalit women: Although rules have been made for free education to children in India, special rules should be made in order to spread literacy in dalit women.

  6. Witness protection programme: In many cases, witnesses are murdered in order to drop cases against other class of people, in such cases it is necessary to introduce witness protection programme.

  7. Implementing fast track case disposal system for cases relating to caste based violence: many caste based discrimination cases are delayed for years and due to delayed judgment by the court, dalits women are not getting justice therefore fast tract disposal of such cases should bbe made necessary.

  8. Availability of psycho-socio counsellor in Dalit settlement cases: as caste based violence and crime against dalit women are very sensitive in nature, it is necessary to employ psycho-socio counsellor for dealing with such issues.

  9. Co-ordination between Non-governmental Organisations and Government: there should be co-operation and co-ordination between governmental departments and non-governmental organisations.

  10. Coordination among law enforcement agencies: Due to clash of jurisdictions among law enforcement agencies, many times, justice had been delayed therefore coordination among them is very important.

  11. Government should ensure rehabilitation of the victims or survivors of the crime: Rehabilitation of victims of crime is very important as the psychological after-effects of crimes on dalit women are very dangerous and therefore government should ensure rehabilitation of victims of crime..


The situation of Dalit women in India is becoming worse day by day and it needs immediate attention of Government of India so that to form and implement such policies specifically dealing with problems of Dalit women. Since ancient times, the violence against Dalits especially Dalit women are carried and after many ages, the eco of pains and problems can be heard in modern times also. These ancient practices needs to be stopped or banned immediately which force Dalit women to indulge in prostitution or other immoral acts.

There are many policies being made for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe people but there is no such policy among at solving problems of Dalit women and therefore it has become necessary to enact such policies. According to convents and other international treaties, the government is at obligation to make such policies which will ensure the protection of women in the country and accordingly the rules are being made in Constitution of India, 1950 and other enactments. But perhaps it is the implementation procedures which are not as effectiveness as they should. In future, it has been expected that India may become superpower, therefore it is necessary to protect all its citizens in order to succeed.



1 Information available on

2 . 2010 Lenten Study compiled by the World Council of Churches, World Student Christian Federation and World YWCA,

3 . Thenmozhi Soundararajan, 'India's caste culture is rape culture', June 9, 2014, article on

4 Report of First day at National Tribunal- Violance against Dalit women in India, October 13, 2013, information on

5 Ibid

6 Ibid

7 Ibid

8 Ibid 2

9 All India Dalit Mahila Adhikar Munch (AIDMAM), 'Violence against Dalit Women', article available on

10 Ibid 2

11 People's Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 1473

12 AIR 1993 SC 1126

13 Universal Declaration of Human Rights available on

14 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights available on

Read More]]> (nishith.pandit) News and current affairs Mon, 25 Aug 2014 22:31:28 +0530
Why Freedom of expression has to be fundamentally restrictive for the successful working of a democracy in a Hinduist society

By Naveen K. Jain
3rd year student of Jindal Global Law School

Democracy, is made of two Greek words "Demos"-which means People and, “Kratos" which means power. In simple understanding - "Rule by People".   In contemporary times, it is understood as vesting authority and power through majority and collective decision to some people to rule and to exercise their authority and power. The best form of democracy is one which is politically and socially equal and works on the principles of secularism. Right to speech and expression is guaranteed to Indian citizens under Article- 19-(1) (a) of Indian Constitution. Under this such a right, we have right to speech and expression until it violates-Public order, Decency and Morality.

Freedom of expression is fundamental for the successful working of a democracy so long as it does not disturb public order Decency and Morality. Freedom of expression is in among those of rights through which a progressive and positive ends can be achieved. One can voice one's opinion and could stand against certain things only if he has a backing of legal and constitutional mechanism.  

According to J.S. Mill- Liberty is based on the understanding of utility ‘in the largest sense grounded on the permanent interests of man as a progressive being. He takes the concept of liberty beyond the utilitarian doctrine of Bentham by holding the view that a proper conception of happiness includes freedom as individuality. As he said, If an opinion is suppressed as against the prevailing notion and the suppressed opinion is right, then humankind stands deprived of its benefit.

 Banning of A.K. Ramanujan's 300 Ramayanas, and Rohinton Mistry’s “Such a long Journey" cannot be considered as just one. The main reason behind banning A.K. ramanujan's 300 Ramayana was that his essay tried to delineate the fact that there are more than 300 versions of Ramayana. Then after, the ABVP started to protest against the course curricular of Delhi University which had the said essay as a compulsory topic on the basis that this essay hurt “religious sentiments of Hindus"

The story of ram katha extends to huge historical period. and there are huge differences in time when "Valmiki's version of Ramayana" and the Ramayana by other scholars such as" Kamba" was written.  A.K. Ramanujan never tried to disregard any of the version described in 300 Ramayana, he just tried explain that there are such version of Ramayana in more than 25 languages and even in Sanskrit language itself there are many versions and each describe and hold a different facts for the same story. For example in one Ramayana- Ram and Sita were described as siblings whereas in another - Sita was the Daughter of Ravan. Jain's version of Ramayana which was written by Vimalasuri describes that Ravan was killed by Laxman. In another version of Ramayana, Sita had refused to give agani-pariksha to Ram when she was asked.

       Historians argued in favour of the Essay saying that it tried to show as how rich diversity we Indian have in different parts of the country on Ram Katha. It shows rich and sophisticated diversity of Indian heritage. And from academic point of view, it does not restrict academic freedom but it gives more academic freedom to choose, deliberate and decide. 

When the issue was raised, and the department of History was vandalised by ABVP, a four member committee was set up to look into the matter and decide as whether or not 300 Ramayana be a part of course curriculum. By that time the matter had already reached to High-Court and H.C. directed the Delhi University to use their discretion on the matter. A four member committee, which was consisted of Scholars and faculty of History, gave a 3-1 verdict favouring 300 Ramayana should be a part of course curriculum. Ignoring the decision of the committee and giving no time to its members to read the essay, academic council decided to have a meeting to take a decision on it. And as expected, they all favoured that the essay should not be a part of course curriculum. This decision resulted in bringing outrage in public and collective disregard towards its members and DU as an institution.  And it was so saddening that it all happened when the exams were scheduled just a few days away.

