To all the anti-reservationists making arguments that reservation should be scrapped: have you people actually given a thought to what will happen if reservation is really abolished? Yes , there will be near-zero SC/ST/OBC students and the merit nerds of general category will dominate. Congratulations. But do you know what happens after that?

Scenario 1: All non-GCs unite and vote in a UPA government with a super majority. They bring back reservation and increase it to 90%, including private sector.

Scenario 2: Complete civil unrest. Rioting, violence and the breakup of the country.

Do you want this?

As a senior at NLS with a sub-20 AIR in the 150-question CLAT, I’d much rather have someone with a 21,000 AIR in my law school, someone who gets an opportunity to enter law school, grow, and potentially help lift themselves and their community out of marginalisation, than someone who constantly cribs about being at NALSAR (assumin ure rank 120 and thats y ure bitter lol)while not even understanding the basics of reservation or why it exists in the first place.

1) The retainer fee is similar when it comes to T-1 firms (say KCO and Trilegal).

2) Tax teams are generally support teams in T-1s with a few exceptions and also smaller in size. Therefore, post the position of counsel/PA, the competition for the partner position is tougher than the general corporate teams. There are not too many partner position openings for direct tax. Hope this answers your growth question.

3) In my view, there should no longer be any doubt in anyone's mind that the concept of execution partner is a dying concept and unless you have strong books, your vertical growth is limited to counsel/PA after which you will most likely be shown the door.

4) Unless your direct tax law expertise as a lawyer is supplemented by additional professional course like CA/CS/ACCA/CFA/ or any other regarded accounting course, your journey as a lateral to inhouse/advisory tax firms will be severely impacted since most of the companies/advisory companies look for a person who is adept at compliances.

5) If you are considering litigation role in direct tax, the opportunities are extremely limited when it comes to firms. AZB, Trilegal, DMD, Vaish, and a few other firms have dedicated direct tax litigation roles. When it comes to companies, you may look at companies like Adani, Reliance, who are big enough to accommodate these specialized roles. However, the issue is that for these tax roles, the minimum required experience is 7+ years and people vying for that role are too many. The alternate is to look for chambers who take up large chunk of tax work - Mr. Aravind Datar, Mr. Percy Pardiwala, Mr. Porus Kaka, Mr. Balbir Singh. However, the expectations regarding the salary should accordingly be set as the pay can't match T1. It's abysmal for most.

6) If we consider going independent, please bear in mind that the work in tax is drying up (definitely not wanting to draw a grim picture here but speaking from experience of close to 4 years) and whatever work is there is in the hands of a few individuals since everyone is bent on undercutting each other in this area of law, even the senior advocates. The fee benchmarks which have been set are terrible. It would take close to 7 years to build a sustainable practice so I would recommend not to keep your eggs in one basket. If you have any more questions, please send a follow up.

It was a genuinely thoughtful gesture by ELP to recognise all 1,200 lawyers who have been part of its journey. I was glad to see my name on that list.

I've read a lot of negative comments, but my experience was different. ELP has been home to some of the finest legal minds in the country. Very few firms in country can say they have produced three Senior Advocates and two judges from their ranks.

It was a firm built on talent, hard work and merit, not family legacy or internal politics. That its journey had to end this way is deeply sad.

Thank you, ELP, for everything. You'll always have a special place in our hearts.

Read your CV well. Go through every publication listed, even if it is a blog post. Expect some very general and broad questions about your areas of interest, but if you have applied for a specialised post, like say AP of Corporate Law, then expect at least one panel member to directly ask you questions about that, even if they are not an expert. Do not be goaded into a confrontation, if someone pushes you, just shrug it off and provide some courteous basic reply that you shall keep that in mind in the days to come or something. You may be asked about some general questions about legal education like use of AI etc. If you have any idea of raising money for the university through research projects or outreach, wait for an opportunity to present that, but do mention that you hope to do so under the tutelage of the present leadership and learn from them in the process. Best of luck!

I love that people have spent hours bitching about me, but apparently couldn’t spare a minute to actually read what was written, or even establish whether I’m first-generation or not.

But there is something I find particularly amusing about all of this.

I enjoy the fact that I can remind you, quite openly of how powerless you are. You can complain about me, call me a snob, arrogant, rude, entitled, or whatever else makes you feel better. Please, carry on. I genuinely enjoy reading it.

The only question is: what exactly are you going to do about it?

I’m not hiding behind anonymity. My LinkedIn is open (Tushar Nair). My Instagram is open (nairtushar9). If you want to speak, speak to me. If you want to play a sport, I’ll see you on the ground. If you want to discuss the law, I’ll buy you coffee and we can discuss. If you want to kickbox, I’ll meet you there too.

There is no mystery here. No distance. No hiding place.

And if you’re genuinely determined and you really want to kick my ass, I’d be more than happy to give you the opportunity to try.

You just need to have the balls to ask.

Most law firm work environments are abusive, and the pay structure is incidental to that. Large firms pay well above what most graduates could earn elsewhere, and they do it early, before anyone has the judgment or the savings to think clearly about it. The salary is not just compensation. It is a lock. Once you have adjusted your life to that number, taken on the rent, the EMI, the family expectations, the exit becomes expensive in a way that has nothing to do with how much you are suffering. The firm knows this. The dependence is the point, and the model runs on extracting the maximum from people who cannot afford to walk.

The structural driver is leverage. A large firm makes money by billing many junior hours against few partner hours, so the incentive runs toward long hours, high targets, and a churn rate the firm treats as a cost of doing business rather than a failure. Individual partners may be decent people. The system still produces the same outcome, because nobody is rewarded for producing it differently.

If you want better teams, look at smaller or boutique firms. Some boutiques are equally treacherous, and a bad boutique can be worse because there is nowhere to hide and no HR function that even pretends to exist. But many boutiques with sensible leadership run a far more balanced environment, and the economics explain why. They pay less, so they cannot squeeze people the same way. Push too hard and the associate simply leaves, because the pay gap no longer justifies the misery. The lower salary buys you bargaining power. That is an uncomfortable thing to say to someone weighing offers, but it is true.

I would avoid boutiques with tier I aspirations. These are the worst of both worlds. They import the hours, the face time, and the hierarchy of a large firm without the pay, the infrastructure, the support staff, or the deal flow that might make the trade defensible. Watch for the signs: obsessive talk about rankings and directory submissions, aggressive lateral hiring to build headcount, non sense linked posts churned on repeat, self-glamourisation, a founder who talks constantly about where the firm will be in five years, and a website that describes the firm as full service when eight people work there.

The diligence that actually helps is talking to people who left, not people who stayed. Anyone still there has reasons to sell you the place. Ask about the last two years of associate departures and see how the answer lands.

And if you are lucky, a spot will open up in one of the decent tier I teams. They do exist. Within firms that are otherwise brutal, you will find the occasional team where the partner protects their people, pushes back on unreasonable timelines, and treats the associates as something more than billing units. That team gets you the pay, the mandates, and the brand, without the extraction.

The problem is that these seats almost never come free. In my experience people simply do not quit those teams. Once someone lands there, they stay, and the vacancy only appears when somebody makes partner, moves in-house on their own terms, or leaves the country. That is a slow clock. You cannot plan a career around it, and you certainly cannot wait for it while stuck somewhere that is grinding you down.

So treat it as opportunism rather than strategy. Keep the network warm, stay on speaking terms with juniors and seniors across firms, and make sure a few people know the kind of team you are looking for, because these roles usually fill through a quiet word before anything reaches a job board. Know which partners you would actually want to work under, not just which firms, since the team is what determines your life and the letterhead does not. Then get on with building a good practice wherever you are. If the seat opens, you want to be someone the partner already has a reason to call.

In Bar Council of India v. A.K. Balaji (2018) 5 SCC 379, the Supreme Court of India held that foreign law firms and lawyers cannot practise law in India, whether in litigation or in non-litigious work such as advice, drafting or conferences, unless they comply with the Advocates Act, 1961 and the Bar Council of India Rules, because only advocates enrolled under the Act may practise the profession of law. The Court treated “practice of law” as covering both courtroom and transactional work and therefore barred foreign firms from opening offices or liaison offices in India. It allowed a limited exception for genuinely casual “fly in and fly out” visits to advise clients on foreign or international law, provided those visits do not become regular practice, and it permitted foreign counsel to appear in India-seated international commercial arbitrations subject to Indian ethical standards and any applicable institutional or statutory rules. The Court left it open to the Bar Council of India or the Union Government to frame detailed regulations.

The Supreme Court’s ruling in A.K. Balaji continues to be in force. It remains the leading authority on:

- - the meaning of “practise the profession of law” under the Advocates Act, 1961 (covering both litigation and non-litigious work such as opinions, drafting and conferences);
- - the rule that, unless another law provides otherwise, only advocates enrolled under the Act may practise law in India; and
- - the position that foreign lawyers and foreign law firms cannot practise Indian law, litigious or non-litigious, without complying with the Act and BCI Rules.

The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) permits practising CAs to form multi-disciplinary partnerships with members of certain other professional bodies, including advocates who are members of the Bar Council of India, under Regulation 53B of the Chartered Accountants Regulations, 1988 (read with Clause 4 of Part I of the First Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949). ICAI even updated Form 18 in 2021 to facilitate such multi-disciplinary firms.

However, Bar Council of India Rules, 1975 (Rule 2 of Chapter III of Part IV, “Conditions for Right to Practice”) prohibit an advocate from entering into a partnership or any other arrangement for sharing remuneration with any person who is not an advocate. ICAI has itself advised its members not to take BCI-enrolled advocates as partners unless and until the BCI rules are amended. That restriction remains in force; In May 2026 the Sales Tax Bar Association made a representation to the Law Ministry and BCI requesting for a change in these regulations, but there has been no progress on that front.

Advocates may practise as sole proprietors or in partnerships/LLPs consisting only of other enrolled advocates. CAs and advocates can collaborate through referrals, consultancy arrangements, or (in some cases) fee-sharing that does not constitute a partnership under BCI rules, but they cannot operate as partners of one firm offering combined legal and accountancy services. Any such structure would expose the advocate to professional misconduct proceedings under the Advocates Act and BCI Rules.

I concede that it is not automatically illegal for a law firm to employ a chartered accountant as staff in a Trade Law practice if the CA does not appear before any court or tribunal. However:

A. if the CA holds a Certificate of Practice, full-time (or even part-time) employment with a law firm is not covered by the general permission in Appendix 9 to the Chartered Accountants Regulations, 1988. That general permission covers only employment under a practising CA or a CA firm. Employment in any other organisation (including a law firm) requires the Council’s specific prior permission under Regulation 190A read with Clause (11) of Part I of the First Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949. Taking up such employment without that permission is professional misconduct. If the CA surrenders the COP (or never held one) and works only as a member in service, Regulation 190A does not apply.

2. B. As per the Supreme Court’s ruling in A.K. Balaji (2018), “practice of law” includes non-litigious work such as opinions, drafting and conferences, not only court appearances. A salaried employment relationship, with the CA doing technical or analytical support (for example dumping-margin calculations, customs valuation analysis, trade-data work) and not holding out as a lawyer or appearing, is generally treated as support staff rather than a prohibited partnership or unauthorised practice of law. The arrangement becomes problematic if, in pith and substance, the CA is giving legal advice on Indian trade law, drafting legal submissions, or the firm presents the CA as part of a joint legal-and-accountancy practice. That could engage Sections 29/33/45 of the Advocates Act and the Balaji principle.

Trust this clarifies.

ELP’s website shows that its International Trade Practice has 3 Partners and 3 Associate Partners. Of these 6, 5 are pure lawyers/advocates. One Associate Partner is a CA and a lawyer.

Hey lovely people of LI,

I have escaped from a horrible team at CAM, ▮▮▮ (insane work pressure, weirdly toxic politics, and super moody partners) and am looking for new gigs. But all the recruiters in the market seem to be staffed to get hires for the most toxic teams in the market that hire all year long (understandable due to high attrition). And when I come to the lovely people of LI, I see that almost all of the teams and their partners have horrible reviews going for them.

I understand anonymity of LI might make people meaner and more critical, but more and more, it seems like finding a nice, sane team is a very utopian idea as either they don't exist, or are never hiring.

Would love to take your read on this!

(free beverages at Gokul {sorry utna hee budget hai} for actually referring or providing some nice leads).

Thanks :)

I interned at an Indian tech giant's subsidiary and this is really not true. My GC was earning close to 2cr exclusive of stock options etc etc. He came in at 11 and left at 4, and also made the entire team leave by 5 max. A few good and bad (subjective, ofc) things I'd like to say:

1) I learnt the business side of things, which was very refreshing. My Legal Head encouraged me to talk with the business team before beginning to draft any contract/agreement.2) The exposure was immense. Legal teams in companies tend to be small. I attended a few meetings with the CEO and CFO. This was also due to the fact that the company I was interning at was a Mahindra subsidiary, and hence every team was small in general. But generally too, legal teams in-house work directly and constantly with the business heads.

3) However, the quality of people who I worked with was...bad. To say the least. Apart from the GC, the Assistant GC, and the Legal Head, the legal managers in the team were subpar at best. They did not have any working knowledge of law, in general. Some of them were put there by their campus recruiters and some had absolutely no experience apart from in-house jobs in their lives which stunts a person's growth. Many a times, the GC would directly assign drafting to me. But this in no way is to say they were bad people, no one had better knowledge of the business than them. My GC told me this is the exact reason why he needed people like the legal managers in his team so that they help him with "business legal" and he does the "contractual legal" stuff. Which is a pattern I have seen in most companies apart from some tier-1s. I personally found no intellectual stimulation there.

4) The starting salary was dehumanising. The place I interned at paid 3.4LPA to freshers. That threw me off. Tech Mahindra pays some 6-9LPA for freshers, Wipro pays 10LPA, my point being, it does not go beyond 10LPA unless you're in ICICI Bank.

That being said, I was the happiest in those months when I interned. After coming from a brutal tier-1 internship where 1am and 2am was the norm, learning about the business, having team lunches, doing impactful work and being involved in substantial stuff was refreshing to say the least. AND I GOT STIPEND MORE THAN ANY LAW FIRM EVER PAID ME!!??? It made me consider whether I should actually fcuk money and live in peace. Yes, it is an average life (compared to a law firm - money wise), but it's not bad!!!! If you stick by the right people and know your stuff, you could get promoted pretty fast. My GC told me that the trick was to jump ships fast and efficiently early in your career and build and expertise slowly. For eg, if you start out at Tech M, you could move on to Infosys and then on and so forth, basically in the IT/Service/Software legal industry.

I believe, the choice is between money and sanity. Choose wisely and never feel inferior for doing in-house. You're doing a job at the end of day ffs, you're employed. what does one even need in this economy?

A partner at ▮▮▮ is running his own expensive course on hnow to be a great lawyer lol, and then making it mandatory for the members of his team to pay for and attend it. I was interning with the team when this was introduced and was also asked to take the course, although I left before I could actually do it. I also thought for a call back but now i don't think i want to work with a team who extorts money from their juniors.

What I find more uncomfortable than the course itself is the power dynamic. If your senior someone who decides what work you get, how you are evaluated and what opportunities you receive tells you that a course he is selling is “mandatory”, it isn't really a choice anymore. And isn't mentoring juniors supposed to be part of what a partner does anyway? Ofc there are paid external courses and professional programmes, and people are free to choose them. But asking your own team to pay you separately for a course, while having the authority to make participation compulsory, just feels wrong to me. There is a very thin line between mentoring your team and monetising the position of authority you hold over them. I mean a partners job is to mentor his team and not make them pay for it.

1. They usually mandate a callback where you are assessed (preferably 2 months). But if you are in your fifth year with competing offers or possibilities of being hired elsewhere, they can offer you a PPO directly followed by mandatory internships. There is no thumb rule per se.

2. Yes, if the team likes you, you are most likely getting an assessment. BLC genuinely operates on merit (at least that is what i felt during my time there).

3. Yes, the procedure is same across offices.

All the best!

Hi! I wanted to ask if anyone here has cleared the Gujarat Judicial Services Exam and is currently posted as a Civil Judge, or if you have a close relative/friend who has cleared it and is now serving as a judge.

I’m particularly looking to understand the actual lifestyle of a civil judge in Gujarat -things like:

- What are the usual working hours and how long does a judge typically work each day?
- Is the workload manageable or does it usually extend beyond court hours?
- What is the work-life balance like?
- What are the major perks and benefits of the judicial service?
- How is the overall lifestyle, accommodation, leaves, transfers, etc.?
- And generally, how does life look after clearing the exam and getting posted?

I’d really appreciate insights from someone who has first-hand experience or knows someone currently serving, rather than just general information available online. Thank you!

Here are a few examples of how you could catch a bad boss or a bad team early on based on your interview:

1. The partner or interviewer does not encourage you to ask questions or responds to your questions ambiguously or in very brief without revealing too much info- that means there could be lack of transparency 2. Everything about the partner or the team sounds too hunky dory - don’t fall for angel or smiley faces- sometimes the angry birds are better bosses or mentors may be just overworked or frustrated

3. The interviewer is moving very fast with the whole process - I.e., they make you an offer within 2-3 weeks or even less; this could mean there is lot of attrition and/or team is severely understaffed

4. You are not asked too many questions at the interview or there is no technical round- you could end up doing only grunt work for sometime -you will be nothing but a cog in a wheel

5. The partner/interview does not have any specific expectations from the candidate- his or her wish list regarding the candidate is abstract or unclear - leadership has no vision for the team or doesn’t care if the team members fit in

6. The interviewer keeps cutting you or interrupting you while you speak, additional questions are asked before you could complete your response - very poor communication skills - big red flag

7. No questions are asked about your family or personal life or hobbies or interests or future plans - you’ll be only slogging in the factory

8. You are called for an interview with one partner but end up interviewing with and /or getting an offer from another partner in a different team- this could mean the partner whose team you’ll be joining doesn’t have a good reputation

9. You are told that your previous experience doesn’t count even though you are not changing practice areas - you will be assigned grunt work or there will be too much micromanagement

10. While speaking to the partner you suddenly don’t feel like yourself or you are either too nervous or too confused as compared to your interviews with other partners and you can’t understand why -trust your gut instinct- basically the partner could be a red flag for your mental well being or your nervous system

11. The partner is not too old but still looks like he or she doesn’t take care of his or her health - looks too unhealthy, too worn out or too tired - so there could be no regard to your physical health and you taking care of yourself could be frowned upon

12. The practice area you are being hired for is not the core or main practice area of the main partner- this could become a major concern later on if the firm is a tier 1

**The list is endless but if you notice something weird or feel something is off during your interview itself then please dig deeper

Don’t trust reviews on LI blindly but don’t completely disregard them either- do a proper investigation regarding the partner and team through your batchmates and friends- recruiters shouldn’t be trusted at all

It is a niche field, yes; but the situation is not as dire as it has been made out to be.

