We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
Rating 3
Fixed - 25.5 L
Bonus 8L (very difficult to get full bonus. Almost no one gets it).
Frequent appearances across different courts, something also in new cities, often leave little room for something as basic as a proper meal. Most of us begin the day early, and once proceedings start, it becomes a continuous stretch of moving between courtrooms, filings, and conferences. In such circumstances, lunch is usually limited to a brief 5–10 minute window, often in an unfamiliar court परिसर.
In that short time, choosing the right place or even the right item becomes important. A disappointing meal is not just inconvenient; it can affect the rest of an already demanding day.
This thread aims to create a practical, experience-based reference for members of the Bar.
Requesting everyone to contribute in the following format:
• City:
• Court:
• Canteen / Nearby Eatery:
• Recommended Items:
• Items to Avoid (if any):
The idea is to build a reliable, crowd-sourced guide to help fellow practitioners make informed choices when appearing before different courts/tribunals.
Small inputs can go a long way in making our daily practice a little more manageable.
Faizan Mustafa deserves better.
most likely outcome: vc would call an open forum next week and apologise, say that he was trying to get the police out of the hostel, when a student hit a policeman, he lost his calm and was trying to de-escalate by ensuring that the student gets punished immediately so that police does not start a case against them
reminds me of the Bart-Edna episode https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LVA8UnjopU
Ps - initially he'll give you a toffee of getting approval of the majority of the team to recommend you for placement and later on the team will tell you that oh it's his sole discretion only and he doesn't listen to anyone from the team so basically making you just a ball in a ping pong. Though it's a good place to learn Cap Marks.
Because of this, NLUs face a built-in disadvantage in global rankings. Multidisciplinary universities such as JGU, DU, and others benefit from aggregated data across fields. This includes publications, research output, resources, and reputation. These factors significantly inflate their scores. In contrast, NLUs operate within a narrow academic scope. Their output is concentrated in one discipline, which limits their comparative metrics. Against this backdrop, the performance of three NLUs in global rankings is commendable. They have managed to stand out despite clear structural disadvantages, demonstrating strong academic quality and institutional capability. Some experiments in NLS, particularly NLUD, within their academic ecosystem are unique.
None of the convenors were people with merit, only people who are easy to maneuver. The mistake you're speaking of is very very very possible.
Apply to a 3 year JD degree at a school which is decently ranked (Top 20) and go wherever you get most scholarships. They have pipelines for summer internships at firms and organizations since first year with almost guaranteed job offers unlike the NLU -> Tier 1 PPO pipeline.
It will work out to roughly the same cost, but you will have opportunities to build network, earn internship and part time money, and participate in campus recruitment.
dunno what it would be reality but it looks otherworldly in render
BTW, they cut down the original allocation from 70 to 35 acres
the govt seems to have allocated 2500 crore for the project, when other nlus are begging for 10 crore
Millions from the lgbtq community love them, look upto them, revere them.
And yet not a word. If not active resistance to the bill ... atleast some empathy ? Some guidance to youngers to take care of themselves and not do anything drastic? Words of calm ? Words of care ?
Both have active insta accounts, and X accounts. Both have been writing regularly in newspapers on OTHER matters (IBC, etc etc), and not a word on this.
Are you required to and/or do you ever get the time to revise atleast the important half of the subject matter more than twice?
Or do you need not do that and can remember things without revision more than twice
Because I have heard people say that they achieve good marks and then forget everything afterwards, I mean that doesn't sounds pretty absurd but I get that you've gotta study a lot as well and only the important topics really matter
Academic seriousness seems to have hit an all time low.
Also, it is your BJP government that gave him the visa.
This relentless targeting of Jindal has to stop. I strongly believe there is a motivated agenda behind it, possibly targeting Naveen Jindal because of business rivalry. How come we don’t see a single post against NLSIU??
An easy way of keeping in touch with lawyers is just telling them that you are free to take on any work that they might have even after your internship ends. Unless you have done terrible work during the internship, there is generally no reason why they would not give you work. If any lawyer agrees to do this, ensure that 1) the quality of your output does not suffer due to college, 2) you sustain the arrangement for a long period of time, and 3) you try to make at least some small talk during your interactions with the lawyer as you want the lawyer to be interested in you as a person and not just as some guy who helps them with work (try not to overdo the small talk either). Remember that you don't have to take on too much work also, it is enough if you are getting work even once or twice a month. The important part is maintaining a connection with the lawyer so that the lawyer does not forget you and you continue to remain in their good books.