Somewhat same happened in Mumbai, when Mumbai University had to withdraw Rohinton Mistry's book titled "Such a long journey" from its course curriculum due to a great and inevitable pressure by Shiv Sena. What was more ridiculous was the fact that they withdrew it when the exams were just a few weeks away and the term was about to end. It was the first time in the 153 years of history that such actions were taken. The vice chancellor of MU used its discretionary powers and acted through emergency provision which are given in Mumbai University’ act. His action brought ridicule on the face of MU’ academic excellence and long glorious years.

This action was taken, as the book contained some part where it was written "“What to do with such low-class people? No manners, no sense, nothing. And you know who is responsible for this attitude – that bastard Shiv Sena leader who worships Hitler and Mussolini."  The sad part of this was not that they withdrew it but they withdrew it owing inevitable pressure by "Shiv Seniks".

Our Constitution guarantees "freedom to speech and expression” and it can only be denied when it disturbs "Public order and peace". Our constitution guarantees freedom of expression and speech "Article-19(1) (a)  so that changes can be brought for public and social welfare without any fear, When Rohinton Mistry said wrote something against the Shiv Sena, it was completely his own opinion and the book could be withdrawn from the course curriculum if it really had disturbed and hurt  people’ sentiments. But ridiculous was the fact that, the action was taken through no judicious means, the process which was adopted for this was also unjust and it completely ridiculed University's reputation.

In both the cases, the method which was adopted was not a judicious one, and it was justified to criticise such actions. "300 Ramayana” does not harm any religious sentiments but it actually tries to promote the richness and diversity of our culture. A.K. Ramanujan did something which should have been appreciated and recognised by the of Hinduist class.

Read More]]> (12jgls-nkjain) Legal argument Wed, 20 Aug 2014 14:40:36 +0530
Dare I protest the ban? - A short (law school science fiction) story

This is a work of fiction and all events as well as characters are purely figments of imagination. Any resemblance (if at all) to any event or person alive or dead is merely coincidental. This is a sci-fi short story set in 2022 and you are free to stop reading it at any point if you hate sci fi or are annoyed with the poor quality of this writing. 

"Yes Sirr!" I blurted out loudly as I was jolted awake from my slumber by Lahsiv's elbow crashing into my ribs.

It was a signal for me to wake up and answer my roll call.

With the West India National Law University (WINLU) having implemented a compulsory 70% attendance policy, the roll call was the single most important reason why most of the students attended classes. I was pleased with myself for having been marked present though I had not been awake for a single minute of the 'Interpretation of Statues' class.

I hadn't missed much, because in WINLU just as 'world class university' meant classrooms without paint, 'Interpretation of Statues' meant a case-memorising-endeavour. The final exam paper pattern ironically did not involve the interpretation of a single section but required students to merely reproduce from memory, some landmark decisions.

Having secured my attendance due to him, I gave Lahsiv a smile and glanced at the time table on my phone to see what lecture I would have to endure next. Constitutional law; I sighed and opened my notebook simultaneously looking around to see who looked like a sincere soul who would be carrying an extra pen.

Constitutional law and Administrative law lectures meant that you had to scribble everything that the teacher said as fast as you could. The professor goes through almost a million cases in a month and you have to have the notes for every single one if you want to have a chance to secure decent marks. Just as the prospect of an aching hand after an hour was going to dissuade me from taking notes, "at least the subject is interesting." I encouraged myself. 

"It's the last class, want to ride to the IT city and have good lunch there?" Lahsiv asked.  The thought of riding my latest 2014 edition Electric Cattle series robot brought a smile to my face. Up until 2012 most people thought that the solution to the depleting petroleum reserves world wide was electric motor vehicles but the unlikely partnership of Bajaj motors and Blackberry had brought forth their innovative product line - Electric Cattle. Not only was it a voice activated robot through which you could access the internet (critics claim Blackberry copied it off Apple's Siri) and play with like a pet but you could also ride on the electric powered bull and go up to 100kms in a single charge. The fastest model, which I had purchased a few months prior, was called Bullsar. It was Bajaj's play on the similarly named range of motorcycles which the Electric Cattle robots had rendered obsolete. 

"Of course" I replied with a grin but my enthusiasm waned when I remembered and added "but we will have to wait for 20-30 mins for it to charge." With the food at WINLU being bad more often than not, most students had bought various Electric Cattle series versions so that they could easily ride to nearby fast food joints.

"You can ride Lalit's. He has to study for his retest today, he won't come." Lahsiv replied just as the professor entered. 

For the next 55 mins words like "reasonable classification" and "nexus" filled the air and my notebook as I scribbled at maximum possible pace not bothering to think whether I was writing legibly enough to be able to read it later. Just as I thought that my borrowed pen was about to embarrassingly run out of ink, the bell rang to my great relief.

"Get Lalit's Bullsar too, I will see you in ten minutes at the gate.", I told Lahsiv as he headed to his room (which he shared with Lalit) while I went back to mine. After unceremoniously dumping my notebook (that's all I carried to class) on my bed, "Hello beefy boy!" I shouted. 

On hearing my personalised voice activation command, the Bullsar woke up from its sleep mode and greeted me. "Hello Almighty!" One of the greatest joys of having a robot you can personalise is that you can train it to give you self esteem boosts!

It followed up with, "You have one new email message." And then in a more ominous tone, "Battery Alert! Battery is less than 5 percent. Please plug me to a power source." 

I cursed under my breath and started looking for the power cord which I soon found under the bed. "Read email aloud." I commanded while plugging in the Bullsar.

From : Professor Alphus
Subject : Use of appliances within the Halls of Residence

Dear Students,
This is to inform you that as per the decision of the Hostel Committee, possession and use of Electric Cattle is hence forth prohibited within the campus. Use of Air Coolers rated above 20W is also prohibited. If any person is found in possession of any such electronic device, it shall be confiscated.

Professor Alphus

My blood began to boil the minute I heard the message.

"Injustice, this is injustice isn't it? Not long ago, that bearded boy had got marks-for-discipline system scrapped by filing a PIL, hadn't he? PIL, I am going to file a PIL.", I decided.

But then, shouldn't I write to the authorities first. Give them a notice or something? I rationalised and I began drafting a letter in my head...