TMT is a broad bucket (abbreviation for Telecom, Media, Tech). The term was created when there was growing sectoral regulation due to advancements in these industries, and existing laws were not sufficient to fully address the issues arising therefrom.

Over a period of time, and in particular, more recently, TMT has been used to cover any upcoming area of law - Fintech, Media and Entertainment, Gaming - essentially anything that may have an interplay with either the T, M, or T. As pointed out above, this primarily includes data privacy, telecom, media, and tech regulations.

Certain TMT teams have specialised focuses - for instance, Harsh Walia at Khaitan & Co specialises in Telecom. Jaideep Reddy from Trilegal and Smita Jha from Khaitan & Co focus on Fintech and Crypto. This does not, however, mean that they do not advise on other areas of law that form part of the broader TMT bucket.

IPR, being a separate field of its own, has separate specialised partners that work in the industry. It is very rare to now see an IP team also advise on general TMT laws. You could argue that the AZB IP teams do broader work than just core IP, and therefore, are TMT teams. However, they continue to be characterized as an IP practice (whose core focus would be trademarks, copyrights, and design prosecution work, along with transactional support to their corporate and M&A teams).

The opportunities are fewer given that the number of partners in the industry are limited. However, if you make it to a Tier 1 practice, the pay is often at par with other corporate teams. Your bonus will directly depend on the amount of work your partner brings, and a function of how well you bill (or appease to your partners). There is differential pay in certain "IP" teams but the pay still exceeds what is paid by pure boutiques.

I disagree.

Subjects like sociology, political science,History, philosophy etc become important as they cover the societal and humanitarian fields of inquiry.

This becomes particularly important as Law,as a field,is heavily intertwined with Society,Humanities and their constructs.

One cannot understand law in its full context without understanding the Societal conditions, Historical conditions,power structures etc.

Sure,one could argue that modern day capitalism especially in India,wages more focus on STEM and it's counterparts,

However,that's primarily because of its relatively easier access to the majority and higher economic conductivity.

The fields of Humanities while not offering immediate short term profits,Offers something greater to the common man.

The mechanisms through which one can understand Society,the idea of Power,The various philosophical Outlooks that change your mindset for the good etc.

The STEM fields of India are themselves in the road of brilliance,amounting to brilliant,dynamic hegemons like TCS,Infosys,HCL who are front leaders in the AI race.

In this context, understanding both STEM and Humanities becomes important.

It's no wonder that most billionaires or say even millionaires come from elite pedigree and privilege;They possess in-depth knowledge of Humanities and it's associates through the forms of cultural and social capital through which they understand the broader contexts of Life.

When you are run by Engineers and STEMtards especially in India,you risk the neglecting of important elements that balance and refine society and power.

you might get spineless institutions like IIT Delhi that remain mum while they get pegged;while colleges like NALSAR make two legal Institutions bend down and apologize.

I will wager an exception for the Medical and pharmaceutical fields who themselves are involved in the herculean task of managing the healthcare of such a nation filled with morons like you.

Good take on the whole fiasco: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/aug/13/jason-arday-right-racial-equality-society

Fresher kid, just joined a respectable boutique disputes team in delhi. Want to shift to tier 1 asap. I know will have to put in at least a year but how does lateral shift even work? Like are there headhunters or you just apply or what? Please guide - serious advice only. Thanks

Why is nobody reading this fucking article? They are cutting on administrators, not teachers. I will say that, once more, very slowly, very quietly, for the deliberately unintelligent of this forum: HARVARD IS CUTTING ON ADMINISTRATORS, NOT TEACHERS. PLEASE READ THE ARTICLE FULLY!!!

1. Where are BA LLB supporters? Well, here's one: me.

2. There is a comprehensive argument to study each and every one of the subjects you have listed, but I am going to give you a pretty persuasive one for only one of them: philosophy. Here's an article from The Economist, 24th June 2026. It tells you everything you need to know. If you think about it, you are the one who looks like an idiot, not anybody else.

Why big AI labs are hiring so many philosophers

The technology presents all sorts of thorny problems—a philosopher’s favourite kind

Jun 24th 2026

Ten years ago, as the ai revolution was gathering pace, arts and humanities students were told that, if they wanted to make themselves employable, they should “learn to code”. That may have been bad advice. These days, it is programmers who are nervous about ai taking their jobs.

They might consider learning to philosophise. Earlier this year the Federal Reserve Bank of New York published figures showing that American philosophy graduates are more likely to have jobs than their peers who studied computer science. In 2024, the most recent year for which numbers are available, 7% of those who had studied computer science were unemployed, against just 5.1% of philosophers.

Many are being snapped up by ai firms themselves. Students get job offers before they have graduated, says Luciano Floridi, a philosopher at Yale University. Academics are moving, too. Dr Floridi describes the scale of departures from philosophy departments as a “haemorrhaging”.

Some of the lessons that philosophy can offer ai researchers are ancient. The Socratic method—as described by Plato, an ancient Greek philosopher—uses feigned ignorance and sequential questioning to clarify meanings, spot contradictions and reveal ramifications. Many current ai systems tend towards sycophancy. Models trained in the Socratic method, says Jörg Noller, an expert on philosophy and ai at Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, are less keen on people-pleasing and more willing to pursue the truth.

Then there is the idea of “Socratic ignorance”. In the “Apology”, Plato has Socrates claim that his wisdom consists mostly of being aware of how much he does not know. Implanting that humility into a model can help limit overconfidence, a common flaw that Dr Noller describes as “ai immaturity”. Iason Gabriel, a senior philosopher at Google DeepMind, an ai lab based in London, attributes an industry-wide decline in hallucinations to such efforts. More broadly, he says, philosophy lessons are “a powerful mechanism” for improving long ai reasoning processes known as “chains of thought”.

Philosophical training can also affect a model’s outlook in more specific ways. Feed an ai legal assistant the writings of John Locke, says Thomas Powers, a philosopher of technology at the University of Delaware, and it will favour robust property rights as an underpinning of political liberty. And if you don’t like those principles, the model-makers have others. The “Granite” series of models from ibm, an American computing giant, come with dials that let business customers better align outputs with their own corporate philosophies. Francesca Rossi, ibm’s head of responsible ai, says these can let users choose where to strike the balance between philosophical trade-offs, such individual agency versus social harmony.

Philosophy can help with safety, too. Researchers have documented all sorts of ominous behaviour in ai models, including attempts to evade oversight and even blackmail their users. One way model-makers try to discourage this sort of misbehaviour is called ai constitutionalism. This involves building a model around a scaffolding of rules and principles culled from philosophical writings with legal or moral authority.

Anthropic, an ai lab based in San Francisco, is one proponent. Constitutions for its Claude models have incorporated material from sources as diverse as Immanuel Kant, Apple’s terms of service and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The latest iteration, led by Anthropic’s top philosopher, Amanda Askell, was published on January 21st. Some staff at Anthropic have nicknamed the 78-page constitution Claude’s “soul doc”.

The biggest question, though, is what sorts of rules should be put in those constitutions in the first place. Philosophers have zeroed in on two main ethical frameworks. One is deontology. Popular with Kant, among others, this imposes strict rules that prohibit things like lying, coercion and treating people as a means rather than an end, even if it is for a greater good. Anthropic’s constitution incorporates many deontological strictures. These can make ai behaviour more consistent, says Dr Powers—a plus for deploying robots in homes and public spaces.

Models with a deontological take on the world have other benefits. One is greater honesty, a trait widely noted in Claude. Models that are more truthful, says Nick Bostrom, a philosopher at the University of Oxford, are less likely to mislead their users. Inflection ai, another Silicon Valley lab, imposes deontological constraints onto its Pi chatbot, which is designed to provide emotional support. Sean White, its boss, says Pi is good at spotting users at risk of harming themselves or others. Deontological constitutions also help with legal compliance, says Dr Floridi.

The other approach to ethics of interest to philosophers of ai is called consequentialism. It weighs costs against benefits to decide what to do. Models more sympathetic to consequentialism include OpenAI’s Chatgpt and Google’s Gemini. Google’s ai models are designed to produce “likely overall benefits [that] substantially outweigh the foreseeable risks”, a classic consequentialist goal.

Consequentialist algorithms are also crucial in software for autonomous vehicles: if an accident is unavoidable, a decision must be made on the least tragic way to crash. Chris Gerdes, a senior engineer at Waymo, which makes self-driving cars, says the trend is to make driving software more consequentialist. Consequentialism is also central to ai weapon systems. Military objectives must be weighed against possible civilian deaths, says Jack Shanahan, a former head of the Joint Artificial Intelligence Centre, which studies ai for America’s armed forces.

Thorny problems abound—a philosopher’s favourite sort. Are there cases when deontological rules should be overridden? How do you make decisions when the consequences are unclear? Should ai systems take into account animal welfare, or the state of the environment? Would it be morally acceptable, asks Stefan Heck, a philosopher and the boss of Nauto, which makes ai-powered safety systems for lorries and other commercial vehicles, to prioritise young pedestrians over old ones? He predicts ethically fraught lawsuits: consequentialist algorithms, after all, explicitly permit one harm as long as it is designed to avert a worse one.

Critics fret about “moral deskilling”: if computers increasingly make ethical calls, might people become less willing to make their own judgments? Roman Yampolskiy, an ai theoretician at the University of Louisville, argues that morality “is historically unstable, culturally variable, strategically manipulable, and often only retrospectively legible”. Unemployed coders take note: there seems to be no shortage of work for philosophers of ai. ■

https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2026/06/24/why-big-ai-labs-are-hiring-so-many-philosophers

3. This commentary of yours also displays a profoundly ignorant understanding of how university governance works. It also displays something shocking: an inability to read a two-page article.

(a) As somebody has written on LinkedIn, nobody in western higher ed making these kinds of decisions about cuts really wants to do this. There are external pressures on university finances (in the case of the UK, perhaps also in the U.S. case, I don't know) and regulatory pressures (in the U.S.). That person in fact said very beautifully that trying to get into these stupid and reductive conversations about defending the humanities with administrators which you have raised is pointless, because it is preaching to the quire.

(b) The earlier point is justified if you actually read the article. Neither you nor the OP seem to have done. They have given a breakdown of who was asked to go. Mainly admin positions. So even what Harvard is actually doing does not seem to be supporting this absolutely stupid crap that has been published here.

Moderators, the fact that you didn't point this out in the case of the OP commentary (by use of a 'trollish' tag or at least a 'contested') is pretty surprising to me. If only the article had been posted without commentary, I would have understood. But commentary has been posted clearly pointing in the direction of an opinion.

Guys, let's play devil's advocate for a second, shall we?

Sure this order seems pretty weird. But what about the argument that the persons who participated in this campaign are behaving in a way that undermines (or may have the potential to undermine) the confidence of the public in the profession of advocate? What is the substantive response to that? Because the satirical letter posted in reply doesn't address that point. People might be somewhat tired of citing ADM Jabalpur and Plessy, but in the spirit of free enquiry, we must not forget J.S. Mill who reminds us in On Liberty to know the argument of the opponent like the back of our hand. I assume that this undermining/potential of undermining confidence in the profession argument is the one they'll come up with, so it's important that it be responded to.

https://images.assettype.com/barandbench/2026-08-13/c8453c14/Letter_to_VC__NALSAR_University_of_Law__Hyderabad_and_the_Secretary__All_STBCs.pdf

Sub.: Seeking a factual report on the persons instrumental in drafting communication bearing No. BCI:D.5449/2026

Sir,

We have taken note, without the expected amusement, of a Notice purporting to emanate from a statutory regulator, in which an entire batch of law graduates has been collectively debarred, for the alleged crime of studying at an institution where, apparently, someone somewhere had an opinion. We knew that thought crime is to be punished in the current climate but being able to punish someone for their neighbours thought crime makes me covet your post (make me your padawan). This is regulatory stupidity dressed up in letterhead, and we salute the confidence it took to sign it.

In the quixotic spirit of the true factual position the Notice so solemnly claims to seek, we request the following, within three days:

1. a) The names and designations of members present, and the quorum achieved, when it was decided that natural justice is for other people.
2. b) The minutes recording the identity of the reliable sources, so we may assess whether they rank above or below rumour, astrology, vibes, and WhatsApp forwards as forms of admissible evidence. We must ensure that the zen Z virus has not infected the august regulator.
3. c) The legal opinion, if any exists, that permitted an entire batch to be punished for the alleged conduct of a few, a principle of jurisprudence we eagerly await making Bentham blush.
4. d) The name of the person principally instrumental in deciding that convocation guest lists now fall within the disciplinary jurisdiction of the Bar Council, so that we have a reference to cite as an example of cooption, arbitrainess and immorality we are tired of citing ADM Jabalpur and Plessy.

We trust the Council, ever vigilant against dirty politics, shall take steps to stop the zen Z virus from spreading in it. Finally, we thank you for not using gen-AI, claude would stutter to satisfy you.

Receipt may kindly be acknowledged, capriciously, if that's more familiar.

Das & Dipke have threatened to counter BCI, esp MM. This MM has had a long run with any one who doesn't agree with avuncular politics and whims. And he gets tacit approval from highest levels of various powers that be although in rare occasions he has been lightly chided as well. Kian@LI had boldly challenged BCI and MM lost his marbles.

While cockroaches are considering swarm attack what are the NLU student associations contemplating beyond choosing sides? Also what about the CLAT consortium? Bend, crawl, grovel?

Updated list.

1. Ravindra Bandhakavi (to a direct competitor) 2. Shaneen Parikh (to a direct competitor)

3. Kapil Arora (to a direct competitor)

4. Ajay Sawhney (to a direct competitor)

5. Abhilash Pillai (to a direct competitor)

6. Faraz Alam Sagar (to a direct competitor)

7. Aditi Misra (to a direct competitor)

8. Bhupendra Verma (to a direct competitor)

9. Rachika Sahay (to a direct competitor)

10. Garima Shahani (to a direct competitor)

11. Amarta Roy(to a direct competitor)

12. Poornima Singh(to a direct competitor)

13. Srabanee Ghosh(to a direct competitor)

14. Anchal Dhir(to a direct competitor)

15. Shubham Rastogi(to a direct competitor)

16. Omar Ahmad (going for independent counsel practice)

17. Gauhar Mirza(to a direct competitor)

18. Reuben Chacko(to a direct competitor)

19. RC (with some other partners) - easily 4-5 partners together.

20. YA (with some other partners) - easily 4-5 partners together

21. Vartika Jain (moved in house)

22. Ashwin Sapra(to a direct competitor)

23. Alok Shankar (going for independent counsel practice)

24. Anandita Kaushik (moved in house)

25. LV (moving to academics)

Easily a loss of approximately 35 partners within a year.

More exits will come post Diwali bonus. In any case blast for next March is also already in pipeline.

1. You need to bill double than what your team is paid.

2. No such thing as connections in partnership. Only pure merit.

3. Mid levels move out because they cannot handle the work pressure not because they are denied partnership. If you have been excellent at servicing clients, then you are guaranteed a seat at the table. In house is utterly useless and I would suggest not even going down this path, unless you want to sink your own career.

4. There are broadly equity and salaried partner models. If you're equity, you get a share in the business.

I am surprised your partner hasn’t spoken to you about this.

Depending upon the firm, salaried partners (10-12 PQE) may or may not be required to bring in work. It depends on whether their equity partner is a big or mid rainmaker. If it is the latter, then minimum expectations are you bring in revenue that covers your own small team’s cost (inclusive of bonuses) along with a 30% overheads cost. Ideally in a team sizing of a salaried partner and a couple of SAs and As, this would mean 3 cr to 5 cr.

Bringing in the work is both a mix of your abilities as a good lawyer and your social skills. You do not need to be a second generation lawyer (although it helps). Connections are built through friends, college mates who went in house, through introductions by existing clients to their other GC friends and of course through regular business development.

In order to reach this, by the time you are 8 PQE make sure you have at least one if not two dependable juniors who will help you execute the work such that you can take out 2 hours in a week to develop your market skills and connections. These are the juniors who you too will lead in the future when you become EP and to whom you will hand over part or your entire book as you grow.

It is not easy but it is also not as difficult as it may seem. You have to balance your work execution, client persuasion and team management along with whatever semblance you have of a family life. The real difficulty is scaling up to the next level, i.e. a 10 cr book.

For non-M&A teams, you have to figure out the right mix of taking up a couple of large mandates and smaller but voluminous matters to reach your targets. Start this exercise at 7 PQE and work towards it religiously. You will be able to achieve it.

If you have other questions, please feel free to ask. Its important that this conversation needs to be had in an otherwise self oriented profession where personal ambition/greed trumps healthy team and succession planning.