Key points to take note:
1. NFSU does not look for examples; it is an example.
2. The generous public funding that NFSU receives is more than justified.
3. NFSU is truly an Institution of National Importance, not just in label.
The House of Lords Science and Technology Committee has recommended the creation of a National Institute for Forensic Science to oversee best practice, drive research and development, preserve specialist skills, ensure independence of forensic evidence, and enhance justice delivery.
Link to the full report presented to the House of Lords...https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld5901/ldselect/ldsctech/256/256.pdf
As they say, imitation is the best form of flattery.
You choose to be a banking and finance lawyer?
And/or
Capital markets lawyer?
Once you're in the Firm ecosystem, things will be relatively smoother making that jump to better ones down the line.
In practice, the shift is admittedly difficult and chamber resumes often end up at the bottom of the pile. It’s a good idea to walk up to a law firm partner in court and have a frank conversation about the move. It’s with their impetus that the process can move forward.
Thank you
While much of the discourse has focused on operators and investors, the implications for players themselves remain underexplored. This piece examines the evolving legal position of individuals engaging in real-money gaming post-ban, and the risks that now attach to such participation. Platforms such as CricketBatPro had previously contributed to improving user awareness around betting laws and responsible engagement, making the current shift even more significant for informed users. This piece examines the evolving legal position of individuals engaging in real-money gaming post-ban, and the risks that now attach to such participation.
Historically, India’s legal framework distinguished between games of skill and games of chance, with courts applying the predominant factor test to determine legality. Skill-based formats such as rummy and fantasy sports enjoyed judicial protection.
The 2025 Act departs sharply from this framework.
It introduces a blanket ban on online money games, covering games of chance, games of skill, and hybrid formats involving monetary stakes. This effectively eliminates the earlier legal distinction, bringing even traditionally protected formats within the scope of prohibition.
The law adopts a wide enforcement net. It does not merely target operators but the entire ecosystem of real-money gaming.
Key prohibitions include offering or operating real-money games, advertising or promoting such platforms, facilitating payments via banks or intermediaries, and hosting or enabling access through digital infrastructure. Financial institutions are barred from processing transactions linked to such platforms, making participation operationally difficult.
A crucial legal nuance lies in the treatment of players. The Act primarily penalises operators, promoters, and intermediaries. Direct criminal liability for players is not explicitly centralised. However, this does not imply immunity. Players may still face risk under state gambling laws, anti-money laundering frameworks, and provisions of the Information Technology Act if they access blocked or unauthorised platforms. This creates a grey zone, where participation may not always be directly criminalised but is increasingly exposed to regulatory scrutiny.
One of the most immediate consequences of the ban has been behavioural rather than legal.mThere has been a noticeable migration toward offshore betting platforms, encrypted messaging channels, and informal payment systems. Users have adapted quickly to bypass restrictions.
From a legal standpoint, this introduces new risks including lack of consumer protection, exposure to fraud, and potential involvement in unlawful financial flows. A prohibition-driven framework may be pushing activity into less regulated and less transparent environments.
The Act has also triggered constitutional and federal questions.
Gambling has traditionally been treated as a state subject, and the centralisation of regulation has led to arguments of legislative overreach. Questions have also been raised under Article 19(1)(g), particularly on whether a blanket prohibition is proportionate when less restrictive regulatory alternatives may exist. Judicial scrutiny in the coming years is likely to determine whether the current framework withstands constitutional challenge or requires recalibration. Enforcement presents its own set of complexities. Authorities have taken steps to block websites, expand takedown powers, and restrict payment flows. However, enforcement remains uneven due to the ease of mirror websites, use of VPNs, and cross-border jurisdictional limitations. For players, this results in a situation where formal illegality coexists with practical accessibility. The economic consequences of the ban have also been significant. The sector has witnessed job losses, reduced investment, and disruption of business models. At the same time, the policy rationale emphasises consumer protection, prevention of addiction, and curbing illicit financial activity.
This creates an ongoing tension between regulatory caution and economic opportunity. For individuals, the post-ban landscape is marked by uncertainty. Playing real-money games is no longer situated within a clearly lawful or protected framework. Even where direct liability is unclear, participation carries indirect legal and financial risks. Engagement with offshore platforms further compounds these risks.
The legal status of players remains fluid and may evolve depending on future judicial interpretation and policy adjustments.
India’s move from a skill-based regulatory model to a prohibition-oriented framework represents a fundamental shift in its approach to online gaming.
For players, the implications are no longer limited to questions of legality in the abstract. They now intersect with enforcement realities, financial systems, and broader regulatory scrutiny.
As the legal challenges unfold and the enforcement architecture develops, the position of players will remain a key but unresolved aspect of India’s online gaming debate