""Dear sir,
The university not only charges us a hefty hostel fee but also makes us pay for the electricity that we use as recorded by the electricity meters installed in each room. When this is so, why in the world do you now want to restrict our electricity usage? We are already paying for the electricity being consumed by our devices including the Electric Cattle and coolers whether big or small...""

I could recall that ironically enough, it was Prof. Alphus who had taught us in his history lecture about how Indians protested against the unfair and irrational Rowallat Act which was enacted without taking them into confidence. "Either it was that act or it was Monty-Mirlo reforms, I must check up and compare this stupid rule made without consulting us to that thing which he had taught."

'But there aren't any of those fancy article 14 words in it yet.' I thought. "The authorities are acting very arbitrarily." I should perhaps add.

'In a letter, do I need to tell them how they are State under article 12 first before invoking 14?'  I wondered. However, that chapter had been taught long ago. That there was some airport restaurant tender case was all that I could remember. 

'Nexus' & 'reasonableness', these words should feature prominently I decided because I remembered them having been uttered frequently in class, just a few minutes earlier.

"The university action had no reasonable nexus with logic." I decided to write. Didn't sound very legalese like but reflected my thoughts rather accurately. 

"Your actions are blatantly unconstitutional." I thought would be a good conclusion to the letter in my head.

"Some famous jurist's quote regarding justice would make it even better. They will wonder if Denning wrote the letter. Even god won't be able to produce a better draft," I thought with the full confidence of a second year law student who only intermittently pays attention in class. 

Just for good measure I decided to open up the bare act and see if there was anything else that I could add. It was rather shocking to see that the bare text of article 14 just talked about equality in two awkward terms.

"The jurists love such crap. They will have written two hundred pages (of some textbook's summary) on 'equality before law' and 'equal protection of laws'," I thought.

"God knows where all this nexus business came from. I should be including some inequality allegations." I was suddenly not as confident as before about my draft. "Could I say it discriminates based on gender because girls use a lot of other electric stuff like hair dryers and irons which weren't banned under this policy..."

While I was wondering about this angle, my cellphone rang. It was Lahsiv asking me to hurry to the hostel gate. I went there. Hopping on to the Bullsar, I ordered it into gear and sped off. Feeling the cool wind blowing in my face as we accelerated towards IT city, I asked him "Read Prof. Alphus' email? Bloody fascists these administration people are! They have no right to teach us law and justice." 

"Nope, I didn't read but Lalit told me about the crazy Electric Cattle ban," he replied.

"This could be our last ride if they actually..." I began.

"Don't worry, they won't implement it. This isn't the last ride, don't worry...  By the way, I'll tell you something interesting! I was chatting with Mosho just now, and you know what, they have increased salaries at BNTT again! Now it is almost two lakhs a month!" Lahsiv paused at that, letting the enormity of that amount sink in. 

It was really difficult to believe that Mosho, our senior who spent most of his law school time playing NFS racing games was now being paid enough by a law firm to actually buy a small Tata Nano car or two or three Electric Cattle models every single month!

"And that's without including the bonus," Lahsiv added but before he could continue, his Bullsar interrupted, "You have a new voice note." 

"Woooohooo, I am going to Cambridge," Esha's voice note played.

"No surprises there, she was bound to be accepted there. She had a superb recommendation from the dean to add to her perfect CGPA. What else do you need..." I commented, wondering if my dream of pursuing a Masters degree from the UK shall also one day come true or if it was destined to remain a dream...

"It was only superb because she herself had drafted the LoR. The dean merely signed it." Lahsiv pointed out. "She was his favourite student!"

Perfect CGPA and favourite student, these things mattered at WINLU. CGPA was the holy grail but this one easier to find than the one Langdon chases. All you have to do is mug, mug and mug, one solid week before the exams and a night before each test to make sure that Sasho's notes (photocopied sets of which are conveniently made available in the photocopy shop) are ingrained in your mind. Then all that remains is regurgitating it on paper. Understanding the concepts which those notes purport to encompass is purely optional.

However, you still need the college to forward that CGPA laden CV to WINLU. 'It is important to ensure that the holy grail lands in the right hands.' I thought. "Will they still help me if I challenge their stupid rules?" I wondered... "Surely no one will bother to give me a Letter of Recommendation. Nobody likes a troublemaker, do they?" 

"They may perhaps even write to other universities telling them I am anti-establishment, or will they not go so far?"

"The safe option is surely to remain quiet. Another semester of persevering on with mugging Shasho's notes, could give me a fair shot at the two lakhs per month pay package or possibly even a UK Masters degree if my luck holds too."

"Who are you thinking about for so long? Say something," Lahsiv interrupted my chain of thoughts.

"Beyoncé. She's hot. Also, out of my reach. Let's have the burgers today." I replied and got a weird look for being so very random. I spoke of Beyoncé but it was the blind lady of justice that I was thinking about. Definitely out of reach if I wanted to have a shot at a UK university. Perhaps I may seek her there but later. Not now, definitely not now. 

What's injustice when compared to 2 lakhs month? How can principles and reasoning ever be more important than going to UK? Why be drafting letters to point out the teachers' hypocracies when you could be planning how to spend a couple of lakhs in a month?

I silently deleted the draft letter from my mind. West India National Law University may or may not impart good education of the law but Western India can teach you far greater lessons. - Focus on what's on everyone's mind and you can trample over the rest.

You can rule your educational fiefdoms with an iron fist, just so long as you have a good Recruitment Committee. 

Who needs Gobbels when you inspire self censorship.  -  A modern West India proverb.

Read More]]> (lawschoolleaks) Legal fictions, poems et c. Mon, 11 Aug 2014 11:35:00 +0530
A primer to mooting for the uninitiated... Studying at Law School gives me some insight how the Mooting (Moot Courts) work. Hence I share the same.

A moot is a co-curricular activity at majority of the law schools in which the participants take part in mock trails which usually consist of extensive research, drafting of memorandum (AKA Memorials/written submissions) and oral arguments, and such an activity is called mooting.


The topic of the moot Court shall be anything ranging from the municipal law to the international law. The Court for the same is likewise or as decided by the hosts of the competition. A moot is team activity which generally consists of a researcher and two oralists' (mooters). There are at least two judges and may differ as per the norms of the competition. The judges of various Courts or advocates are called upon to be the judges in such competitions. A researcher is the person who does not present the case in front of the judges but may pass chits (if permitted) to help the oralists’ when he/she is presenting the case. Some competitions may conduct researchers’ interview. All the three members undertake extensive research not only on the topic of the moot problem but also on the topics related to the moot problem. For instance, if the moot problem talks about transfer of property through sale, then it is expected that the team is aware about the Court fees paid in such cases.