- Not that Old First Gen EP

Started my career as an advocate back in 2019, but jumped over to the corporate side in 2023. I honestly thought it would be a much more comfortable life and better money.

The reality couldn't be further from that. It’s just endless "fake urgency," zero work satisfaction, the savings aren't actually what I expected, and there's honestly very little respect in the field. Most in-house counsel are basically just email pushers and contract redliners for most of their careers until reaching a senior post, and hitting the pay celing is a reality. Unless you happen to be in a super exciting industry, the standard 9-to-5 is just endless same format agreements, office politics or clearing other advocate's bills.

Looking at how the litigation market is shifting right now, with all the new regulations, AI, and data practices coming into play, I really feel like it's time to start something of my own, grind out 1-2 years of honest work, and finally build a practice of my own.

I just want to know if anyone here has made the jump back from corporate to litigation? What was your experience like, and how rough was the transition? Would love to hear your thoughts.

Going back to my previous comments - I agree that the CCI's suo moto mandate is not unprecedented. I'm just fundamentally against a setup which combines investigative and adjudicative powers with the same authority. I'm well aware of the CCPA, SEBI and other such frameworks. My skepticism applies to them equally. I referred to your summary procedure point because it came in response to my fairness arguments, to which my counter is that summary procedures do not compromise on these principles.

Secondly (and maybe I should've brought this up earlier), how is a suo moto mechanism helping with speed anyways? We've discussed extensively on the need for a faster mechanism without even establishing a causal link between the two.

Third - if we are concerned about institutional capture (I echo this concern), won't forcing the CCI to expand its wings further worsen things? My fear is that active suo moto enforcement could further embolden and institutionalise CCI's role in battling for these select few without even waiting for a formality complaint (as they did in cases like Amazon which surprise surprise eventually got reversed).

Fourth - The Meta decision actually reinforced my views against this dual setup. One casual look at the CCI order - the clear logical fallacies, lack of any independent analysis etc. would show the CCI just wanted to rubber stamp its pre-determined infringement mindset without even doing the most basic of work. This is probably why the first rule of natural justice requires no party to be a judge in their own cause. This becomes especially important for an authority which is expected to regulate its own procedure while adhering to natural justice, while being run by politically appointed members who are easy to replace, none of whom have judicial experience.

On state enforcement - I understand your point. However, I don't believe this has a correlation with the merits or demerits of a suo moto mandate. My criticisms would persist even if the Advocate Generals for Maharashtra or Karnataka decide to pursue active antitrust enforcement. Going back to my argument above, if an institution is indeed captured, how is vesting it with further discretionary powers an effective remedy?

Lastly, I completely agree with you on the CCI's abysmal state. And maybe I should clarify, I don't blame suo moto powers for where we are today. The reasons, like you mentioned. are largely the patchy fundamental structure, the lack of adherence to explicit constitutional directions and a perennial lack of funding over the years. I think we just disagree on our underlying fundamental principles. Best to just agree to disagree.

PS: Glad to have had a respectful engaging debate on this platform for a change!

A few of us thought a quick game of catch on DHC's lawn couldn't possibly go wrong. Bold assumption, in hindsight.

The first throw drifted a little high and landed, with what can only be described as remarkable precision, directly on a Senior Advocate. Miraculously, he wasn't hurt and, ever the good sport, picked up the ball and lobbed it back. His return throw, powered by decades of seniority and noticeably fewer decades of hand-eye coordination, veered off and landed on... another Senior Advocate. Small lawn. Suspiciously large odds.

This one was not amused. Visibly wounded by the sheer audacity of junior advocates enjoying themselves on DHC's grass, he snatched up the ball and launched it in fury, in principle, who's to say at one of my friends, who ducked just in time. The ball carried on and found yet another advocate.

Senior. Obviously.

By now a small crowd had gathered, drawn by the commotion and, one assumes, by nothing better to bill for at that hour. As everyone demanded to know what on earth was going on, it emerged that almost the entire crowd shared the same designation. A gathering convened to complain about a ball game had, without anyone quite intending it, turned into something resembling a Full Court reference.

They're still deciding what to do about us. Personally, I think the real agenda item should be how anyone is expected to stand on that lawn without hitting a Senior Advocate.

I am sick of people like you wanting the repressed, the people fighting for their basic rights, to be perfect and have unimpeachable behaviour. Yes she is gay, yes that is the main cause she fights for. You know why? Because being gay is literally a death sentence in most parts of India and elsewhere at best, it is a cause humiliation and ostracization.

Oh she doesn't engage with widespread problems like shelter and putting food on the table of every Indian. Basically every politician doesn't, but YOU point it out in this case because on some level you just can't stand people who may fundamentally exist in a different way than you. "Useless marker ". Bitch please, let me call your heterosexuality a useless marker and you being a man a useless marker.

She is far from perfect, yes she is very entitled and a nepo kid. Call her out for that sure. Linking her passionate push for "identity" politics to that is ridiculous, bad faith and bigoted. Because by your logic then any minority issue is a useless marker and that's just a sad inhumane pov. Hope these words can get across to you and how your comment is both, unhelpful and actively hurtful.

This topic has been beaten to death, just search up past threads on this topic. This one in particular sums it up pretty well- https://www.legallyindia.com/convos/topic/280739-after-extensive-research-i-think-i-know-how-nlsius-nickname-harvard-of-the-east-came-about

It is neither the students, nor the CJI who called it that - it got entrenched because of the continuous reporting surrounding NLS.

Hey man. I am a partner in a law firm and we recently interviewed a candidate who had his ELO rating on his CV (1600 if i remember correctly). The other interviewers looked at me for confirmation on whether this was something impressive. So I asked him if it was an OTB ELO rating and he confirmed. This lead to a bit of a discussion in the interview about chess, ratings, tournaments etc. Overall, it can work as an ice-breaker and demonstrate that you have some skills outside of work. But since your rating is a Chess.com rating rather than the FIDE Elo rating, you should be prepared to field that question, if someone asks. I personally dont think it's bad for you to put it under your extra-curricular section. Obviously, this isnt what gets you a job though, so work on the rest of the CV. All the best!

He has high expectations and limited patience. He also likes to be very precise and expects that from his team. Juniors are expected to take ownership of deliverables. This can lead to stress and long working hours sometimes.

That said, if you do good work, i.e., try hard - the attempt should be clear; know what you're talking about; take initiative and gain his confidence - the team is a great place for juniors to learn. As regards pay, he is not stingy with end of year ratings and bonuses. So you can make the top pay band at Trilegal if you prove your worth. Would highly recommend joining as an A1/A2 (if you have thick skin or are willing to develop it).

He tries his best to respect weekends, and also tries his best to push back against unreasonable deadlines (of course, if the client insists, the client insists). Leaves are generally respected as long as work is transitioned properly beforehand.

As regards work profile - mostly Private M&A; some PE/VC work; GCC and advisory work as well.

First impressions matter. All the best.

OP I FEEL YOU!

I started in a corporate team about two months ago, and I'd also just moved to Delhi, so I promise you're not the only one stressing about this. 😅 A few things I've learnt the hard way:

-
- Day to day, people wear a mix of western and ethnic. Nobody is sitting there judging whether you're in a blazer every day.
- Honestly, good grooming goes much further than having an expensive wardrobe. Neat, well-ironed clothes, clean shoes, tidy hair and looking put together matter far more than wearing a new outfit every day.
-

I also made the mistake of panic shopping before joining. I took my mother with me, which in hindsight was a terrible financial decision. 😂 Indian mums have this magical ability to walk into a store and suddenly "budget baad mein dekh lenge, pehle achhe kapde le lo." By the time we left, I was convinced I needed an entirely new personality to justify the shopping bags.

The funny part? Two months in, I mostly rotate the same few outfits anyway. Most of what I actually wear is from Westside (Wardrobe), plus a few basics from Lifestyle. Nothing fancy.

If I could do it again, I'd buy:

- 2–3 pairs of trousers/straight pants
- 4–5 tops or kurtas that all go with those bottoms
- 1 blazer for meetings
- Comfortable shoes
- A decent work bag
-

That's genuinely enough to get you started. Once you've been in the office for a couple of weeks, you'll know what everyone actually wears and can buy anything else you feel you're missing.

I work in a corporate team, and on a regular office day, most people are in smart business casual unless they have a client meeting, signing or presentation. You definitely don't need a huge wardrobe before you start. A couple of well-fitting trousers, 4-5 tops or kurtas that can be mixed and matched, one blazer, comfortable formal shoes, and a good work bag will take you much further than buying 15 different outfits. Most of us end up repeating the same staples anyway.

For brands, it really depends on your budget:

- - Uniqlo for shirts, trousers and knitwear.
- - Marks & Spencer for work trousers and basics.
- - Allen Solly Woman for formal office wear.
- - Westside for affordable workwear.
- - Zudio is a necessary resort for basics if you're on a tighter budget.
- - W for Woman, Aurelia and Cotton World all have simple, office-appropriate options.

Honestly, keeping a budget is necessary. Money leaves the wallet very quickly in the initial days and your team is not expecting a fashion as much as they are good work.

What an abject abandonment of a statutory mandate. A country of cowards regulated by bigger cowards.

https://www.newindianexpress.com/business/2026/Jul/26/avoiding-suo-motu-cases-unless-nobody-is-willing-to-come-forward-cci

We now have to read about competition law sponsored by Amazon from NLU Delhi.

Incredible.

I came across a similar post and realised I have the exact same question, so thanks to the OP there.

I'm starting at a law firm soon, and I'm weirdly anxious about whether I have the right wardrobe for the job. I interned there during the winter, and everyone looked incredibly put together with tailored coats, blazers, boots, elegant sweaters. I never felt particularly out of place then because winter dressing is a bit more forgiving, and you can layer almost anything under a nice coat or blazer.

But now I'm joining in the middle of summer after most of the freshers have already joined, and I have no idea what people actually wear day to day. Looking at the firm's website and LinkedIn doesn't help because half the photos are from court or formal events, where everyone is in a blazer anyway. Do people actually wear blazers year-round, even in this heat, or is that just for client meetings and photographs?

I'm also wondering about women's workwear in general. Is it common to wear kurtas with straight pants, or do most women stick to Western office wear? I'm worried I'll end up looking underdressed even if I'm dressed appropriately.

Am I overthinking it, or is there an unspoken dress code that everyone just seems to know?

The highest paying Indian law firm for freshers is CAM/KCO at 21-22LPA - highest paying among magic circle is Clifford Chance/Freshfields/Links at 76LPA (this is pre SQE - trainee salary). Now, if we were to compute PPP as against the most expensive city in India (Mumbai) and the most expensive city in the UK (London) - the math is that the London trainee earns about 3.5 times more on the face of it.

Approximate PPP adjustment

A reasonable way economists think about this is that the UK price level is roughly 2.3–2.8× India’s (depending on the basket of goods and methodology).

Using a midpoint of 2.5×:

- London trainee:
- ₹76 lakh nominal
- PPP-adjusted purchasing power ≈ ₹30–31 lakh in India

Compared with:

- CAM/KCO fresher:
- ₹22 lakh

The effective purchasing-power gap becomes:

31 ÷ 22 ≈ 1.4×

So after accounting for local prices, the London trainee is closer to 40% better off, not 245% better off.

(ChatGPT did the math)

But really, when the London trainee becomes a NQ solicitor - the difference is steep. And even accounting for PPP, Indian law firm pay is abysmally low compared to UK/US/even Singapore counterparts.

T1 Batch 27. Hi, I am in a similar situation, performed amazingly in my last semesters but my first year was shit, which led to my low grades, falling in the middle of the batch rank. I did not get shortlisted by 2 firms I applied to for day zero, extremely disappointed with myself. I don't know where will I be in the upcoming months. I have anxiety issues to the extent that I am thinking of not reporting to my college if I do not get shortlisted by any firm. I am just cursing myself for not performing well in my first year, but coming from a small town, it took me time to understand everything plus I was a PCM student, so I did not have the habit of writing long answers, which impacted my first years. I just don't want to be unemployed, atp I don't care about the pay scale, I just want a job.

I just hope and manifest that after one year I will re-read this comment sitting in an office.

Why don't you make a complaint and prove this argument to the appropriate authorities instead of coming and crying here? You do know that you are actually making things worse for the people you claim to care about - disabled people? Your post is just the trigger to set off more speculation and gossip. It was a very irresponsible thing to do to come and post like this. You claim to care that some people faking it means people without visible disabilities get a "side-eye". Believe me now, thanks to you, even more people who are undeserving of such treatment will get it.

Everything in the previous paragraph takes your post at face value - that you are actually telling the truth. I note this because there are things that seem very unusual about what you say - and I am coming from the point of view of a visibly disabled person who attended the type of flashy western university (whose disability support system is very good) that Jindal/JGLS would be trying to emulate to climb up the rankings:

1. First of all, in many circumstances, people with laptop kind of arrangements wouldn't have that in isolation. They would have it along with another arrangement, that is often called a "separate room". That's literally what it says on the tin - they'd be in a different room from the non-disabled students. Among other things, that helps invigilate them better.

2. You'd have to be the world's biggest prat to allow in internet-enabled laptops for in person examinations that didn't allow access to materials. Why! At my university, I couldn't even carry in my own laptop! (Even if I had turned the internet off.) I was given one of theirs to take my exams on. And, while my own laptop had an Indian keyboard, that was one hell of an inconvenience, because the placing of the @ symbol and quotation marks on a British keyboard compared to an Indian one are very different - an important point to note for lawyers taking exams.

Jindal as a university and JGLS as a law school may (does) have many faults, but you are making a very tall claim: that they are making elementary mistakes in walking a path that the type of universities they are aspiring to beat in the global competition do not make.

Moderators, please have this deeply provocative, problematic and irresponsible post removed, unless the author of it is able to provide proof in some form of what they are saying, or unless they give a written undertaking to you (privately is fine) that they will put their accusations before the appropriate authorities. Put a moderator note on the post to flag it as unverified material unless and until the one who wrote this helps resolve the issue one way or the other.

"It appears that a few politicians, particularly one or two individuals with foreign loyalties, in whose veins foreign blood is flowing, are cunningly instigating and provoking younger generations to foment lawlessness. Every prudent person recognizes that such individuals have no genuine concern for the peace and prosperity of our Bharat; instead they are dancing at the tune of enemy countries. The anti- social and anti-national elements have entered this "so-called students protest" at the instance of those politicians only. Such people will stop at nothing to grab power or bring about the country's ruin. They have no interest in the welfare of students or the nation. Their sole motive is to create lawlessness, destabilize India, and seize power, and they have pursued this aim for a long time. They

want our country also to be ruined like Bangladesh and Nepal. One of these politicians frequently travels abroad and meets anti-Indian figures, including those who support terrorism. He is reputedly very close to George Soros and has been receiving huge funds intended to destabilize our country over the past decade. "

https://x.com/LiveLawIndia/status/2080326332215665128/photo/1

1. Draft Advocate's Act 2026 debars foreign law firms from all work expect appearing in arbitrations involving foreign law

2. BCI stands by decision to oppose enrolment by Korean national JGLS grad ("but since the law was clear we could not stop").

Incidentally, the South Korean Ambassador had taken up the issue of the student with the MEA and succeeded.

https://images.assettype.com/barandbench/2026-07-21/qqnhukmg/BCI_draft_advocates_act.pdf

This is really the most serious problem that, remember people, the Indian regulator for lawyers (!!) had to deal with!!?? Really?

This reminds me of a joke that John Oliver made about former governor of South Dakota Kristi Noem (DHS secretary formally in the second Trump admin). For Kristi Noem, ensuring that college sports women teams were only played in by biological as opposed to trans women was a huge thing. She even had an add about it. Oliver's joke was, I think, that if somebody from the future who did not know about anything of the past came back with a time-travelling machine and saw Noem's add, they would think that all the problems of the world had been fixed.

Same way, some lawyer who has perhaps been working outside the country for many years and hasn't kept in touch with the Indian scene will think it's seventh heaven! If the "BCI uncle" has time to go after social media posts, then surely India is now a heaven on earth for lawyers? I just don't envy that hypothetical character when he experiences the hard and disconcerting bump of reality - that these guys are wasting time on stupid stuff as usual.

Sure. Go after confidentiality being broken. But isn't it better to go after the senior lawyers? After all, they are supposed to be the ones responsible for giving the students/interns work? If they are prat enough to recruit someone who engages in childish behaviour, I would have thought it is those advocates in chambers or law firm partners whose heads need to be put on the chopping block?

Nope. Spent nearly 10 years in a T1. Happily out of it. Happier for it. Still have recuiters who buzz me with potential partnership roles in T1s and T2s. They also lie about the roles and the teams.

The only reason recruiters post things like this is because people are now going for irregular non linear paths especially good talent.8pMost don't know much about what we do and do not understand the practical realities as we get senior. Its also the reason why recruiters only succeed at lower levels. They're a intermediary servive - a middleman - who fake being a career coach to get prospective clients.

This makes getting their commissions harder. Their job is to find as many linear career progressionist to push into T1s for their big bucks. When people pull wool over your eyes, always watch out for the incentives at play here.

My reading of the rules is that they don't apply only to interns and young law firm associates making reels, as the media is making it out to be. It also applies to senior lawyers who tweet about the judiciary and politics. The rules say:

For example, Sanjoy Ghose makes a lot of flippant tweets about the judiciary, in between his rants against the Modi government.

https://www.barcouncilofindia.org/info/forwarding-d4cwwl

Ok, so I'm one of the partners who takes these interviews. We normally do 5-6 a day and generally there's one rejection every day out of this 5-6. The almost overwhelming reason for rejection is the candidates inability to answer slightly nuanced questions about stuff they've written in their CVs. So my advice to you is, really brush up on your CV. Even if what you did was one bit of a large transaction, if you include it in your CV, it's fair game for an interview question. So brush up on the law on things in your CV. Can't stress this enough.