How it Works?

After the participant has taken part in the moot, a hypothetical situation known as moot problem (AKA Fact Sheet) is given to the participants. Usually, the participants are supposed to prepare memorials and argue from both the sides, that is to say, preparing written submission and arguments from the applicant’s/plaintiff’s/petitioner’s/appellant’s side and from the respondent’s/defendant’s side.

The moot Court revolves around the question of law rather than question of fact. For instance, the moot problem is about rape (Section 375, 376 of Indian Penal Code, 1860), then the act of the persons or situation of the moot problem will NOT be questioned but whether that act or situation constitutes as a rape shall be the issue of the case i.e. question of law will be discussed.

In moot Courts, there is no presentation of evidences and statements of witnesses. It can be said that moot Courts are like the final arguments or summary arguments of real Court. The participants need to present their case which is in the best interest of their side of representation. For this the participant shall take help of provisions of law, books, journals, national and foreign case laws (precedents), obiter dicta from various case laws, opinions of eminent jurists, authentic statistical and other reports, published articles, web sources and so on.

After the research work is complete the participants draft the written submission. It generally includes the following:

  •          Cover Page
  •          Table of Contents
  •          Index of Authorities
  •          Statement of Facts
  •          Questions Presented
  •          Summary of Pleadings
  •          Arguments Advanced
  •          Prayer

Generally, the judges awards marks on the basis of interpretation of facts, understanding of law and procedure, reasoning, use of authorities, presentation and articulation etc. The oral arguments are time bound to be distributed among the mooters. The judges may screw the mooters and they should be prepared to answer very farfetched questions which may not be related to the moot problem. Some competitions may also have rebuttal rounds.


Read More]]> (Sankul Kabra) Student life Mon, 28 Jul 2014 09:22:00 +0530
Death Penalty: An Unacceptable Proposition Ironically, the philosophy that India relies upon for not abolishing death penalty is completely foundation less and tenuous. India believes that the punishment should be according to the severity of the crime committed. This philosophy completely holds true for itself but in case of death penalty is it really so? Capital punishment is inhumane and barbaric. It is ridiculous argument that by killing a criminal with less pains sufferings in humanitarian thing. The lions in the zoo are not at all dangerous to men, they do not harm anyone, similarly, the hardened criminals, who are kept in prisons for years together, lose their temper, anger, cruelty, sadism, etc. the person’s life changes to cause repentance in his mind.[1]

The convicts after conviction have the right to file a mercy petition to the president. Sadly, this process takes so long that the convicts who have been awarded death penalty are put in a situation where they feel there is a knife on their neck and any moment it will scratch through. For example, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar who was convicted for terrorist activities[2] had been waiting for 12 years to get the response for his mercy petition. This means everyday you get up in the morning and think that today is my last day and I may not see the new tomorrow and this continues for 12 long years; after such a thing no person is in a normal state of mind to be hanged. Justice K.T. Thomas, who headed the three member bench in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, has said that “executing Perarivalan, Murugan and Santhan, convicted and sentenced to death in the case, would amount to punishing them twice for the same offence, as they had already spent 22 years in jail, the equivalent of life imprisonment.”In a nutshell, the anticipatory suffering of the criminal, who may be kept on death row for many years, makes the punishment more severe than just depriving the criminal of life. In State of Bihar v. Pashupati Singh[3], the Supreme Court held that “if there has been a long interval between the date of the offence and the consideration of the appeal by the Supreme Court, the capital sentence for the commission of an offence under section 302, IPC for which the accused has undergone a long period of mental agony, may not be executed.”

The delay factor in execution of death sentence is violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India[4]. The Supreme Court further said that undue delay in execution of death sentence due to delay in disposal of mercy petition by the President would certainly cause mental torture to the condemned prisoner and therefore would be violative of Article 21. The Court at times considers the delay factor in the light of the circumstances of the case and in appropriate cases commute death sentence to life imprisonment.

Capital punishment reinforces the idea of retributive justice a medieval concept that must be have no place in the civilized society. It is argued that a person who has committed a heinous crime, such as murder must be likewise deprived of life. Does this mean that a rapist must be raped or that a torturer must be tortured?

India believes that death penalty acts as a deterrence effect to would-be criminals. But, Evidence from around the world has shown that the death penalty has no unique deterrent effect on crime. Many people have argued that abolishing the death penalty leads to higher crime rates, but studies in the USA and Canada, for instance, do not back this up. In 2003 in Canada, 27 years after the country abolished the death penalty the murder rate had fallen by 44 per cent since 1975, when capital punishment was still enforced.[5] Data shows that states that do not practice death penalty have lower murder rates compared to states having death penalty.[6]

On the other hand, though no execution had been carried out since the execution of DhananjoyChatterjee on 14 August 2004, the number of murder cases have been reducing. According to the National Crimes Record Bureau, in 2001 a total of 36,202 murder cases were registered in India. Though the population of India increased from 1.028 billion in 2001 to 1.21 billion in 2011, the murder cases indeed reduced to 34,305 in 2011.

Thousands of murders are committed each year and to check murders, national interest demands that the guilty persons should not escape justice. The best deterrent sentence would be one of life imprisonments,[7] and that should mean imprisonment practically for life, and not just 14 or 20 years as at present.[8] Perhaps the knowledge that a murder would make one spend their whole life in prison would act as a sufficient deterrent.

Taking the recent example of 26/11 Mumbai attacks terrorist Ajmal Kasab, he said in his confession[9] to the police that he had carried this mass killing so that his family could get money after his death and he wanted to die in the name of Allah and be epitome of sacrifice to his fellow terrorists. Now by awarding death penalty we are actually serving his incomplete task and cultivating more Ajmal kasabs. This example also shows that the main purpose of death penalty has not only lost its importance but is now giving birth to more terrorists so that they can set examples and become famous and India certainly does not want this!

According to the National Crimes Records Bureau, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, a total of 1,455 convicts or an average of 132.27 convicts per year were given death penalty during 2001 to 2011. This also implies that on average on less than every third day, one convict is awarded death penalty in India. Death penalty therefore is not awarded in the rarest of rare cases but in most cases. During the same period, sentences for 4,060 convicts were commuted from death penalty to life imprisonment. This indicates that thousands of convicts remain on death row at any given point of time.

India also gambles upon the testament that Individuals are less likely to commit violent crimes, including murder, if they know they will face punishment by execution. But certainly this is not the true picture.This argument supposes that criminals study and anticipate the consequencesof getting caught, and decide that a long term of imprisonment is acceptable, whereas execution is not. Many crimes are committed on the spur-of-themoment. Taking the same example of Ajmal Kasab, he mentioned in his confession that he did this for money and would do the same for Indian Government, where ever they wished if they paid him the moneyand gave him regular meals.[10]Hencethere is no stopping for people like these and no punishment, known to man could ever stop these misanthropic people.

It is often argued that the death penalty provides closure for victims' families. This is a rather flimsy argument, because every family reacts differently. As some families do not feel that another death will provide closure, the argument doesn't provide a justification for capital punishment as a whole.Also there is a notion that executions provide the most cost-effective solution to violent crime. A society cannot condone violence and sacrifice human rights as a cost-cutting measure. The decision to take a human life should not rest on financial motives. Using the death penalty to reduce prison populations is futile. Study after study has found that the death penalty is much more expensive than life in prison.[11] The high costs of the death penalty are for the complicated legal process, with the largest costs at the pre-trial and trial stages. The execution process is to be done as per the jail manuals which is different for every state. Research shows that there are number of formalities to be taken care of and there is a great need of monetary as well as human resources. The simple argument is whether we are ready for killing a person based on a myth that it will lead to fewer expenses to the state and is money above justice and good conscience?

“Justice is meant for reform. Death penalty denies the opportunity to reform.”

[1]MALIK, Supra 12 at p.4.

[2]Bhullar was prosecuted for the 1993 New Delhi car bombing.

[3] (1974) 1 SCR 742

[4]Triveniben Vs. State of Gujarat, AIR 1989 SC 467

[5]Amnesty International, Death Penalty the ultimate punishment.

[7]State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Ratan Singh, AIR 1976 SC 1552

[8]K.NKatju, Life imprisonment should replace death penalty, Northern India Patrika, 10 February, 1963

[9]Mumbai Terrorist Wanted to Kill and Die and Become Famous, ABC News, 3 December 2008. Also available at (Accessed on 9 May 2014)


[11]Information available at (Accessed on 11 May 2014)

Read More]]> (Sankul Kabra) Legal argument Fri, 04 Jul 2014 12:21:37 +0530
How dropping a year to re-take CLAT was the right and ultimately happiest choice! As I sit next to the same window of my room, I remember how I sat here last year too, fingers crossed, in a life-changing dilemma. Makes me smile right now. I remember how tears emerged from my eyes, and how I wished to yell at the sky, I dont want to do this. I don't want to take a drop. I wanted to have a one-on-one conversation with God, rebuke him, for why he couldn't let me take up the law school I had been selected in ! But alas, all I heard was the thundering of th clouds, pattering of water on my window. 

I come back from the nostalgic moment and as I hear my mother scream over the phone, "oh yes, She is selected. yes!! Yes!! NLIU Bhopal, it is."

I hadn't seen my mother so happy since long. Seeing her so enthralled, I felt bliss. :)

A drop year is something, every student is afraid of, be it anyone. Nobody knows what the future beholds, and everybody is afraid of the negative repurcussions that heshe could face thereafter. I was scared too. But you know something ? the best lines I ever heard were TAKE RISKS. No matter what, no matter how tough it seems, take a chance. Who knows ? Miracles happen. Don't go to that bed without realising how important it is that you know what are you doing with your life. Half of the time, we follow the same old schedule and never even try to remember who we really are. We forget that we have brains, and we are intellectual. We can create history, write epics, revolutionize a whole damn society ! All it takes is one thought.

Life is changing, and we can never know what happens next, all you have is choices, and the rest, leave it on God. Let him do a little work too ;)

(( sorry I couldn't write much, as it is my first blog. Anyways, have a happier day than ever :) ))

Read More]]> (kriti.29) Fun, laughs and timepass Fri, 04 Jul 2014 10:47:00 +0530
Do you think you know MS Office? How to use it like a true wizard lawyer: Hardcore Tabs in Word, Beautiful PPTs, Magic Automated Proofreading and much more It’s a product which we use everywhere and we will tell you the tricks to take the experience a notch higher!
MS Office has become indispensable part of many of our lives (Open Source just died a silent death somewhere?)  Though office on its own is pretty complete in itself I would tell you here of some add-ons which will take your Office experience to the next level. I would be mainly focusing on Word and PowerPoint in this article as these two software are what mainly used by legal fraternity.
Yet to get that law firm job, Outlook will come after that ;)
Automated Proofreading – Remember that time when your supervisor at your internship took your case because of that missed comma/bad formatting/ misspelling etc. We all hate Grammar Nazis, don’t we?  At least I hate them for sure.  (Pro tip – When confronting a Grammar Nazi, softly say to them, “There, their, they’re”) So now to avoid this not so welcome situation, I offer you Ginger. Yeah sounds funny name for a proof-reader but believe me it’s a life saver. Ginger has many medicinal benefits, the first one being that it saves you from headache.
But do remember that Ginger at the end of the day is a software prone to err, use your brain before accepting the recommended changes by the software. Add Consistency Checker to Word and your formatting is also taken care of.
ginger proofreading app for ms word


Tabs in Office – We all love Tabs, don’t we? One of the most horrid aspects of MS Office and especially word is that each document opens in a different window making use multiple windows simultaneously a PITA. Well we have a solution here all you need is Office Tab and you are good to go.
office tab