Generally there 2 every day who have spoken to the partners they interned with and those partners have reached out to one of the partners interviewing. When your internship partner calls up the interviewing partner to put in a good word, it generally works.

Also when we reject someone in a PPO interview we are cognizant that were going against the recommendations of two partners who have seen your work in internships and have gotten much more than the 30 mins we get to evaluate you in the PPO interview. We're aware that the pressure may have gotten to you and you may have frozen. So when we do reject we always give HR instructions to speak to the recommending partners and set up a second PPO interview with a different panel if they feel the candidate deserves it. So don't give up, speak to the team that you interned with. If they push, you'll get another chance at a PPO interview.

Finally, I'd like to point out that almost two decades ago, a young kid at an NLU shat all over his AMSS interview and didn't make it through. I was that kid. And here I am. This one failure doesn't mean much in the larger scheme of things. You'll figure it out and get where you deserve to get. Failures will happen from time to time no matter how much you prepare coz that's just how the world is. Don't beat yourself over it too much, hold your chin up and move on. You'll do well.

All the best to all of you.

I'm an A3. Recently switched from a T1 to another one. Worked my ass off across the board at both places. 9AM to 2AM on an average. Sometimes more.

I used to be a smart guy at college because I truly loved the law. I was interesting, I had a personality. I was excited about getting to work. Got 3 PPO offers along the way.

But slowly, all that has chipped away. I'm working on matters that sound truly incredible and I'm somehow still struggling to find the basic motivation. Fear and drive don't motivate me anymore because somewhere deep down, I know I want to quit really soon.

My practice area is so niche that less than 10 firms do it properly in India. I've been to one, rejected another, and am currently in one. The rest either don't have vacancies or are proceeded by terrible reputations. Plus, going to a T2 doesn't make much sense because it will likely just be as much work but with smaller names, more drudgery and even lesser money.

So what exactly do I do? Is anyone/has anyone been in the same boat? Is it wise to shift to in-house at my level? I have a feeling that the motivation will come back if I take a few months' break (or at least join a 9 to 5). Any options / help / advice is deeply appreciated.

At the outset I should clarify that I do not intend to use the LLM to transition as a lawyer into that country (Think UK and SQE exams), my research shows that path has gone dead for a very long time. Thankfully I find myself far more interested in policy and legal research (not exactly academia).

My current interest is in Data privacy, AI and governance (and adjacent research areas) therefore I'm thinking of pursuing an LLM from Europe, as a fourth year law student the earliest run rate to executing my plan is 5 years and I will need this much time to get my language skills up to wherever I go (currently thinking Brussels), as is I am aware that competition between Non EU and EU grads is a whole minefield so wherever I can give myself an advantage I will take it.

I can completely fund this pursuit abroad without incurring any debt of any kind for the whole duration (tuition +living expense) therefore I'm not extensively deterred from this plan based on financial feasibility.

Nonetheless, I am aware of the bloodbath that the european market is right now, I suppose I still want to do this because I find life here abysmal by any meaningful metric (short of the fact that I have my parents here). If I have to come back I will paid more for my foreign qualification so there is some win there.

I suppose I am looking for others who may be pursuing something similar their thoughts ?, others who may know better than me regarding my plans ? or in a general sense any guidance you would give to someone who came up to you with this plan.

A little different from the constant corporate craze but I hope people engage.

The writing is on the wall. The Delhi High Court’s Original Side practice is about to be vaporized. Some say by as much as 70%.

The old guard, with their fingers firmly buried in this jam jar, seem more than a little insecure. They’re throwing out one ridiculous excuse after another for why the proposed enhancement of the pecuniary jurisdiction to ₹10 crore is supposedly a bad idea.

The award for the most absurd argument goes to the DHCBA, which claims this reform will increase traffic. Traffic. 😂

Who’s been enjoying these dharnas from the comfort of their office via YouTube? I know I have.

Let’s have some fun. List the most absurd arguments you’ve heard against this proposed reform.

And to the nepos and bootlickers..this probably isn’t going to be a safe space!

I am a 4th year ( started) law student from tier 3 NLU with CGPA of 8.95 , I have only completed 4 internship in total all being basic and not very good ( like one was tis hazari , one under some normal lawyer in Delhi HC , one under raj HC judge and now in a tier 2 firm) .

My long-term goal is to build a career in Delhi litigation. Being completely realistic about my profile and the current state of litigation hiring in Delhi, what should I be doing over the next two years to maximize my chances of securing a position at a good litigation office/chamber before graduating.

Should I focus on specific kinds of internships, drafting experience, networking, publication work, or long-term chamber associations? At what stage do litigation offices in Delhi actually begin considering students for post-graduation roles?

I have been swamped with DD work and I have never done it before, I am literally losing all motivation and finding it hard to push through. I am not complaining I just need some tips from people who have done it before. How did you manage to get through this monotonous task everyday, when it feels never ending?

Hi.

Never worry about what others have done. Chart your own path. You have made it 35 years in your life. Congratulations. Remain confident. You will pull through.

While no one can ever understand what you are feeling maybe my experience may be helpful. I went through similar motions and quit law but came back after a gap of nearly 4 years.

What helped when I quit was therapy, lot of introspection, lot of time alone, and then coming to a realization that it is merely a job. I understood it when I left the profession and started working as a management trainee in a company.

So, if you want to quit law and do something else, do that. Similar feeling may or may not come again in the new profession. If it does, just remember it is a just a job. Nothing more. If you can figure out how to enjoy the job, do that. If you cannot, do not succumb to the negativity or escape from it. Tell yourself its a job and do what you can and not more.

If this does not help, ignore this and just know that even a stranger believes in you and that you will pull through.

I am around 35 years old and I am having what would deem to be depression, burnout and absolute lethargy. I've tried everything. Taken a long vacation. Gone some place away alone. Completely cut off ties with toxicity. Yet I just can't seem to feel the same enthusiasm and joy in this field anymore. It has nothing to do with law as a field, where I could jump offices, firms or chambers. I just need to quit. But what happens when I do ? What do I do ? Atleast now I have a steady source of income. What next without a job ? And once you're out, it's difficult to get back in. I had friends who took a 6 month break for health, family, birth etc and they're all suffering since they can't get back in the work force. What do I do ? This is so depressing. Anyone ?

I recently appeared for the Infosys Protégé Program Legal Executive test and wanted to share my experience for future candidates.

The initial test was conducted on 27 June. Unfortunately, the test management was not handled well. The examination platform kept crashing throughout the test, and many candidates lost a significant amount of time. Some candidates reportedly lost 30–40 minutes, while I personally lost around 15 minutes due to technical issues. As a result, I was unable to complete the test properly.

After the exam, I emailed the HR team and the concerned coordinators explaining the issues faced by candidates. It appears that several candidates raised similar concerns. Subsequently, Infosys arranged a re-test for candidates who were affected by the technical problems or were unable to complete the examination.

The re-test was conducted on 11 July. This time, the experience was much better. The test was managed more efficiently, the platform functioned smoothly, and there were no major technical disruptions. Overall, the administration was significantly improved compared to the first attempt.

Regarding the test pattern, the questions were largely based on the Legal Executive job description and the areas mentioned during the information sessions. Candidates should focus primarily on core legal subjects. Topics included Contract Law, Mergers & Acquisitions, Arbitration, CPC, CRPC, and other foundational legal concepts.

Apart from the legal questions, there were approximately 2 to 5 questions on English grammar, logical reasoning, and reading comprehension. The comprehension section included passage-based questions where candidates had to read a passage and answer questions based on the information provided.

The exam consisted entirely of MCQs. There were 120 questions to be completed in 90 minutes, so time management is extremely important.

As far as I understand, the selection process involves multiple elimination rounds. Candidates who clear the written test move on to the Group Discussion round, followed by the Interview round. Candidates who successfully clear all stages are then issued offer letters.

I am still awaiting the results of the test and have not yet received any update regarding the next stage of the process.

My suggestion for future candidates is to thoroughly revise the subjects mentioned in the job description, practice MCQs, brush up on English and logical reasoning, and work on speed, as the time limit is quite challenging.

Hope this helps anyone preparing for the next Infosys Protégé recruitment cycle. If anyone has already received results or updates regarding the next stage, please feel free to share them in the comments.

I am a neurodivergent lawyer who studied in one of the NLUs. I was pretty average in exams but i found my strong forte in writing research papers and public speaking. Eventually i pursued a career in academia which kind of is a suitable profession for people like me i feel. Just a suggestion

"Years of no protests"....

https://www.10net.in/nlu-demand-sparks-protest-at-deputy-cm-event-in-kathua

https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2026/05/13/nlsiu-students-protest-unsafe-hostel-infrastructure-conditions-2026/

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/nagpur/mnlu-students-protest-mgmts-failure-to-curb-on-campus-eve-teasing/articleshow/132225366.cms

https://theleaflet.in/leaflet-reports/tnnlus-vice-chancellor-said-female-students-in-shorts-invite-sexual-harassment-varsity-then-threatened-parents-of-protesting-students

Neurodivergence, as with any other fields, will be a hurdle in law as its not at all accessible to people who do not fit a certain mould of lawyers. It starts with the entire NLU v. Non-NLUs fights, and then the Tier-1, 2, 3 firm debates, and finally, the ideal lawyer stereotype relating to their working styles, demeanours (for example: our coffee machines at CAM literally show pictures of white, well-groomed males with straight, short hair as the 'ideal' look for lawyers, or people who want to work on side-projects or their healths or relationships are often looked down upon and not considered good lawyers because what are you even doing outside office that is worth it?).

Sadly, law, and especially, if your son wants to do the stereotypical law (corporate houses or firms in a tier-1 city) is a highly, highly stereotyping profession that does not tolerate any divergence at all. There might be one-off examples here and there where the professors/tutors in education, and partners/teams in employment might be sensitive to the specific needs of a person, but these are so far and few and minuscule that it's not worth considering them. I see some of the comments here pointing out similar advice as negative, or stereotyping law, but that's just how law looks on the ground, and I'd rather your son have real overview of the profession than bullshit wrapped in golden foil of positivity and inclusion. Law is not there yet, and to promise someone that, especially when they are hoping to base a major portion of their life on it, is just wrong and misleading.

Studying law could be wonderful, and with the right peers/support groups, you son might have a wonderful time, but the professional law would not be this accommodating I am afraid. So my advice would be to consider alternative employments in law (if your son has genuine interest in law itself), that offer more agency to him, even though if it comes on the cost of reduced earnings, or stereotypical prestige lawyers are so boastful of [right now, freelance work comes to mind as a potential area of work, but I am sure it has its unique challenges, which freelancers would be better suited to comment on].

But regardless, good luck to you and your son specifically! I am sure there are ways to figure this out :)

You completely missed out arranged marriage system in India. Lot of arranged marriages are forced marriages. Women are forced to breakup with boyfriends, forced to marry some random guy because family likes them for status and caste. Men in arranged marriage doesn't have any clue about women. Women are threatened to be cut off from family for rejecting arranged marriages. Women are killed for marrying whom they like. These are the rewind Siya Goyal and cases like these exist.

I am not even a feminist. Still this is the reality. These feminist writers rage bait. But are pointing to the correct issues.

Hi! I just wanted to say that your post really resonated with me.

I'm on the autism spectrum and have moderate to high ADHD. I graduated from a Tier 2 private law school a few years ago, and honestly, law school was tough. Academics were never my strong suit, but dropping out wasn't an option, so I just kept going.
I figured that I should focus on internships because I knew practical experience would matter more for me than grades.

Things did work out in the end. I don't work at a law firm, but I have a job I genuinely like, with kind people and a healthy work environment. Looking back, I spent so much time worrying that my grades would decide my future, but they didn't.

So if I can offer one bit of reassurance, it's this: your son's neurodivergence doesn't mean he can't have a successful legal career. The path might look a little different, and he may need to find what works for him, but it's absolutely possible. I know because I had the same doubts about myself.

Wishing him all the very best. Having supportive parents already gives him a great start.
And I am open to your questions if you have any.

1. Ignore majority of the population that celebrates discrimination, condones sexual harassment and resorts to victim blaming.

2. Ignore over 30,000 rapes that happen every year or just say “meh rape bad” without any critical engagement on measures to improve safety.

3. Ignore the well documented and pervasive social evils of dowry and rampant domestic violence.

4. Get rage baited by random engagement farmers or cling to the odd cases (albeit very unfortunate) where the victim is a man to paint an extremely skewed and honestly retarded picture of society and cry about how men are the real victims.

Talk about real problems man. A women perpetrator getting support from stupid content farmers is not news. The millions of women victims who are ignored in popular narratives is news.

Looking back at your first year (or your formative years in practice), what are the things you wish you had done differently? What are the most common mistakes you see juniors make, and what habits or skills made the biggest difference to your growth? Any practical advice that would have made your early years easier would be greatly appreciate

With Fable 5 returning today, quick reminder to all law firm partners and innovation people; if your legal AI provider starts providing access to Fable 5 again, you should drop them immediately.

Fable 5 was the first model from Anthropic that deviates from their data retention policy, allowing them to retain and review all prompts for a period of 30 days, making it completely unusable for most legal work.

Probably a good idea to see which vendors advertised support for Fable 5 when it came out last month (ex: August, Spellbook, Juris) and make sure you avoid them too.

From my experience as an inhouse lawyer, a couple of issues stand out:

1. 1. Missing Due Diligence Flags in Definitive Documents: During one transaction, a material due diligence observation was not carried through into the definitive documents prepared by the external counsel (Khaitan and Co, Delhi). I identified the gap during my review, and the documentation had to be revised accordingly. This reinforced the importance of ensuring that every DD finding is appropriately reflected in transaction documents and not treated as a standalone exercise.
2. 2. Overlooking Basic Security Perfection Requirements: I have also noticed instances where fundamental security-related provisions were missed. For example, a common oversight is taking security over an asset but failing to expressly include the insurance proceeds arising from that asset as part of the secured collateral. If the secured asset is damaged or completely destroyed, the lender's realisable security effectively shifts to the insurance claim. Without appropriate provisions assigning or charging the insurance proceeds and ensuring the lender is named as the loss payee/ beneficiary, the lender's ability to recover from the insurance payout may be compromised. This is a fundamental aspect of security creation that should always be verified during documentation.
3.

Overall, the biggest learning is that juniors should not rely solely on templates. Every document should be cross-checked against the due diligence report, term sheet, sanction conditions, and transaction checklist to ensure that commercial understanding is accurately translated into the legal documentation.

Hi! Sure; here you go.

1. Not analyzing clauses in documents - from a broader perspective - for eg a change of control clause cannot be narrowly studied (ie control f control), but related words, such as management, shareholding, directors or the like. One has to strategically read contracts - shortcuts will not work.

2. Making proofreading errors, for eg adding the word ‘not’ when not needed - can change an entire sentence.

3. Missing new documents when uploaded, asking for the same multiple times.

4. Randomly closing requisitions when the client says ‘not available’ - the standard is you should first clarify on a call, insist that it is important to us, if it is still not available - make an issue and do not leave it.

5. Treating DD as an unimportant exercise - the attitude of who reads the DD report - irrespective, the DD is a facilitator to a good SPA - it forms the basis of good warranties, CPs, CSs and in some cases, even purchase price adjustments.

6. Clarify with seniors on the drafting style, template formats, and the rhythm of the DD - for eg when to update requisition lists regularly, when to circle back with updates etc!

I am younger than you so can't offer a perspective regarding your professional life. That being said, ADHD is another neurodivergence. You don't cure it, but you can treat and control it to a point of optimal functionality. Although I can't promise it will be easy. I know of people thriving with it. But also ones like myself, that are unsure of their diagnosis, have hopped on meds, and still see a long way ahead of themselves before they get anywhere to be normal. Please try and get a diagnosis and the adjunct meds if necessary. Its a long process, since you can never be sure if your first doc will diagnose you rightly or the first set of meds prescribed would work. Takes a while, but the sooner you start, the better. Don't worry tho, there are more people around you with similar conditions than you think. Also, I am sure almost half the country suffers from a Vit D and B12 deficiency if not more, thanks to the Indian diet, weather and lifestyle.

Its down for many reasons. Mostly the shit shape of our economy and its outlook.

1. There is no more cheap money. As the reserve banks raise interest rates a lot of reserve banks follow suit. With Inflation targetting, rate increases into the future is also baked in. Many lawyers here have only seen the era of cheap money. The era cheap money began from 2008 and somebody had to finally bite the bullet. India was a beneficiary of cheap money.

2. India is not an FII destination during the AI boom build out. All FII chasing returns are there investing and finding deals in AI. So not many stock deals either. Speculative fast money spent a lot of time in emerging market in the decade before, not anymore in this geopolitical environment. That money is going home - for some time too.

3. Even FDI for India is net negative with more outbound transaction with indian conglomerates investing more abroad for markets abroad. India conglomerates within its business families continue to run safe margin based businesses and not risk based business - there is no appetite for risk, be it R&D spend or aggresive expansion. Good sectors with potential like pharma continue to remain bleak too. Sun pharma went for its biggest acquisition abroad.

4. As the Rupee depreciates everything technically is cheaper for someone entering India but one sees India loves to protect its champions. Look what Tesla or BYD faces. Protectionism in the right places remains rampant in India and its alive to the point where genuine foreign interest in India has died. Minimal investments from foreign companies and many exits.

5. Indian manufacturing had a false start post covid in the 1+1 era. China managed to keep the +1 within ASEAN countries. India's hostility with China ensured this as we faced strict rare earth ban. Chinese supply chain controlled ruined an Indian rise in manufacturing. I dont know if the governement Press Note 3 was also a great idea as China knows how to hurt us more. Many chinese companies were hit with tax and fema violations that reeked of blowback. Not a good look. You always want predictability.