Better Presentation – I suck at making presentations. I am pretty sure there are many of you who fail miserably when it comes to making an attractive PowerPoint presentation.
Yes, we all dream of that powerful and beautiful board-room presentation, even though it’s going to be presented in class.
I have a way out! Add Visual Bee to PowerPoint make a simple PPT and click on enhance PPT. Select a nice theme and you are good to go. Alternatively you could also use import PowerPoint in Prezi and come up with an attractive flash based presentation in a single click.
Flowcharts – Remember that Property or Family case law which had more parties to the case than characters in the Lord of the Rings? The only way to remember who was who was by making a flowchart. Lucidchart and Gliffy Diagrams are two great free add-ons which let you make complex flowcharts in MS Word. Yes, absolutely free!
Citation Management – One bane that legal writing suffers from is citation. Often I found easier to write a legal paper than correctly cite it. These guidelines are so stringent that it takes forever to cite only. The details are too many, italicize the author’s name, and write this in upper case, that in lower case and so on. Zotero is the solution. Just feed the basic info to Zotero and it will generate the correct citation for you.  (I personally prefer CiteThisforMe for one or two citations). Zotero’s integration with MS Word is quite handy and makes life a bit easier. Mind you, just a little bit J


zotero at work

Dictionary – How about Merriam Webster Dictionary, integrated in MS Word itself? You know what the best part about it is, it’s completely free and yes, it’s authoritative too.
Drafting – Ever heard of legalzoom the legal documentation website? Well, you have now.  They have created a free nifty addon for MS Word which provides common templates used for drafting. (You could also check out kagzaat, a simple legal documentation site).
Note – Some of the suggested apps above may not be compatible with your version of MS Office.
The author blogs regularly about technology for lawyers over here.

Read More]]> (neo) Student life Fri, 04 Jul 2014 08:02:00 +0530
Modernity or Obscenity? A need for evaluation over media's abuse of power and freedom. Modernity or Obscenity? A need for evaluation over media's abuse of power and freedom.

Media brings the world on our doorstep by keeping us updated over current affairs, history, and science and about each and everything that adds to our knowledge but however the limitation is that we cannot differentiate information from misinformation and disinformation. Due to cut throat competition between every branch of media and to get the most viewers, readers, TRP'S, etc, there is a need for speed for getting stories, lucrative and captivating stories for which there is often a dereliction of duty at the end of media people. Our Indian Constitution has guaranteed a fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article.19 (1) (a), which is repeatedly exploited by these men to justify obscene or indecent news published or broadcasted by them. It is undeniable that freedom of expression needs adequate "breathing space" but having space by compromising morality and justifying obscenity on grounds of contemporary social norms and values is indefensible. Accompanying the provision of Article 19 (1) (a), Constitution has also made provision imposing reasonable restrictions in the interest of the sovereignty, integrity, public decency, morality, etc under Article 19 (2), which is comfortably overlooked by media people before publication of any such salacious content.

Sec.292 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 has made a general provision in respect to obscenity and has not defined the word "obscenity" anywhere. Sub- sec. (1) of sec.292 generally speaks about sale, hire, distribution, public exhibition or circulation of any book, pamphlet, paper, drawing, painting, etc having any lascivious content, effect of which it tends to deprave and corrupt people who read, see or hear the matter contained in it to be an offence. Further clause (a) of sub- sec. (2) of sec.292 brings under its purview even those who are under possession of such material. But the lacuna in this section or any other sections of IPC is that it has nowhere defined the term "obscenity", providing this to be the lope hole for such publications to escape in the name of changing modern lifestyle or elevation from conservative social thinking. The term "obscenity" for a layman means something which is indecent, lewd, and offensive in behavior, expression or appearance and which creates a situation of sudden shock for the recipient and having this in mind, the publications should be scaled to the majority of recipients' comprehension. Obscenity is a subjective term, which might differ from individual to individual for their personal feelings and opinions concerning indecency related to a particular thing. What might be indecent for one, might not be for the other but considering this fact, it is incumbent on the legislature to interpret the term "obscenity", to avoid further assassination of morality. There needs to be a yardstick indicating a line of demarcation adequate enough to distinguish between that which is obscene and that which is not.

In a case of Aveek Sarkar & another Versus State of West Bengal, Supreme Court recently passed a judgment stating, "Nude picture of women is not obscene if it carries social message", that is a picture of a nude/semi-nude women, as such, cannot per se be called obscene unless it has the tendency to arouse feeling or revealing an overt sexual desire. The judgment passed is indisputable but many advertisements published in newspapers, magazine related to contraceptives involve picture of semi-nude women models posing in seductive gestures, soliciting and luring people to try their products. The pictures depicted in such advertisements are undeniably vulgar and designed to excite sexual passion in persons who are likely to see it and the defense taken by the media for publishing such contents is that it's an effort to spread social awareness. Such advertisements are meant only for a particular group of audience and certainly not meant for children and adolescent and by publishing such content in newspapers or magazines it is bound to create a sudden shock or feeling of lustful thoughts in the audience's mind. Particularly for newspapers which are pursued by almost every age group, there has to be certain restrictions on publication of such content to maintain public decency.

In a case of 2004, a complaint was filed by a retired BSF officer against the editor of a leading newspaper publishing house in India before the Inquiry committee at New Delhi for publication of allegedly obscene material six times in one of its magazine supplement edition. The counsel for the respondent defended the respondent in the written statement filled by him stating, "That these articles/pictures are life stones of new styles of life challenging traditional social norms and values. What they have stated has to be tested by the current standards of ordinary decent people, the newspaper being in English and likely to be read only by well-educated persons". Neither of the publication houses asks for anyone's qualification nor tests their intellectual maturity before granting subscriptions for their editions or issues, rather they are in constant need to covet the audience preferring other publication house editions. If we consider the defense of the editor, then there arises a situation where there is a need of a statutory warning, to be printed on each of its edition demanding only for such audience which is well- qualified to perceive the printed content according to the editor's understanding.

In Ranjit D. Udeshi, 1965 case, the test of obscenity & community standards was considered and was stated that the concept of obscenity would change with passage of time but if we evaluate this fact then sooner we will be in such an age, where watching pornography or filthy images, videos, etc in public would not be considered a matter of concern as our righteousness would be buried deep. As of today, majorities forming our society have yet not progressed or are incapacitated to draw the exact interpretation of what they are presented with so a need for check over "obscenity" and laws attached to it needs a through scan.

Read More]]> (prax12) Legal argument Tue, 24 Jun 2014 10:32:05 +0530
How I ended up with the a chance at the NLU dream (I crammed a lot & hard) After dealing with numerous tuition classes and solving dozens of questions, I finally got the chance and got alotted with an NLU.