6. The geopolitical sceranio in the Trump 2nd term has been disastrous for a staid India. India faces a perpetual energy crisis, India lost access to Russian oil briefly which was a hedge in more ways than one. All of this means Indian consumption especially rural is down. India has handled Trump poorly hands down. I dont think anyone else would have done better - but that has definietely pushed to the back of the line in many things.

7. On top of that India is staring the bad end of a trade deal. A trade which we know is coming but India like fools didnt make a deal early and hung it out so late - it committed right before a court in the US ruled it all out being outside of Trumps powers, meaning sign up to any deal has no real value. This trade limbo has meant many bad consequences. A Ford re-entry died. It also means India agri wont have much time left to be subsidized.

8. India's genuine moat - IT sector - is slowing as the python of AI strangled before swallowing. Indian IT is the sole reason India didnt have the issues facing Sri Lanka, Pakistan or Nepal. Indian IT helps India keep its neck above water with balance of payments issues. This is going to be the biggest issue down the road. A lot of Indian middle class rose from this sector. This sector is struggling. A switch to more AI on foreign LLMs means the wage advantage is lost, as companies spend forex paying for tokens. The GCC play is not going to replace this moat either.

9. Even big projects have started to slowdown. The recent news that India is not going to buy Japanese trains for its HSR lines is actually a story about the govt straining its budget but has been shared with media as some sort of great indigenizarition measure. There is a genuine drawdown in terms of grandiose projects, because we dont have room on our balance sheet as our fiscal gap widens from the target.

10. The taxation policy remains punitive with state capacity means money is squandered. Tax admininstration remains poor, while direct and indirect collection has gone India's complexity index remains high. On the ground GST is a disaster worse than the government lets on - it is a genuine pain to get input credits back making it worse than the old excise and VAT regime.

11. India reforms have slowed down. Between IBC, GST and slow water down DPDP, a lot of novel legal work has already been squeezed out. IBC pushed restructuring work - that pipeline is slowing down as the NPA's have been cured. This has helped banks, but Indian banks wont get into another funding frenzy anytime soon.

12. The immigration pipeline out of India is also breaking apart in the face global anti immigration wave. How does this impact M&A? As companies are forced to become efficient wage efficiency is still deprioritized. They rather invest into AI/ Robots. This means offshoring to India is down. Look at a company like Honeywell which is downsizing and moving plants back to the developed world. Reversing offshoring kills many possible deals involving small and medium sized Indian companies who would have been offshoring targets or its suppliers.

All in all that is a dozen reasons - these many cuts - slow our economy down. The government and opposition should be shouting from the rafters about it. Instead our government is focussed on breaking opposition parties for a re-run at the delimitation amendment project to secure its reign for the next few decades. All of this means deal pipeline for M&A becomes a trickle.

It was so brave of you to be so honest and bare your heart out here. Kudos for being so courageous and having the guts to ask for help.

There are so many people in worse off situations than you are in, so many have no guidance or direction and completely, utterly lost. Don’t feel so dejected and lose hope. You’re a Lawyer AND a CA. You’ve worked hard and worked in both types of firms: legal as well as accounting firms.

What are you goals in life? Is it accumulating money? Staying away from your hometown forever? Or just working and doing the work you love without the need for earning? Your defined goal will help people point you towards the right direction

Wish to see inputs from others who can provide proper guidance at this stage. Also, it was nice to see someone not use ChatGPT for writing their post :D

Members appointed as the club’s lawyers and paid a total of Rs 1.95 crore, including Rs 77 lakh to Arun Kathpalia, Rs 28.76 lakh to Gaurav Mohan Liberhan, and Rs 20 lakh to Harish Salve.

The new governing body stopped hiring club members as lawyers after it took charge in April 2022. But, records show, that did not bring down the club’s legal bill — from Rs 1.84 crore in 2021-22 to Rs 2.09 crore in 2022-23. From 2018-19 to 2022-23, records show, the club spent Rs 8.22 crore on litigation.

Noting that “legal costs have become a material cost incurred by the Club”, the 2022-23 auditor’s report repeatedly highlighted legal expenses as an area where verification was difficult because of incomplete records, unavailable legal files, and lack of information regarding the duration and status of litigation matters.

I have been reading up on the history of the legal profession in India since I find it fascinating how the Bar was made of multiple different strands (barristers/advocates, attorneys, vakils etc) before it was finally unified through the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926. I recently read 'The Legal Profession in Colonial South India' by John Paul (Oxford University Press), an excellent book which closely follows the fortunes of the vakils who practised before the Madras High Court.

Paul's book made me wonder whether there are any similar books on the Bar of the Bombay High Court. I know that Chapter 1 of Abhinav Chandrachud's 'An Independent, Colonial Judiciary' does touch upon this to a certain extent but I would like to read a much fuller work on the subject. An article published by the Bombay Incorporated Law Society on its centenary (see: https://bils.co.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Brief-history-of-the-bombay-incorporated-law-society.pdf) is somewhat illuminating but it is even more light on information than Chandrachud's book.

While I am interested generally in the history of the Bombay High Court and its Bar, I am particularly interested in 1) the history of the dual system (counsel-attorney) which existed before the OS and the reasons behind its persistence till 1976 when it was finally done away with, and 2) competition among Parsis and non-Parsis regarding the practice before the OS. Unfortunately, I think it highly unlikely that there is any written material on the second point (though I am well aware that rich oral histories of this rivalry have been passed down to lawyers currently practising before the Bombay High Court). In any case, I would greatly appreciate it if anyone would be kind enough to point me towards any relevant material.

Thanks in advance!

My view of the future is this, for Indian law firms. Our market is still so nascent, we are, in crudely comparative terms, akin to the American and English legal industry in the 1940s-1950s. Financial engineering the likes of which prompted the rise and importance of commercial law firms in the US and England is only beginning to happen in India today. My assessment is that there is massive headroom in the market in terms of space for law firms and lawyers to grow. Vis a vis AI and LLM, the lawyers role will shift to much higher order thinking skills, and the lawyers will be freer to do more strategic thinking. Think of it like the SCCOnline and Manupatra of our generation, which democratised the profession of law.

Why I feel AI or LLMs will never replace lawyers (maybe slightly reduce the need for so many, but that is still debatable in the Indian context where our economy is booming at an unprecedented rate, and when economy grows, lawyers grow) is that law as a profession is regulated and borne out of the need for subjective decision making, taking calls, and at the end of the day, someone to take the fall or someone to 'certify' certain aspects. In this regard, law really distinguishes itself from other pursuits such as engineering or management, where a lot of decision making is largely objective. Objective decision making is the first of decisions which will be replaced with AI/ LLMs. Even for law, completely objective or purely language based tasks, such as summaries or list of dates, or checking volumes of data for specific dates, or straightforward compliance requirements in bare acts will be easily replaced and are already being replaced with AI. But for things like structuring, which needs much higher order thinking, subjectivity in taking certain calls (such as, would a 49% subsidiary violate FOCC restrictions in combination with other factors), humans will continue be relevant. At the end of the day, it also largely depends on what us humans, collectively, are comfortable delegating to a machine. My personal belief is that law, with ramifications for violating it, will never be fully machine run or led. I mean sure, the in house counsels and A0s will churn out shitty drafts using AI, but hey, that doesn't change much for higher ups in the law firms.

Don’t know why this post has only two comments. But the legal profession will reduce in size by atleast 50 percent in the next 4 to 5 years if not more. Clients or companies are price sensitive, not only that, they are aware of what AI has gotten to the legal profession. Tier 1 firms are charging peanuts to maintain clients. When I say peanuts I mean peanuts. The ones that may survive are the ones on the top of the pyramid. That’s that.

Hi, I am just a random guy. i just wanted to point out 1 very simple thing
This is an old post, and I can see you replied 3 years ago and talked about 17 years of career.
1st thing.
https://www.sebi.gov.in/monthlypay-allowance.html
link to pay and allowance and this overall doesnt even have complete gross salary and is without housing
I went to the SEBI directory, available on their website. and searched LAD first name pop-ups.
D.V. SEKHAR, CGM, currently 21 years in SEBI—gross pay, which is not the full pay, is close to 5.9 lakhs a month
Since you talked about 17 years, found another one.
AYAN MUKHERJEE Joined in 2009, currently 17 years old - Gross pay is 3.62 lakhs a month.

And this gross pay are not even the exact actual pay

another person who joined 4 years ago

DEEPAK SAROJ joined in Aug 2022 with 1.48 gross per month. Again, this is without housing and other things, so it's nowhere close to whatever 10 lakh you are quoting and whatever 17 years of career you are saying.

At least do proper research.
Peace.

I am astounded by the negativity here. Anonymity does seem to strip away empathy and human decency.

I'm an ex-NDA'ite and a beneficiary of Nishithbhai's mentorship. You do realise that he has every prerogative to keep his practice a sole proprietary concern. Those of us who wished to have our own equity have chosen other paths. That is just individual autonomy.

The one thing you cannot take away from NMD is the fact that he has made entrepreneurs out of so many of us. He may not share equity, but he shared the core skills and allowed us to hone them. That is not "exploitation". That is true guru-shishya parampara aka mentorship.

XOXO

It's a hit or miss. I know people who are APs from the following route:

1. Only LL.M.

2. LL.M. + NET

3. LL.M. + M.Phil

4. LL.M. + NET + M.Phil

5. LL.M. + M.Phil + Ph.D

6. LL.M. + Ph.D

7. LL.M. + Ph.D + Postdoc

In short, no one has any idea what works. The minimum is an LL.M. After which a NET, m.phil, PhD or none is desirable. Some have zero publications, some have ten. Some have zero work experience, some have more. Some have connections, some don't. Some are alumni, some are not. Some are experts, some are not.

Unfortunately the entire process in this country is messed up when it comes to education.

Now when you look abroad. A PhD is mandatory to be an assistant professor. The most you can be without one is a lecturer/reader. Still they would expect you to be a PhD pursuing soon.

The only advice I can give is get your LLM. Apply immediate for a PhD. And apply everywhere. Your pursuing PhD is more important than your NET or your publications. Work experience depends totally in the university. Some value it, some feel since theory and practice is different it doesn't matter. The proper format would be LLM-Phd-Publications.

Now everything else is based on how you get in, your salary is determined by your position and you leverage through that process. A PhD scholar can demand the 7th pay commission equivalent salary. A LLM with NET may not. My two batchmates one with a LLM and another with an LLM and JRF got selected together in the same university. One got 25k per month to teach, the other got 40k per month. That's the difference.

The leverage is based on your connections, you profile and your luck.

So a year ahead but would like to contribute to this.

Caveat: I practice in a Tier 2 city at a Regional High Court and other State forums.

Generally, the Court hours plus the chamber hours are eratic but one may count around 2 to 3 hours a day in Court and an additional 3 to 4 hours in office. After slogging myself for 10 years, I have relatively free weekends. I do have to hold office on weekends but mostly it is for 2 to 3 hours. Remaining time I like to spend with my family and devote to my reading list and other hobbies.

My monthly earnings are somewhere in the ballpark of 2 to 3 lakhs a month. I own a car, nothing sophisticated. I still putting up on a rented place with a desire to own a house in near future, deadline being the age of 40. I do like to go on holidays and religiously plan for the same. As of other holdings, I have 70 lakhs of savings to secure my future.

All in all, indeed, I have friends, both in firms and litigation who are better of me or may be not so better of, but in the end, I find myself to be happy and satisfied wherever I am.

Yeah man michael sandel is gold. I watched his video lectures and then bought his book. That is what sparked my interest in philosophy and it would be fair to say that it has helped me in law to some extent. As justice nariman says 'The more you read outside law, the more helps in law'

For an introduction to general jurisprudence: Nicholas McBride and Sandy Steel, Great Debates in Jurisprudence (2nd edn)

For reliable introductions to legal theory: Andrei Marmor (ed), The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Law (or entries in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy like https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/contract-law/ and https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/constitutionalism/ )

My batch rank was in the bottom half of my batch, 0 publications, multiple competitions and wins, 0 family connections, tier 2 nlu.

I ended up getting offers from two tier 1 firms and one tier 2 firm in my 4th year.

Don't lose hope, try networking as much as possible, your placement cell is not the only place you can get internships from.

Also, these firms don't pay that much attention to your gpa once you get the internship, it's only a pre-requisite to get the internship (if applying via the cell or individually). try networking with people (ideally SA and above) and getting them to forward your CV to their company HRs. once you enter a firm, it's far easier as long as you can convince your team you deserve a place there.

Hello,

OP here. Thank you for your concern and kind words 🙏🏻🪷🌸 Yes, I’m in a much better place right now.

I completely agree. This is why it’s so important to be street smart. Since I was a kid, I was a bookworm. I loved to study, followed whatever my teachers said religiously and toed the line completely. Whatever ideals and ethics lessons we were taught at school, I took them quite literally. Even my CLAT coaching teacher called me, “too idealistic”. I genuinely believed that, “Truth alone triumphs”, “Good always wins over evil” and other such stuff you learn from childhood, in the stories you’re taught with a moral lesson, in the ethics and morals classes at school as well as college.

At law school, I would readily buy into the lofty ideals written into our constitution, judgements, BCI rules and I would feel so good about how our Judiciary held itself to such impeccable standards. How despite our legislature and executive being too far gone, our Judiciary was still standing as the last beacon of hope. Especially when you’re fed all such unicorns and rainbows and more by your law school teachers who paint a very rosy picture when you’re a first year and they’re trying to retain you so that you don’t change colleges. (I got to know this later from a senior who stayed in my hostel). And when you read books on legendary judges and lawyers, they’re described as other-worldly and almost divine by their colleagues.

Plus, I was the quintessential teacher’s pet in school. I used to top my exams, carry odd errands around the school for my teachers, participate in whatever competition and workshop they asked me to when they didn’t have any other student takers since they had a quota to complete for student participation and burn myself out just to please them. I remember how deeply ingrained and imprinted were the ideals they’d taught us since kindergarten. “Guru-Shishya Parampara”, “Gurur Brahma Gurur Vishnu, Gurur Devo Maheshwara”, “How the stature and place of a teacher is even above your parents and just below God”. I still remember the poster on the corridor where my 8th std classroom was. It described the meaning of “Guru: Gu + Ru = One Who Removes Darkness”. A common complaint my mum had throughout my schooling years was, whatever her teachers tell her, she takes it literally as if it’s set in stone. She’ll run around at the last minute, at midnight, if her teacher tells her to participate in something at the last minute. My mum finally got fed up of my 7th std class teacher making me do her errands around the school, checking her papers and books, and told her off in the next PTA meeting and asked her to stop treating me as her personal assistant and let me study since she would tell me to give a book to another teacher at the start of class and by the time I came back, having walked across the school campus and back half the class was over and I would miss the concepts taught. At that point I didn’t even go to tuitions since our principal told us not to and I took it literally. My mum would scold me for that and complained about my insane teacher appeasement behaviour to my Masi.

My masi used to say that teachers and all are limited to inside the school. A once school gets over and the bell rings, they’re just normal people and one should treat them as such. No need to show so much reverence towards them. I would bend down to touch the feet of whichever teacher I bumped into outside school since we were taught that in school. That would be my highlight for the week and I would tell my friends I bumped into so and so today.

This incident really burst a bubble and I realized that though the proverbs and shlokas about teachers are on point, they don’t apply to all. Just because someone mugs up some concepts about a subject does not make them a Guru and does not elevate them to the stature this word carried. And so they should not be held to the same sense of awestruck fascination and devotion I so naively and tbh, stupidly harboured. At that point, I was straight out of my school which was very strict in upholding standards of behavioural conduct, dress code, academic excellence etc. so I kept all my college teachers as well on the same pedestal we were taught at school.

Moreover, one should keep an eye for all the red flags in the behaviour of the perpetrator. I could not register them on account of the rose colored glasses I had on at that time. After our guest lecture was over, some students went over to discuss their doubts and engage in discussions, I was one of them. You know the lists of advocates students can intern under that the college circulates? His name was on it. Our teacher had asked him to explain a couple of concepts which she would not be covering and had asked everyone to attend compulsorily as those topics would not be repeated in class later. I thought to myself that was a great opportunity. I could discuss my internship prospects with him at college itself, instead of having to go to his office alone. A week prior to the guest lecture, I didn’t even know someone like him existed on the planet.

Anyways, when my turn came I asked, “Sir are you taking any interns? Your name is on the list our college gave us, of the advocates we can intern under.” He told me to walk with him as he had to meet the dean. Now our classroom was on the first floor. The dean’s office was at the end of the corridor on the ground floor. While walking he asked if I understood the concept our group had doubts in and asked me a couple of questions regarding it. They all had stayed back in class since their doubts had been solved. Since I was the only one remaining, I walked with him to the dean’s office. Since the dean was preoccupied, he was requested to wait. I stood behind clutching my notebook. The teacher who asked us to wait asked him to please sit and wait for a few minutes. There was a bench next to our dean’s office with it’s back to the wall at the end of the corridor. He sat down and motioned me to sit next to him. I sat to his right after leaving some space in between. I started to discuss the internship again and asked him if he had any vacancies. He told me to call him and fix an appointment at his office to discuss it since he had to meet our dean right now. I said okay, and asked him his office address, opening my notebook with my pen ready to jotted in down.

He said I’ll give you my card and started to take it out of his pocket. After he took it out of his pocket, he folded his arms and slipped his left hand under his right arm and shook his card that was wedged in the fingers of his left hand, as a signal for me to take it. I still remember how odd it looked and how perplexed I felt. Why was he slipping his card like he was handing over some contraband? (This was the same posture he would enact later) Anyways, so while feeling utterly confused and weirded out, I took the card and tried to shake off this feeling. After I took the card, he told me to keep it in my notebook, lest I lose it. I had it in my hand. So I kept it in my notebook (I later realized he was asking me to hide it). After I do that I look up and see our moot court teacher walking towards us in the corridor with her eyes widened. Like she had caught him dealing contraband or something. And after seeing her, he immediately stiffened, straightened up and stood to greet her. He looked very flustered like he had been caught in the act of doing something wrong. She faked a laugh and said the dean was ready to meet him. And that made me even more confused. Later, I rationalized it to myself that maybe this was to not let out the news of him taking interns out or else he would be swamped with applications and I might never get a chance since our entire class and our seniors as well, would apply. Looking back, I realized how absolutely dumb my excuse for his extremely weird behaviour was and maybe the reason why my moot court teacher looked so shocked was perhaps he had had complaints made against him prior? Since students at our college has been interning under him and this was the same list that had been circulated to our seniors as well.

That was the first red flag. The second one was during the interview process. As soon as I sat down, he told me the question our college teachers had told us to expect and prepare answers for, in advance as it would be asked for sure. “So tell me about yourself”. I started repeating the answer I had prepared: academic history, strengths, weaknesses, hobbies, reasons for doing the internship etc. When I mentioned that I loved to read and was a voracious reader, he stopped me and asked me names of some of the books I had read. I started saying, “To Kill a Mockingjay”… and he stopped me once again, said he was impressed and asked if I read non fiction as well. I said yes and started listing down the books I had read. He paused me to ask me if I was into history and I said yes. I was a major history buff and when asked what history books I had read, I started off my list with Rajtarangini by Kalhana since that was the latest I had read and the most I remembered so if he asked me any questions related to it, I’d be able to answer them relatively better than the books I had read earlier. At that he interrupted me and looked quite surprised and said that I didn’t expect a first year student to have had read it. I said my social studies teacher had suggested it in the end of 10th std. He said, “Wow, that’s very smart”. With an emphasis on “smart”. He said I reminded him of his elder daughter who was a vociferous reader and read a lot as well. He then got up and pulled out Rajtarangini from his shelves behind his desk and showed it to me. And said that as his intern, I would have access to his collection of books at all times and could ask to read it anytime. I remember feeling so happy I had passed the interview and had been selected. He then remarked that I had a long name and if he could call me by my pet name. He guessed my pet name out loud with a questioning tone at the end. I immediately blurted, “This is exactly what my papa calls me! And some other family members too! My mum calls me by a different name though.” (Like suppose someone’s called Deepika, her pet name would be Deepu, if someone’s called Anushka, her pet name would be Nushkie). I remember thinking of how I had found a father figure in the new senior advocate I was going to intern under since he told me I reminded him of his DAUGHTER. I genuinely thought that him guessing the same nickname my father called me by was also a sign that he thought of me as his daughter. That lowered my guard even more since a girl feels the safest in presence of her parents and here was someone who was portraying himself as my father figure. After all who would suspect someone who was being so nice and telling me I reminded him of his daughter? Looking back, I beat myself up over how unbelievably naive and stupid I was to be so trusting. But then reconciled in light of the environment I had grown up in where I had no reason to be suspicious of someone like him who was a teacher and thus, by extension, automatically to be trusted. And how I was barely an adult at that time

Later on I realized how what he said was inappropriate. This was the second red flag. In my latter internships and work experience, never did ANY of my seniors, forget the advocates I was working under, ever ask me if they could call me by a shortened version of my name, forget a pet name. It is then I realized how essential it is to have street smarts. It’s much better to be a streetwise person who scores average and is able to detect danger and stay safe than to be a book smart bookworm who tops their exams but becomes an easy target due to their naïveté. It’s so important to teach your kids to be sharp, astute, and street savvy first. Marks can always be improved later

Incoming 4th year at one of the top 3's. My gpa is around the batch average. My cv has a few comps, some wins, but no publications, I have done normal internships at no name chambers (enjoyed the experience and learnt law and life) , and 2 law firm internships.

The issue - I did not get a tier 1 internship through my RCC on the first cycle ( it was due to my gpa, a lot of people above me). If I don't get a Tier 1 internship in my 4th year, chances are that I won't get placed there either.

i obviously can't bring my gpa to top 30 right now. so should I even bother about getting a tier 1 placement on day zero ? Is it possible? I was thinking about doing internship at boutiques which specialize in gen corp transactions. ( would like recommendations) which would help me stenghten my CV.

If T1 isn't possible, then what is the best course for me to get a tier 1 job later on in the future through a lateral switch? how do I maximize by chances.

( To clarify, I'm not glamorizing T1 jobs or putting them on a pedestal in any way, its just that my very humble background + limited exposure - made me do law on the premise that there is a shit ton of money).

I don't care about work life balance, I cannot literally afford it due to loans.

Regarding my gpa - I always felt like academics wasn't really my thing. I unfortunately for my present self was never really passionate about it. Inspite of my mid gpa however , I have always performed better at corporate law gpa wise and prefer to pursue it. I am interested in general transactional work (M& A, bnf etc), and have experience in IP law and want to switch.

I never really realised how important my gpa was in placements until the start of my 3 rd year, because I really thought that the mere fact that i was in a T1 law school would give me pretty good opportunities. (silly me, I did not realise that even here it's only the cream and not the milk )

I have derived much more pleasure during my internships, and have gotten good feedback about my temperament and work. I do understand why firms select by GPA due to it being a common objective parameter, but I feel like I'm just getting filtered out in the system inspite of having a genuine interest. ( too many people - too few opportunities)

Currently I'm thinking of applying to firms who do transactional work and needed a few recommendations on those as well. additionally, what are some tier 1's/ well paying boutiques which aren't very strict on their gpa requirement?

I'm open to advice but give me the realistic possibilities.

Would greatly appreciate it, since I really don't feel like asking a senior or anyone i know.

Hi there. I was in this position a few years ago. The firm I used to work with desperately wanted me out since they did not like me, and I was thrown under the bus for the gross negligence of a senior. I was unemployed for 9 months. At least 10 to 12 interview rejections. I never gave up. Thereafter, I finally got into a tier 3 and worked my way up, today I am an SA in another tier 3. Took a lot to wipe off the black mark from that disgusting firm. But here I am today. Still surviving. Do not give up OP. Keep up the sincerity and hardwork. Good things will come your way.

PS: One of the firms which rejected me during my struggling days, despite my almost pleading for a chance, interviewed me once my career was back on track. This time, I rejected them, and they pleaded me, but I refused them. Things will turn around for you too as long as you are sincere. Look for good people to work with.

Hi,

I understand why you’d feel that way. But lucky for me, I have screenshots of chats, my ride that I booked that day, call recordings since at that time I was using an Android which had automatic call record option turned on, call recordings when I called him to say that I was running late and I’d I needed to change the appointment timings and he had said, “Ohh there’s no need blah blah. Come araam se etc etc. Call recording of when I called him from inside my ride asking for directions since the location that the app had picked up was off by quite a few distance and I couldn’t find his house and he guided me to his house. My mum, when I had told her about the interview had told me to ask him if he had any female interns and she had insisted that this be asked since she was not comfortable with letting me intern in a place with only men. And he had said yes and that he had ▮▮▮ daughters and I would need to come to his home office only since he predominantly worked from there and not his chambers in the High Court and that his daughters would be around when I came over for the interview. This was also on record. And when I entered, in the beginning, he mentioned about his daughters and asked me if I had met them in the living room while they were huddled on the sofa and I told him I saw one. And he said the other 2 women were his wife and mother. I had smiled at them out of courtesy and even at his weird, creepy servant at the start when I was blissfully unaware of the horrors about to unfold later. I have a call recording from that when I called my mother and recounted everything, when I called up my Aunty who’s my family friend and recounted everything to uncle and Aunty, call recording of her telling me that they had talked to my father and advising me to leave for my hostel immediately, not wait for ride to arrive and instead flag down any auto on the road, call recordings of people asking me if I had made home safely, if there had been any communication from him, call recordings of my brother cursing him and threatening him with dire consequences if he dared to contact me again, screenshots of him texting me again, me telling him not to contact me again, photos of his house at that day and time, other videos, photos and recordings, my selfies, him coming to my college, my refusal to attend college the day he came again. My attendance record in which that day is marked absent and I never stayed absent for college since I absolutely loved to attend all my lectures. I would sit on the first benches and loved to take notes. I hated skipping that day since I would then have to ask notes from others. All this and more is recorded, saved and backed up across multiple places. This information is available with multiple members of my family and trusted people in multiple different forms so yes, I have ample proof but I was talked out of going public with this information due to notions of shame and honour especially for a girl in our society. Recordings of my consultations with my therapists, psychologists, counselors whom I sought to make sense of this and to stop the panic attacks I had immediately afterwards. My anxiety was at an all time high at that time, me confining in my trusted family members and friends, diary entries, witness statements from the people I talked to about this, call recordings with even the trustworthy goons my brother had talked to to protect me and destroy him if he ever tried to get close to me again and much much more.

So yes, I have more than enough proof to prove it was him. Moreover, I’d openly challenge this fucktard to go through Narco analysis and lie detector tests if he dared

Thank you so much for your kind words. They truly mean a lot 🙏🏻🪷🌸

I have regained most of confidence back but still this incident has really affected my life and the way I behave in relation with almost everyone else around me. It has definitely affected my formal, informal and professional relationships immensely and the constant cloud of fear that hangs in the air whenever I meet someone new.

Looking back even I don’t know how I managed to keep a calm, neutral tone and face when inside I felt like I was going to pass out. I was just listening to my intuition and following whatever my inner voice was telling me to do. Later on, I learnt that Flight or Fight are not just the only Fear Responses. There are actually 4. The remaining being Freeze and Fawn. And these 2 are seen most commonly in women. Many a times women will freeze and will not be able to respond to the sudden shock of sexual violence they encounter since their brain shuts down. The amount of cortisol that floods the body in such situations is very high and dangerous and so the brain will numb the response to preserve the body. Many women are unable to even move an inch. The other response is Fawn, wherein the victim will try to do as the perpetrator says and try not to anger him so that he doesn’t hurt her more. This is also seen and documented in victims of sexual assault and violence. Especially in human trafficking when they’re out in public yet the woman doesn’t ever ask for help since she feels she’ll survive and live if she follows and doesn’t want to invite his wrath and more harm upon herself. This is why many women just go along with whatever is being asked of them in a paralyzed daze.

Well there still was the underlying current amongst my family members of these notions of honour. The community I come from is very orthodox, conservative and violent. Honour Killing is very rampant and common. And in this case where the family knows that it wasn’t their daughter’s fault and since there is no basis for honour killing, since I did not elope with a guy of another caste or someone of the same caste who did not have my family’s approval or whatever, if my family was not supportive, I would’ve been married off at the earliest since I was technically an adult. So I would’ve been married off and not allowed to continue my education. I would be recounted as an example of not letting your daughters study too much or send your daughters to college, lest in another city/state. I would’ve been passed on as an inconvenient burden to my husband and I would be his headache now. Of course, it would’ve been an arranged marriage.

And this is still rampant. What’s more, I heard it myself. A meeting of all the elders in the family, our close friends, respected heads of our community who hold high positions, was called. One elderly man straight up asked my father, “Why not marry her off?” My father was a bit startled and taken aback but put his down and was firm in his stance that she’ll first complete her education before I even think of marriage. She should have a basic degree first so she can support herself later if needed. And though it was unspoken but I knew that I was lucky enough 🧿 to not be married off against my wishes. But we all know how familial pressure is. Especially in large families where 20 different people have an opinion on your life and seek to control it

Hi Kian,

OP here. Since my account was not published, I had felt a sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach. I would constantly refresh the website after I submitted my experience to see if it was published or not. After multiple months, it just made me relive the trauma and feel extremely disheartened so I stopped searching if my submission had been published. To be honest, I stopped reading Legally India completely unless I searched something and it appeared on the results page. I used to read your website religiously before 😅

Since the last 3 days, reading about a rape triggered memories of this horrifying event and I went through many different accounts of sexual harassment that were reported on your website. I just had a gut feeling to do so. Idk why since we read about many such cases but I had a very strong urge to go through all sexual harassment accounts reported. It makes sense now. I was going through each result and just randomly clicked on the link lower on the search results page and I was kinda shocked but also pleasantly surprised to see you had finally published my account. I realized this was my account as I started reading this. And despite feeling that I was over this trauma, I broke down and started crying.

I totally understand why you took so much time 😅 since journalists have to verify their news. You must receive a flood of emails and messages every single day and I can see why you took the time to publish it. I completely understand why you didn’t publish his name. I just wanted to highlight this to warn other girls who might want to intern or work under him. To warn them of his predatory nature and to advise them to ALWAYS take someone with them if they ever were to go to his office or home-office. Be it your parents, friends, classmates or just go in groups since there’s safety in numbers.

I was thinking of making this public with his and my identity both, all the proofs, receipts, screenshots, witness statements, everything. But I was talked out of this again by a family friend saying she wouldn’t advice women to do that. At that point, I was very attached to her and looked upto her for all kinds of advice and followed her what she said for everything so backed down.

Thank you for your kind thoughts, advice and suggestions. Yes, I have grown to be a more confident person. Mostly on account of the sheer rage I felt after going to therapy and working on myself and understanding that this was not my fault at all. And working on different sexual harassment/assault/abuse/rape cases over the years.

Thank you for publishing this. Seeing my submission up her made me feel supported, better and lighter. 🙏🏻🧿😇🦋🪷

This is a news report from a Bengali channel on his passing, but you can press CC and read the English captions. The report says it was on the basis of his arguments in RG Kar that some important instructions were issued by the SC. The report also says he appeared in other important cases, like the Kamduni rape-murder case (which Mamata had infamously dismissed as a "small incident") and the school teacher recruitment corruption case (over which multiple TMC politicians have been arrested and Abhishek Banerjee is being questioned).

May Ahura Mazda bless the departed soul. He may not have been felicitated by international magazines, but he was a true human rights defender and someone worth emulating.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaHRbyGhLUw

Here's a video of him arguing the case and exposing how evidence was contaminated. Look at Sibal and Menaka's reactions on the side.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXx1USYYWUk

Suvendu Adhikary had remarked that if even a firecracker explodes in Gaza, then India's liberals are out on the streets and social media. But they turn a blind eye to thousands of atrocities in Bengal under the TMC. But not this man. While certain elite law grads became limousine liberals in Delhi's champagne party circuit, he chose the toughest practice area in the toughest state.

Salute you, Sir.🫡

Hi
I am a Civil Judge myself. Its been around 2 years I am in the service and I pretty much understand the curiosity around lifestyle and pay scale of a judicial officer, work life balance, pros and cons.

Work Life balance
See, the initial 1 year is going to be a bit hectic as you will be learning everything from the scratch. Starting from the functioning of how exactly a court works to how to handle the advocates to handling your court staff, reading hefty files in Hindi, to handling other court administrative work. You will be the master of your court. Everything might feel intimidating at first because you won't be hanging with people your age, you will be ordering people of your fathers age. But once you get hold of such things its a cake walk, trust me. Most of the things are repetitive. So work life balance is a solid 4/5 here.

Stress/Workload
There's stress and there's workload but its all about time management Once your learn that most of the things are doable. I would give it a 3/5 for stress.

Family life/Social life

Family life ain't that great here. I literally have to wait for the weekends to go out, eat junkies and meet my friends and family. I make a list of everything I need so i can go for grocery shopping in the weekend. As a judge you can't socialize a lot with general public. I have been given strict instructions to avoid going to this famous salon near my house and not been caught eating pani puris in public. I am crying while writing this.
This is by far the biggest con of the service. If you are someone who loves to go out and make friends you should consider joining this service.

Job Security

My job comes with great security until and unless you are caught taking bribe. Still better than the corp sec for sure.

Pay

I earn around 1,50,000 a month which is more than enough considering I am posted in a tehsil.

Holiday

15 days vacation (summer+winter)

13 Days CL

3 Days OL
30 Days EL

Protocol

Judiciary has a lot of protocol. Boy, I can have a whole rant session on that but lets leave it. Its strict man, its strict.

Conclusion

You chose your battles buddy. If your priorities are having a stable life, money which comes with a cost of living in a tier 3 city or may be village and you are okay with not socializing a lot. This service is great. Oh one more thing, judiciary gives sooooo much respect man, people salute you and respect you all the times.

That tracks. DRAMS is a supporter of Rahul Gandhi, after all !

It will take more than just a movement to dislodge these inept dynasts. Their tentacles are deeply entrenched in the system. People are either beholden to them or in awe of them. The exceptions merely prove the rule. This explains the latitude they enjoy, especially in the courts, and why some lawyers charge upwards of ₹18 to 20 lakhs per hearing, payable in advance, mind you, while others charge a few zeros less, payable only after a minimum 60-day delay, in tranches, and with at least a 30% discount, all of which you learn about only after the fact.

And if only the chamchagiri stopped there.

In a recent hearing before a certain court/tribunal, I watched a counsel with over 17 years of experience roll out the red carpet for a designated senior advocate, one who appears before that forum regularly, who needed an adjournment to fend off multiple provable perjury claims. This junior counsel did not even oppose the adjournment despite holding all the cards. In fact, they actively helped the opposing side and said, “last chance,” with a sheepish smile. That sort of generosity no doubt earns a pat on the back, and perhaps a future client referral from the senior.

The lesson? Our systems are deeply fucked, and Trump, for all his shortcomings, was not entirely off the mark when he described India as a “shithole” country. In many respects, it is. The evidence lies in the numbers. We are not only losing our brightest minds from NLS, the IITs, and the IIMs; people who can afford to live abroad are leaving in unprecedented numbers.

Ever wondered why someone like Virat Kohli might prefer living overseas rather than in one of his villas or apartments in India worth hundreds of crores?