Even though I didn't belong to a legal background and Law never being my option, some unforseen, some unfortunate and some fortunate circumstances led me to change my field from medical to Law.

It was like a place of no-where for me. I didn't know anything about this field. All I knew was, that too from some fatuous elements, that Law is where you spend hours in court rooms, sweating your ass off to earn your living and people are afraid of approaching you.

BUT my dad was clear about everything. He knew what I needed to do in order to getting into the top law universities of India. He had a blueprint ready for me to follow. Okay, so he asked me to join a crash course as there was not much time left in the entrance ( CLAT 2014 ) and I didn't know a word. So, what I did was, I started reading all the material I got from the institute the other day and completed most of the part before the commencement of the crash course. You know, self-study, as my dad is a doctor and what doctors do best is " SELF-STUDY ". And as I belong to a medical background and had a routine where I used to study for hours straight, it wasn't that tough for me to complete the said amount of syllabus in a week. 

The crash course started and it was pretty easy for me because I had already gone through the syllabus once and it was like a revision for me. Who knew dad's plan would work so well :P Anyway, I gave 6 mocks and that made me familiar with the exam pattern and the sheer shortage of time that never has anyone been able to complete the whole exam. But after solving a pretty good number of questions, I honed my logical and inferential skills.

So, the day came. The day when I was about to shit my pants amid 40 students and me being seated at the centre of the class as the invigilator ditributed the exam papers to the students. So, I prayed to god before opening the exam paper. As soon as I opened the paper, a smile came on my face as I was familiar with most of the questions asked in the exam. I started solving the questions as soon as the bell rang with so much enthusiasm just like when a monkey jumps on a banana thrown at him by the tourists.

Anyway, I completed the exam just seconds before the final bell rang. It was such an experience! An ordeal too, though. The fear of flunking the exam was so powerfull that I forgot that my dad drove me to the exam centre and instead of waiting for him at the main gate, I took the bus and went back home.  

My exam went good but still, there's always this fear that you just can't suppress and you always succumb to the overwhelming feeling of flunking the exam. 

So, I reached home, switched on my laptop and played Call Of Duty for hours. For those who don't know what Call of Duty is, it's a video game, a good one.  All there was left to do was just wait for the result to come out. I had this feeling that I might get a golden chance.

So, the result came out. As soon as I opened my ID that was given to us by the CLAT conducting committee as there's online counselling and all this year, I saw this:  You have been selected in the first exercise list of counselling. Please fill the payment to continue with the admission process. 

I was dumbstruck for 2 mins. I shouted MOMMYYY! I got selected in the first counselling list. Every one was so happy. I was so happy! It was like a dream. I could finally see myself studying in one of the top Law universities of India. AND I thanked my dad for believing in me and giving me all the great suggestions on how I should study for my exam. 

So, after completing all the basic formalities I got alloted with an NLU. It felt so relieving! I finally got into one of the best law universities. After all the hardships and hours of question solving, the dream finally came true. I proudly tell people that the success that I am enjoying is all because of my dad. It's all because of him that I am able to look forward in my life. All thanks to my dad.

I'll end this by saying that  Always listen to your parents, they always know what's best for us. But that doesn't mean that you just stop making your own decisions but always think about your parents before making any big ones.

Good Day, people :)

Read More]]> (puneets957) Student life Wed, 18 Jun 2014 23:44:46 +0530
Nandii Reywal on the Liberalisation of the Indian Legal Market Disclaimer: The views expressed in this blog post are of the fictional Indian lawyer in London, Nandii Reywal.  The author has no political or other agenda and may or may not agree with Nandii.

Disclaimer 2: Let me make it clear at the outset that I think Indian lawyers (like me) are absolutely top-class and Indian law firms are doing a fantastic job. These are simply ramblings of an idle mind.

Been a while since my last post.

I met up with a friend from law school yesterday. He made salaried partner at one of big law firms in India a few years ago. We gossiped like old ladies about old classmates (looks like divorces are the flavor of the day at our age), complained about our bosses (even partners have big bosses) and generally exchanged notes on life in Mumbai and London.

As nostalgia and drink began to set in, I asked about chances of the Indian legal market being liberalised to let foreign firms in. No way in hell, he said. Got me thinking. Having never worked in an Indian law firm, the more I thought about it the more confused I got.

Naturally there are valid concerns of reciprocity and how liberalisation will be implemented (if at all) but to my mind, the debate has significant knock–on effects on two categories of people - young Indian lawyers starting their careers and clients in India.

For now, this post only explores whether there is any possible benefit liberalisation could bring these two groups.

Specialisation: I was recruited by Colby, Hewitt and Richards and trained for two years across four departments before choosing to qualify into the corporate department of the firm to become an M&A lawyer.  Most of my peers in India were randomly distributed across departments depending on a whim – some left in six months, some enjoyed it so much that they remain chained to their desks to this day. Would liberalisation allow young lawyers more flexibility to become the kind of lawyers they want to be or would the international firms see them as highly replaceable billing machines from day 1? Would Indian clients accept the higher level of specialisation that the international law firms offer or do they prefer their lawyers to be generalists with one person advising on everything from real estate to tax to competition law?

Cross-border work: Working across borders can be rewarding by way of experiencing different jurisdictions and working practices. While the scale of the deals in India is often similar to the deals abroad, is young talent at Indian firms getting the opportunity to stretch itself beyond Indian boundaries and take the lead on international deals? I don’t know. For those who do wish to work internationally, the only route seems to be through a foreign LLM. Except for the lucky few that can bag a job, this can be a costly job-hunting exercise often leading to disappointment as the job market is tight and there are immigration issues. Would liberalisation be a more cost-effective way of providing our young talent with the international experience? Might it even prevent the drain of some of India’s legal brains?

Training : It isn’t easy to keep pace with the latest legal developments when you’re working all the hours god made. Luckily, the firms I’ve worked at have placed quite a high premium on legal training programmes.  So every few days everyone from partner to lowly trainee is shunted into a classroom and made to listen tothe latest legal upates. Some of it even finds its way into our heads. Would liberalisation bring in a culture of formalized ongoing training or would this be seen in India as time spent not working? Do Indian lawyers already spend a lot of time keeping themselves current with law (researching for client memos doesn't count!) ? If the answer is no, do Indian clients require that their lawyers have at least a vague idea of the latest legal happenings or are they simply happy to pay for advice?

Accountability: Firms have reputations which they spend a lot of time (and money) protecting. I don’t know if a firm in India has ever being sued for negligence/ malpractice by a client but negligence claims against law firms are common in other jurisdictions (and one of the reasons why lawyers stress so much about the quality of their work). Similarly, I don’t know if a firm in India has ever been sued by one of its employees/consultants. Policies on harassment/promotion/equality/diversity which actually work for the employees and promote meaningful dialogue when issues arise are a must for every organisation. Would liberalisation help hold law firms accountable to their clients/employees or is this something that isn’t seen as an issue in the Indian market?

War for talent: Crucially, would liberalisation worry Indian law firms enough to make them do more to retain their top talent? Given that India produces several thousand lawyers every year, would it create more jobs for Indian students if local staffing is made a pre-condition to the entry of international firms? Would it mean better salaries?

Liberalisation is certainly not the panacea for all ills and this post doesn’t offer any answers – just more questions.

Your thoughts are welcome in the comments section. Keep it nice.

Until next time,

Nandii Reywal

Read More]]> (nandiireywal) Life as a qualified lawyer Fri, 06 Jun 2014 06:12:14 +0530
[Opinion] Vox Populi, Vox Dei: What this election & our delicate democracy means to one SC lawyer Guest blogger and Supreme Court advocate Shinam A Seth writes about what has made this election special.

The last vote has been cast. The last franchise exercised. The exit polls play havoc with the mind and the market alike.

As the curtains on the largest democratic, electoral exercise known to humanity, come to a final close, India and the world wait in anticipation. Some would even say, in trepidation.

Not so much, for who is going to be the leader of the world’s largest democracy- the exit polls in the last few days seem to be giving us, a fair glimpse of that.

But, for the hopes and aspirations of a billion plus people waiting earnestly to seize their destiny. Waiting, with bated breath, to watch India take its true place on the world stage.

What sets this Indian national election apart from any others in the past? It isn’t the first exercise of its people’s precious franchise. Nor, the first exploration of India’s democratic polity.

In fact, the Indian Constituent Assembly, drafted the Indian Constitution with Universal Adult Franchise as its most cherished right, as a cornerstone of our freedom and democracy. Universal suffrage was the way, immediately upon the founding of India, as a republic, much unlike and much before many of its western counterparts.

I ask myself, then, what is so remarkable about election and verdict 2014?

Elections 2014 have been a visible celebration of the diversity of India and her democracy. This nine phase electoral process for the 16th Lok Sabha has been extraordinary, to say the least.

Described by US President Barack Obama, as an “example for the world”, this Indian election has been watched with awe and with a sense of festivity for one of the many things, that India does get right.

The largest ever voter turnout in India at an average of 66.4%, across all regions, past caste and class barriers, is second only to the general elections in 1984, which took place in an unusually sensitive environment, after Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s assassination, and led to the sympathetic vote in favour of her son, Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.

This marvellous display of voter gusto makes this election historic, for the larger role it will play in reflecting our ‘evolving’ political discourse. Perhaps it is the power of social media- the much celebrated voter ‘selfie’ all over Facebook, the Twitter hash tag desperate to converse, not to forget the constant political chatter on all media. Or perhaps it is merely the access to information that makes it impossible to remain uninformed and apolitical, anymore.

But most importantly, it is the rise of a nation. An uninhibited resolve of the people. An unhindered fervour, to exhibit the power of the ballot.

This enthusiastic voter turnout across various States and communities, the fabulous CSR initiatives reflective of an evolved corporate culture, the ‘Power of 49’ translating in the large number of women voters outnumbering men in many constituencies and the engaging TV advertisements reflective of the real issues plaguing the country, is only reflective of fact that the Indian voter is informed, involved and is ready to seize the moment.

The political apathy and previous apolitical-ness, no more acceptable. A unified zeal, to defeat, all sense of disillusionment. Election 2014 has harboured a political engagement and passion in India, akin (I dare say) to an India-Pakistan Cricket World Cup Final. Everyone has an opinion, everyone is passionate and everyone is watching. And more so, aiming for a singular goal- a win for India.

And this festive zest limited itself not just to the ‘masses’. This election has had the ‘classes’ sitting up and participating with pride. From the average auto-wallah to your drawing room intellectual. From school children in Andhra Pradesh who encouraged their parents to sign an election pledge to poll officers in Meghalaya who flew kites with the slogan “Your vote counts”. Their enthusiasm, all encompassing.

This exceptional turnout is largely attributable to increased participation of younger and first-time voters, as well as women. And more so to the mammoth and laudable effort of the Election Commission of India (EC) in reaching out to the 551 million voters who cast their ballot, more than the combined population of the US, Germany, Canada and the UK.

Government spending on this election is up 131% from the last time around, making this the costliest election ever. This due to the many initiatives of the EC, including one known as Systematic Voters Education and Electoral Participation programme (SVEEP). From flash mobs and human chains to witty skits, catchy jingles on the radio to hoardings yelling “Say yes to vote, no to note”, the EC has left no stone unturned, to rope in virtually every section of society.

This renewed recognition and celebration of the sanctity of every vote, of the true vision behind the Constituent Assembly’s objective for one (wo)man, one vote is what this diverse nation has responded to. And what we must cherish and embrace.

Much has been said about this personality driven, ‘presidential style’ election and even more disturbingly, about the (perceived) threat to the secular fabric of our country.

Only the voter, the electorate- We the People of India - can protect, guard and ensure that these treasured morals weaved into our constitutional framework and inherent to our culture, remain intact, no matter who comes to power. Let us, the Indian people, remain a feared entity, capable and determined to continue to play our part in this dance of democracy. Our role has only just begun.

One can only hope and wish that this political engagement doesn’t fade and that We the People, learn by heart, that we truly are the lead protagonists of our own lives, and masters of the destiny of this gifted polity. As Maistre famously said: In a democracy people only get the leaders they deserve.

And more than that, one can only dare to dream and trust that the next government, our chosen representatives, consciously realise and recognise this precious faith and voice of a billion, hope-filled people.

Vox Populi, Vox Dei! The voice of the people is truly the voice of God.

Shinam A Seth is an advocate of the Supreme Court of India

Read More]]> (kianganz) News and current affairs Fri, 16 May 2014 12:32:59 +0530