That should tell you everything you need to know about India and about us Indians. The sharp and disproportionate class divide has little to do with Congress vs BJP “misrule”; it points instead to a deeper corruption in our values as Indians. We rape, pollute, shortchange, and kill our own in the name of class, caste, and religion. We feel no shame in using institutions like the Gymkhana, which, before Independence, banned “dogs and Indians” - to signal our social superiority over those without such memberships.

Which is especially rich considering these so-called clubs pay a pittance for land that would otherwise fetch several hundred crores in rent alone.

So, yes, I won’t miss the Gymkhana. I would, however, have preferred the DDA taking it over and running it like Siri Fort. But honestly, anything is better than the status quo at this point.

HT reports Sibal and AMS will represent, as speculated by LI. Shows LI gossip is #1.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/delhi-news/delhi-gymkhana-to-challenge-eviction-order-in-high-court-101779648321279.html

I don't have that many problems with the article. What I have a problem with is your thread title.

1. You do know that concepts like RCT etc have been used in economics? That Abhijit Banerjee, the nobel-winning economist, used these concepts? So where is all this "humanities heavy" stuff coming from exactly?

2. You do know that humanities departments (at good universities at least) have research methods training courses on statistical methods? So again, where is this coming from? Sure, some departments do this stuff in a more cursory way than others and sure, there's an argument for maybe teaching it more rigorously, and as far as I am concerned, sure there's an argument for getting statistics/econometrics teaching in at the undergrad level, but still, that doesn't create an environment for the acceptability of this language as a correct description.

3. Finally: For all this guy says, "personal experience" is an important part of the law. Indeed as Holmes says, law is built upon experience. So you cannot discount this stuff. And humanities captures experiences of people - the human condition. Be that philosophy, history, literature... whichever subject. So even to the extent that they aren't Maths focussed, they are important. And the best research often combines the best elements of the two. Look at Hamish Stewart's use of behavioural economics to show the wrong assumptions that Simmonds and Kramer were making in the debate about Fuller's philosophy! Is that not writing about the human condition? Does that not use empirical methods? So again, where's all this bias coming from? Please explain.

Tier 1 M&A partner here. I think it's always better to get a foot in the door and then work your way through opportunities. We routinely get from folks in forensics or any of the Big 4 or in house roles. It's not ideal but can get an interview. When some of these do convert there may be some discount to one's experience (I took a discount earlier in my career when I switched from tier 2/3 law firm to tier 1 because corp/M&A was only a part of what I'd do and hence exposure was less). So my take is:

1. If you can get into a tier 2/3 law firm, it would be an easier way to a tier 1 (if that's the ambition, not suggesting that it should be) than through legal forensics. If that's not a possibility, I'd suggest you take what you can and actively network then to find opportunities at a tier 1/2/3 law firm, if that's something that you'd still be interested in/have your heart set on it. Do try and land tier 2/3 roles than tier 1 - the exposure you'd get would be worth a lot and you perform better when you make a switch to a tier 1 later (generally, compared to someone starting at a tier 1 firms);

2. Not really but there could be some discount to your PQE; doesn't matter in the long run.

3. Take what you get, upskill, network, apply for interviews. You'll have 2-2.5 year window within which you can make a switch to another practice area at a tier 1/2/3 law firm (can't speak for others but I'm more likely to interview someone who's working somewhere (and is adjusting to work life from college life) than someone who chooses not work till something suitable comes by). The ability to work with people, whether you like them or not, is extremely valuable and highly underrated. There's also a chance that you might like what you do. Legal forensics might not sound glamorous but getting really really good at a niche while having a solid understanding of a variety of practice areas, for me, is the holy grail.

Lastly, and I'm not quite sure how to say this without it seeming like I'm discounting your worry but - things generally work out, they may not always go to plan but in retrospect, I wish I'd have worried less about all this stuff. Hang in there, it's generally a fun journey.

The words "good, healthy" and "boundaries" are words in a foreign tongue to commercial law firms in India. Please understand that and start life on that basis. Working in an Indian law firm means your health and your personal life go to die. Getting married? Be ready to be asked if it can be avoided/postponed to later in life. Mother's funeral? Carry the laptop, maybe you don't have to work, or wait... perhaps you actually do... sorry for your loss and all that mate, but business is business. Brother's wedding? Type an email related to a deliverable surreptitiously while the priest is chanting the mantras. Child's school is conducting a parents' evening where the French teacher wants to complain that little Johny's been ragging in class and the Maths teacher wants to complain that if his marks don't pick up, he'll fail the board exam? Let the kid's other parent deal with it unless you want the golden prison doors unlocked and to join the lines of unemployed up and down the country. Oh and don't forget - don't give a flying fuck about Johny's behaviour in French or marks in Maths except to the extent required to administer the obligatory tongue lashing and moderately hard slap on the arm (neither of which will ever happen, be honest with yourself, because no child, however badly behaved, should be tortured into staying up as late as you return home).

Whether or not you make that sacrifice or should do so are not questions on which I should give a judgment. That's just how the status quo is, nothing indicates that there'll be a change and therefore, you need to decide for yourself. You know that the foreign law firms ain't coming - they aren't stupid - so the Lalajis gonna rule us for a while longer. Simples.

Best of luck and have fun, either way.

Am glad you’re ok. As someone with quite a few years under the belt in this profession, i can vouch for the fact that it is indeed, as someone above says, a marathon. It’s build slowly, day by day. There are good days and then there are some not so good days. There are days where i still curl up and go to bed at 9 pm because i just want to. Depression is real. Get some professional help. It will help you smile and make the world a much better place.

Thank you for your support everyone. I am the OP, and I’m truly grateful for all your advice. Unfortunately, after posting the initial message, I did something I’m not proud of and could only check back again today. I am trying to do better and all your words of warmth and encouragement have given me considerable hope. Again, thank you so much for all your advice.

Brother. I left law at 22, came back at 28, left again at 32, came back at 40 (academia). So you're still too young to worry. If you need to, leave and try something else. If you fail or get bored with the new work try something new. Law is always here to stay, if not litigation then Academia or research. Why stress ? Indians have a risk averse mentality, we are scared to move away from something that doesn't work just because of a sunken cost fallacy. Look abroad, people change careers every 5-6 years, like complete change. So don't sweat it. YOLO.

Please see Rule 36 in Chapter II of Part VI of the BCI Rules. It very clearly says that "An advocate shall not solicit work or advertise, either directly or indirectly...". Cold-mailing of all sort intended to have the effect of expanding your practice is barred. Insofar as free legal services are concerned, Rule 36 refers to solicitation of "work" and 'advertising. Free legal services can be advertised and "work" can also be free. The provision nowhere states or implies that it is applicable only if work is sought in order to earn money. So even though Rule 36 is silent on this point, I would suggest being very cautious.

This ^ there are plenty of non-nlu people in tier-1 firms and at the top of the profession in general. Your hard work and character will outshine any college in the world. Focus on giving your best in college and make sure you develop good communication skills and have a good command over the language, these things go a loooooong way (and don’t forget to have some fun along the way - you’re young!). You haven’t been defeated yet, this is chapter 1!

You are not a failure, you managed to get into an NLU a T2 one at that, this achievement in itself puts you in the top percentile of legal aspirants in this country. Be kinder to yourself. The resilience you’re showing right now is admirable and an achievement in itself, please please give yourself some credit.

A job doesn’t define your worth as a human being. You’re young, give yourself time to figure things out.

Life is not a sprint, it’s a marathon. As long as you’re on your feet, things can always turn around, as long as you’re alive and kicking your world can always change for the better. There are things only you can give to yourself - one such thing is the realisation that you have time, you still haven’t graduated and even if you had graduated - in this tough market there’s no shame in not landing a job immediately.

Just keep going, you don’t have to win everyday - you only have to win once, and the next day could be the one where you find what you’re looking for. I’m so sorry you’re having to go through this but it does get better.

Please do consider the advice shared in the other comments regarding changing therapists and including some exercise - as a fellow survivor of poor mental health, these things do really help. Also if you haven’t already, try to broaden your criteria for the jobs you’re looking at - if you’re limiting your search to tier-1s or a specific practice for example then do consider other firms and practices - experience is so valuable in our profession and it’s much easier to switch jobs or practices once you have a job in hand.

Please take care of yourself, your life is more precious than anything else. I would love to see an update from you here down the line when you land a job so that we have the opportunity to applaud yet another achievement of yours. Rooting for you buddy, good luck and I’m sure it will all work out.

I don't want to give you wishy-woshy feel good advice here but all I'll say is this - get to work on something, anything - even if it means working for ₹10,000 a month at a local advocate's chambers. Make do with whatever best you can at the moment. At the same time, prepare for something bigger - maybe the CAT exam. I promise you, the day you stop expecting that something will magically change for the good is the day you actually start on your journey to a better life.

i know right now not getting a job seems like the end of the world but 5 years later it wont matter at all. you're very very young and so much time to figure out what you want to do and its absolutely fine. trust me when i say this - it wont matter in the long run if you were unemployed for a bit

Adopt a dog. I had suicidal tendencies but now I cant because I have to care for the dog. Btw, I am very successful by any standard career wise, married and still the feeling does not go away. You need love, connection and a strong purpose in life, only that keeps me in line away from depression.

You will make it, just know the bad feeling eventually passes if you want it to.

I'm so sorry for what you're going through. It sounds like you have a proper depression coupled with a very rough jobs situation. Whatever you do, please don't do anything you can't undo.

But, you should know that jobs and careers first of all, should not and do not define you. You are more than just a job or exam you get at the end of your studies. And the legal jobs market is tough for a lot of people right now, so I'm sure you are not alone. Also, no one is a failure for not getting a legal or any job right now; often it is circumstances beyond our control.

And one day it might turn out to be a blessing in disguise that you didn't get the jobs you are focusing on right now, and you will discover something or someone or somewhere that will make you happy one day (even if you don't have the perspective to see that right now or the ability to look into the future, obviously).

Take it one day at a time, be kind to yourself, eat well and sleep well as much as you can, maybe go for walks or exercise to clear your head, or meditation or drawing or writing or reading fiction or comics or something else you enjoy, and think of some different options or other jobs: are you interested in the law, for instance, or do you have other careers that might also interest you?

Take some time out from the law job rat race for a week or two and find some perspective.

And perhaps consider opening up to someone in your family or some other acquaintance from home, who might understand the situation you are in and give you some support, even if you currently think they might not? Or some advisers in college, etc, perhaps? Or have you considered another therapist or a doctor who can prescribe you anti-depressants might help? It could just be the chemicals in your brain right now that are giving you an especially hard time with the stress you are under, and that does suck.

Wishing you all the very best, you are much less alone than you think you are!

I am working on a guide it is going to take me some time, and end sems are also approaching so I cannot work on it for the time being, but I will make a super detailed post by 10th of June explaining how everything works and go into every nitty gritty of it. Also, as I said, I am trying to make my database public.

Now, commercialisation: it is a crapshot made using a sling owned by someone else.

The problem is that the market is flooded with AI wrappers doing the same thing, connecting the Legally India API, Claude API, or whatever cheap AI model they could find or got credits for from the company at the time. Now, if I do the same, I will be offering a subscription for ₹1500-3000 a month, but then the output quality will degrade so much that it will become useless for everyone and anyone using it, no one will be using it, plus I will still be making nothing but losses as the margins are very thin at this price point. It will be the 100th AI legaltech company, claiming to revolutionize the field.

To do something truly good, Harvey AI type, I will have to incorporate a company, hire people, and regular run of the mill engineers aren't going to cut it. I am talking about top-tier talent, SDE 3 and above. These guys are in extremely high demand, so they'll charge even more to enter something this un-proven with someone who doesn't have a background in tech, if at all. At the top, for building everything, what I did was essentially make a tent. To make an enterprise product, you're looking at a building made of concrete that follows western building code. Handling 20-30k concurrent enterprise users, load balancing, cyber security at that scale is not just beyond my expertise level, but my comprehension as well. Now the building part involves a frontend and a very robust backend that isn't held together by duct tape and my hopes, and actual contracts with data providers. On top of that, I will have to make a database of my own that will have to get much bigger, deeper and nearly error-free, and would require constant updating. Think of daily updates from every High Court and District Court, making my own headnotes, summaries and stuff like that. EC2/Lambda instances to run the whole thing, and for AI models, Google Vertex or AWS Bedrock, with region/cross-region inference due to data residency requirements. This, by the way, was the least of my problems, as it is manageable.

The bigger worry is that I will have to subscribe to either the reserved tier or Provisioned Throughput tier. What both of these mean is guaranteed compute capacity no matter the load, which sounds good, but there is a very huge but: I will have to pay for the capacity even if anyone is not using it, I will be paying the same amount regardless. And you cannot use demand-based tier because those institutions who are paying good money are not going to tolerate downtime because your cloud provider ran out of compute, which happens often enough that you need to be plan for it.

I had an idea where I thought about using audio streams from virtual court meetings, converting them to text, linking them with the cause list and making a near-instantaneous court status tracker and data collector. But that would have required permissions from courts, it would have been prohibitively expensive and prone to errors as well, though it would have led to a great database.

Harvey AI is also facing similar issues in countries where they don't have a lot of customers: hardware sitting idle in data centres, still paying for it, making losses. But they charge $1,200 per seat per month with a minimum of 20 seats, so that comes to roughly $288,000 annually, and you can somehow make it work at that price point. It also needs to be taken into consideration that they raised over a billion dollars and are still burning money. Their token cost is higher as well due to the exact same reason I mentioned above: dormant compute.

For compliance, in order to sell to any decent organisation internationally you will need GDPR compliance, DPDP for India, ISO, and last but not the least, SOC Type II. SOC Type II deserves some extra focus: it is very important, costly and time consuming. To put things into perspective, this is the kind of certification American companies spend thousands of dollars on, and an entire company was set up in the US that claimed to use AI in the process to hasten it, called Delve.co . These guys are doing nothing but fraud by forging reports, and start-ups knew and were complicit. This should explain how time consuming SOC Type II is.

Now, even if I somehow secured funding and cleared all these hoops before going bankrupt, this business model is unsustainable and very short-lived at best. These companies are entirely reliant on other companies for the most important part, that is intelligence. You can make servers with enough money, but you cannot spring up a model out of thin air. I know someone will say they can use an open weight model, but the problem is not just that you are banking on Chinese companies continuing to release them it is that you only need one geopolitical event, one export control regime, or one strategic pivot for that dependency to collapse overnight. The probability is not even the point. The consequence of being wrong with no fallback is. And as of now closed models are still better.

The free cash flow of hyperscalers is coming to an end, and as that comes down, the funding for the labs will also start to dry up. But it is actually worse than that. Hyperscalers are simultaneously bleeding FCF on capex and not getting the physical capacity they are paying for on schedule. Cancellations have quadrupled, the total capacity under construction has declined for the first time since 2020, and transformers and electrical equipment sourced from China are holding up billion-dollar projects by a year or more. The compute supply that labs depend on is more constrained than the headline spending numbers suggest, and the return on that capex keeps getting pushed out. You cannot keep up the pace for very long. Then, when they get hungry for more money, because you cannot just keep making losses when your funding pipeline has dried up, the first entities they will go after are these middlemen. Not because they are small consumers, but because their entire business depends on them, and that is exactly why they have no leverage.

Think of movie distributors and how they twist the arms of cinema chains. They know PVR is sitting with around 1,750 screens that need to play something on them. They know they are desperate, so they do that, even though film distributors need them too. Customers are also not dying to go to PVR because of OTT and Telegram, the alternatives don't have to be perfect they just have to be cheap and good, so they are getting hammered from the supply and demand side. I know institutional contracts don't work like that, but I believe this analogy gets what I am trying to get through. The problem is that once these companies start to get squeezed, they can either absorb it or offload it to the customer and risk them migrating to their in-house tool, and if more customers leave, your costs increase, thus creating this deadly cycle. They aren't able to turn a profit even now; the future looks bleak.

Another problem is that you're nothing but a middleman, and if anything the internet has taught us, it is that the middleman gets crushed sooner or later. To be more precise about it the specific thing that is lethal here is the narrowing capability gap. As frontier models get better at legal reasoning out of the box, and vibe-coding the delta between using Claude directly and using a wrapper built on top of it shrinks toward zero. Right now every company is focusing on coding benchmarks and making the best IDEs and CLI tools, but the day they conquer that market they will come for this one with all their engineering experience and might. Plus, as models are getting more capable, their ability to sell simple solutions is short-lived at best. Think of what happened to CRUD developers: you cannot bank on complexity being the only thing keeping you alive.

The only thing that can save them in the long term is government protection, which in my opinion is very unlikely, as these guys aren't necessarily serving a purpose. Though I can be wrong as well. The thing that can truly save them is proprietary data and in my opinion this is the only thing that can save them. By data I mean a corpus of cases with their own headnotes, books, reports, articles and stuff like that, and not having to rely on third-party services for data. The issues are so big that you cannot just solve them. Palantir benefits from AI because of how good their management software is and how deeply it is integrated everywhere. With AI wrappers, I don't think the same can be said. I am making a very crude prediction so take it with a grain of salt they have a life of 10-15 years in my opinion.

Lastly, and this is the least important point: I feel it is very wrong to charge for plumbing that someone can do themselves with some learning. But it is not very important, as I am not really faced with the choice here, so saying how I would have acted when presented with the opportunity is rather abstract. What I can do, and will do, is share what I have built.

It doesn't matter how many times you fail. Failure is what shapes us. First, remember that when you fail, you progress. I have already graduated from a reputed NLU. I secured admission to an NLU on my second attempt, but if you ask me now whether it was worth taking a gap year, personally, I’d say no. Sometimes, we fear accepting any option other than the one we have already decided for ourselves. The truth is, it is not us but the universe that knows what is best for us. Sometimes, it is not failure but a redirection that you need to look into rather than cry over lost battles.

Regardless, if you choose to retake CLAT, be confident in your own decision. This is not a one-off instance. From now on, you will have to make many other decisions that will literally shape your life. No one who is criticising or appreciating your decision will be there in the making of it. So, your decision and your will are all that matter. Further, whatever you choose, choose empathy for yourself. You are more than just a failure. This will help you recognise your worth and leverage it to build a successful life, both in terms of happiness and money.

Please take care!

Hi
I feel I am in a pretty good position to reply to this. I gave CLAT 3 times, first 2 times was getting NLU Sonipat, third time I landed in NALSAR. I was exactly where you were and I just want to tell you one thing. ITS OK. IT WILL WORK OUT.

I know you must have a lot of questions just eating away at you every single second. Just know, that feeling is normal. You'll eventually get over it (or atleast as close to it as one can get) Self-harm will not help you tackle these feelings. Soon you'll get a sense of stability back in your life, that's when it starts to get better.

There's a lot I want to just rant to you, all kinds of tips, all kinds of frustrations, just so many things that would others might not even spend a moment thinking about but hounds those who take double drops, but idt it will help you right now. I just hope this comment that I am leaving here will give you the strength to go on.

I'll still try to answer some of the questions you have asked, but if you still have any more doubts, questions or anything feel free to drop me a mail at burner.mail.9.3.4.1@gmail.com

Are double droppers discriminated or treated differently socially?

While on a surface level the answer is no, there are still some moments where you end up feeling bad about being a double dropper. Most of the times people would not mean it, but the words some people end up saying still hurts a lot. For those moments I only hope that the fact that there are so so so many like us all around us and even all over law colleges become a solace for you. But again most of the time people don't really care, and especially beyond the first year nobody cares about this stuff, everyone is too busy just trying to keep their own lifes normal that they don't have any energy for such stuff.

And as for if you get a good rank this time, will your previous failures still be relevant?
Well, those are your life experiences. They always stay with you, its upto you to not let them become some lingering negativities and to use them for your own benefit.

Now, as someone else in this thread already said, once you are in no opportunities are out of your hand.

I have just finished my second year, and am about to enter the third year, if anyone had told the me that had just gotten out after having written CLAT the second time and knowing that I had absolutely ruined that paper that I will be where I am today, I don't think I would have ever believed that. But life always has mysterious things in store for us. The highs and the lows that I have experienced after all of that just make it all seem just so... in the past. Trust me when I say it's not the end for you, YOU can still make your life into something that you don't regret. That's all that counts in the end.

Wishing things get better for you soon, and you look back to these moments of your life at your lowest points and use it to pick yourself up.

I'm a 2nd year law student, not a professional. This workflow/system is the result of my laziness and my lack of ability to trawl through material to complete assignments. For the first 3 semesters I was just downloading research papers and feeding them to Claude Sonnet with my writing sample. Output was decent for assignments, but I knew this isn't it, citations can be better, more depth can be covered.

This semester I had a mandatory graded moot and I used SCC Online, AIR and their likes for the first time, and the sheer inefficiency boggled me. This clearly wasn't going to work in the long term, I have 6 semesters left, which comes to around 36 assignments, and I need better. So I started with API reverse engineering. Not a huge problem for me, I have done this in the past, I have worked with documented trading APIs and I have been messing with websites for 3 years now, so I had a very decent working knowledge, knew how stuff works. It isn't particularly difficult either, all you need is a sense of architecture and curiosity; I'm a law student who came from a commerce background with a fascination for computers, so it's not difficult. I kept building on top of that SCC Online MCP, and now the problem is that there's so much to download and index that it is becoming difficult. Even setting up a cron job at this scale is proving to be difficult.

I am actively trying to make the offline corpus bigger, I aim to include as many reports as possible, Gazettes, Parliamentary Debates, laws that were drafted but never passed, articles from public journals in my DB. Right now it just has laws and a few hundred important and major reports. The problem is the majority of the stuff is not organised, so downloading, indexing and organising is a huge task. I hit a wall multiple times and still hit one with every new source, but it is well worth it. I use this solely for assignments, as I was never interested in moots and research papers, so I am not hurrying like my career depends on it.

That said, I am trying to fix all the errors and make the DB public, access to structured data shouldn't be a bottleneck for anyone. I cannot make the MCPs public for obvious reasons. It took me about 2 weeks with a lot of work, around half a dozen all-nighters and once I worked 8 hours straight to put things in perspective, and that's with my background; the part that took time was trying to come up with ways to improve it. From scratch with no background, 2 to 4 hours a week, it should take anyone willing 5 to 6 months. It is a little difficult to make and work with, but it is a complete game-changer for anyone willing to put in the work. Any small law firm or solo lawyer can and should be able to adopt this as well once it is more stable and bigger.

I'm also working on a model interconnect so ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Kimi and Deepseek can debate each other and find flaws in the output. This would strengthen the reasoning capability significantly, and the best part is it would still be cheap af, though it is proving more difficult than I thought.

This is also better than commercial tools because it is not bound by a lot of the institutional stuff they are bound by, liability hedging, locked-in models, fixed pipelines. They also cannot just reverse-engineer APIs, download stuff off the internet and call it a day, and they have to build something sustainable as a business. Since you're paying for the subscription of AI services directly, you get far better value, as the API itself is much costlier, and after the overhead of the company you're either paying very high prices or paying for it in the quality.

The best part about this entire system is that you're always in control of everything, the reasoning capacity, data, model type, costs, the offline corpus, how you want the output to look like. The entire thing is practice-agnostic, you can fetch data, make a database and start it. Plus the custom instructions in CLI are followed much more thoroughly than they are in the web. It is cheap as well, especially if you use opencode go.

If anyone wants to build something like this and needs technical help, feel free to reach out at LIunofficialtechhelp.contact@proton.me. Do not ask me for the MCPs, I won't be sharing them for obvious reasons, and don't try to buy them either, you'll be wasting your time. I can guide you through building your own, but sharing mine crosses a line I'm not willing to cross. I'll be lurking on the thread for a few days as well if anyone has doubts.

I fully agree with the above observations. I think as someone who began their career with boutiques and is sort of shifting towards a full-service law firms, I particularly do want to reiterate a few of the above points -

1) PAY - It is definitely less than the average corporate pay. In fact, your peers in corp will always earn more, even if you are breaking into Tier 1 [at least I believe so; I could have negotiated my own deal poorly lol]. At 4 PQE, a lot of my friends have been struggling to crack 1L a month (in hand), while corp/lit people seem to be getting it quicker.

2) OVER-SPECIALIZATION - So Boutiques largely run the game in terms of prosecution (at least in Delhi), and also (owing to the SME business they take up as opposed to big ticket clients that a Tier 1 looks for) do see a lot of highly tricky cases. But they also overly-compartmentalize. In fact, prosecution itself is broken down into: contention and non-contentious. I have spent time at firms where I literally just did oppositions or prosecutions or C&Ds. In full-service, there are two firms (in my mind) which are attempting to also take on the prosecution game - KCO and FM. The name of the game with these firms is volume, even if it comes at the cost of lower prices. Result: the usually under-staffed associate team takes the brunt. But, owing to being full-service, they often get work outside of prosecution/litigation/core IP as well (such as metrology advisory, even a little bit of data privacy compliance). Personally, I believe I should have pursued a more general role than IP prosecution, as it is highly specific.

3) Lack of feedback: If you venture into IP prosecution. I have two specific gripes I want you to know: 1) In 2026, I believe a substantial number of attorneys who have made it to the top, came-up at a time where IP laws were a little too lax. I thus find my faith waning a lot in such partners (usually people who have only done prosecution and are now partners in prosecution teams). I actually kind of blame allowing trade mark agents into prosecution. It's just a shitty mix where the attorneys in this field feel like more sophisticated TM agents without the rigour of law. E.g. - It's an entire industry who functioned on putting a Stamp Paper of INR 100 for allllll POAs without any of them even once consulting the Stamp Duty Act, ever - An.Entire.Industry. 2) TM Registry has a loooong waiting period. You can initiate an opposition and then have to wait like 6 years for an answer to come your way on merits, with no interim hearings, no update, nothing. Thus, the problem? You have a partner you can't entirely trust and a system which is not quick enough for you to truly see if your arguments bear any merit in the actual game. In some existential sense, I believe that not a growth has happened for me owing to that. I do read a lot and constantly attempt to get better sectoral knowledge and hope to upskill myself. I have also had good partners, so touch wood, I don't feel lost. But this feeling is there.

P.S - I must admit, I am writing this at a time of my life where I am frankly a little embittered with IP Prosecution and am actively moving away from it to a more transactional IP space. I know people who are having a lot of fun in this space too. No work is bad work in law if you're willing to think your way through it like a lawyer - meticulous and forensic. So don't take this to mean IP prosecution is a dead route.

P.S.S - My career (as on date) has been fully Delhi. It is possible other cities have better experiences. But I largely Delhi to be ahead in IP.

P.S.S - About the Feedback Loop. I must also admit, the TM Registry is becoming more vigilant, more stringent, and better. Thus, in 3 years time this comment might have been ancient and unusable to fingers crossed

Here's what I've been running-

I reverse-engineered the APIs of SCC Online, Westlaw Classic, and Westlaw Asia, and made MCPs out of them. You need a subscription, as it's based on cookie-based authentication replay, but it works. You're kind of violating ToS, so don't abuse it, or else those guys will abuse you, and you don't want that. Don't try to scrape any of the closed DBs either. Thomson Reuters went rabid when ROSS Intelligence tried to pull it off; they had VC backing and still got crushed. You don't stand a chance. The MCP is also significantly faster than the actual SCC Online website; search and fetch take a fraction of the time, just to give you a sense of how well it performs. I use Playwright instances for mass-scale downloading of data and cookie capture. The Playwright instance has a keep-alive function; it simply keeps visiting pages every few minutes, and once a cookie is captured it stays valid for a good amount of time. Make sure to enforce proper rate limits, or you'll nuke your personal or institutional subscription.

You can do the same with AIR Online and The Hindu. I tested AIR Online with curl and direct API requests and it worked, but I didn't find much value in it, so I didn't bother adding it. I didn't try The Hindu, but the console does reveal an API key, so it should be theoretically possible. Added an Indian Kanoon MCP using their official API. Plus, there's a very popular library whose MCP you can use by donating to them, so it fetches books as well.

For the offline corpus, I downloaded every piece of legislation and report I could find, then rented some GPUs from E2E Networks (they're India-based and the rates are reasonable; note that you'll need to complete KYC on E2E before you can spin up compute). Use the PyTorch environment. It's the cleanest base to build the OCR pipeline on. Ran OCR first with Tesseract, which is very fast, and then for the files that had bad recognition I used Chandra LLM OCR, though its speed varies a lot (pro tip: make sure you're using vLLM and not HF). An L4 is sufficient for Tesseract, but for Chandra you'll want an A100. Don't waste time trying to run Chandra or Surya OCR on E2E's L4 instances; they have serious driver issues.

Structured everything into an FTS5 SQLite DB (FTS5 because it gives you better search capabilities), made an MCP out of it, and connected all of them to Claude Code CLI and opencode. There's a hierarchy in how the systems are queried: one is checked first, and if that doesn't satisfy the query, the next one is hit, and so on. The best part of this setup is that the cases are saved in .txt format, so the AI can actually read them, unlike what these sites do by serving non-machine-readable PDFs.

Modern frontier models can either handle 60-70 agents at once or, failing that, give you a 1-million-token context window. For instance, Kimi K2.6 can launch up to 300 agents but caps at a 256k token window, whereas Deepseek v4 Pro offers the full 1M context and can also launch multiple sub-parallel agents, just not as many as Kimi. Either way, you can research books, cases, and reports all at once with zero issues. That said, having 1M context doesn't mean you should fill it up; retrieval quality degrades as the window fills, so treat it as headroom, not a target. Also, don't try any parallel agent tomfoolery with Claude; you'll burn through your limit in under three minutes. Once the cases and material are saved, one agent is deployed per file, each saving its output in a separate folder in Markdown format, and finally one agent synthesizes everything. Opus 4.7 is the best pick for the final synthesis: it's the smartest model out there, and it'll consume very few tokens because the cheaper agents will have already chewed everything down and added the digestive aids. A final agent then checks the synthesis. The possibility of errors slipping through is low but real, which is exactly why humans still exist in the loop. Use Obsidian for reading the Markdown output, and make sure the Markdown is formatted properly so it converts cleanly to .docx via Pandoc.

On tooling, I suggest using opencode CLI, as you get access to opencode go, which is quite cheap. Claude Code eats tokens like anything; to do anything meaningful you'll need the $100/12000~ Max 5x plan, but ₹2000 pro plan will work if used cautiously. Codex CLI is also quite good with ChatGPT Plus. The usage limits are pretty generous even after they constrained them, especially compared to Claude. This workflow works best with CLI tools, not the apps of these platforms; I haven't tried the apps much, as it's just easier to work with these in the CLI. Also, adjust the reasoning capacity of the models based on the complexity of the work. Running Opus 4.7 on max reasoning will burn through your quota in minutes. Make sure you're using a custom directory and have custom instructions, such as telling the model to rely only on the supplied material, produce a review, and give the exact source.

A round of research can take anywhere from 30 minutes to 2 hours, depending on how many issues crop up, since the whole thing is still held together by duct tape, hopes, and wishes; that said, most issues resolve themselves in minutes. As for build time, I had a working knowledge of APIs and system architecture, which sped things up manifold. AI in the CLI also helps a lot with the build itself: even if you just hand it a HAR file, it'll reconstruct the API payloads for you. Took some doing, but scarce material and slogging through archaic portals stopped being the bottleneck.

Tasks wildly depend. Matters, based on listings/dates can pile up. Certain days are slow, others are extremely tedious with a lot of nervousness for filing your rejoinder in time before the filing department shuts shop, or if matters are clashing and your arguing counsel is not present in your courtroom. (Bombay folks can relate to commuting from CR. 16 to CR.16A) Your most typical task as an A0 and A1 will be between diligence of documents, research and/or support work for seniors like drafting.

In contrast to this, there are NO slow days in Delhi Disputes if you are in a decent-sized terms in terms of filing. Days which seem slow actually bother you and you check and recheck your case-diary entry list or calendar to verify in case you missed a meeting and will be blasted for it by your seniors.

SA1 at T1 here. It will definitely be difficult, but always be kind to yourself. Many people will drag you down, so you shouldn't add to that. Just keep working hard, avoid personal discussions (will bite you in the ass if your peers view you as competition), and be polite to people. And I can't stress this enough - be nice to the receptionists, the IT teams, the admin teams, helpers, etc. They will genuinely make your life easier.

Also, READ. READ a lot! newspapers + updates relevant to your field + anything interesting. It's always nice to be able to contribute to general chats your team may have, plus your seniors and partner will definitely notice (you don't have to chuck information down their throats, of course xD)

Dress neatly. Brand doesn't matter, but how you present yourself does matter.

Take notes during every matter discussion. Always walk into your partner's cabin WITH a notebook. This will help you clarify things and avoid mistakes while recollecting matter discussions.

Hope this helps. Good luck!

-A0s and A1s, depending on the teams, are burdened with diligence, basic research and/or delegating interns to do work that their SAs have asked them to do. A lot of the things you have mentioned will be part of your daily work as a Disputes Associate. Depending on the firm, you will also be involved in publication of articles w.r.t. precedents or general research publications.

-Drafting and all happens at all levels and even team heads give their say in the final draft more often than not (micromanagement level differs). It is NOT a one-day job unless its an urgent application. In a sane disputes team (there are less than you'd like to think), the work goes upto a Partner who reverts to the counsel/client firm and back, if necessary, for further revisions. Basic memo work is handled by juniors.

-In smaller firms, associates may get more court exposure and directly participate in briefing unlike T1s who take senior counsels just to mention or adjourn.

-Partners in these firms usually have less experience than a fresher at an advocate's chamber. If you dream of building face value as an arguing counsel, Disputes firms are definitely not it (with a few exceptions who actually became senior counsels themsleves lol). A lot of partners/senior partners CANNOT argue or are NOT CONFIDENT in arguing. (FYI, if you are a law student sneering at this, you'll realize how difficult it actually is to make relevant submissions before a High Court Bench.)

-In Bombay, some old-school firms tend to send freshers for administrative/compliance work before the Prothonotary (OS Registrar).

-Urgent tasks land on your plate all the time, especially when arbitration matters come up.

-For a lot of budding litigators, the answer for your last question is a resounding 'NO'. Most disputes work is clerical at junior levels and becomes briefing/solicitor work at senior levels. If you don't mind being a briefing counsel as part of your career trajectory, then disputes is good because you get paid better than litigation at the start. Cannot say the same for litigators with 5+ years of experience who usually start outearning their corporate peers by then. This curve, however, is very steep. Not every litigator can survive the court experience. Many prefer stability (LOL) compared to the complete uncertainty of litigation.

Hi, even if the partner is coming out to put a statement, anyone else disclosing any information that can lead to the identification of the child, such as linking the post here, would be held liable under POCSO. Might be best to remove this thread altogether since every new comment is just trying to provide identifying information and no other discussion is taking place @mods

Girl, your post is making people call me and ask if it’s written by me! Imagine how frequently this is happening!

I had to search and find this to actually read it.

The person doing it is thinking that I am the one doing this - some guilty conscience.

Take care - ask your associates for help and I’m sure someone will - communicate politely over call and tell them that you don’t want harms way when it is preventable.

Take good care and all good energy to you.

🫡 ♥️🙏

Truly inspiring!

Note that his rank was 171, so he did not need to bank on quota. A pure merit case. And he’s not even from a privileged family, as he says in the interview when asked about his parents.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=YmAjeFQiZmI&pp=ugUEEgJoadIHCQkDCwGHKiGM7w%3D%3D&ra=m