Your colonialised mind can not fathom that beyond a point all universities are more or less the same. This is the exact problem with NLU mindset. You’d say NLS > any other uni without actually putting any stats on how it “improves the quality of a graduate” and then Harvard > other uni without explaining why. These universities are old and have a good alumni base, that’s it. They don’t produce better students. My friend who couldn’t get into a single Indian law school is studying law from Yale, it’s that easy to get in, if you have money.

You are making the claim without substantiating how Harvard or NLS as an institution “improves the quality of a student” when compared to JGLS or what you call “tier 2 NLUs”. I know a lot of people who went to Harvard and CLC and I know a lot of people from the latter, who are better legal professionals than the former.

Actually, you made a whole lot of assumptions and are now trying to pass them off as mine. I never said NLSIU is the best or even that NLUs are better than Jindal. On the contrary, you are the one who's been claiming that Jindal is better. I have just said that I do not find that there is any difference between the graduates of Jindal and those of NLUs. Therefore, whenever people ostensibly from Jindal claim hete that they have got everything better, I take that with a pinch of salt, because even after getting everything better than others, if they cannot become better lawyers, then what's the use of all of it? Which made you come up with a whole lot of comparison, bringing foreign universities into the equation and so on. So maybe you should revisit your own assumptions instead of trying to pass them off as others'.

Your friend is pursuing an LLM at Yale, aren't they? Getting into the JD programme is extremely difficult especially if they did their undergrad from India and getting a 173+ on the LSAT is a huge task. I have a hard time believing that they could not crack the relatively straightforward CLAT but achieved that task.

Yale LLMs on the other hand, like most LLMs, are much easier to get into, simply because LLMs are geared towards international students and are therefore money shops. I will admit it is not as easy as UK universities (which let's be honest, would take any half decent student willing to pay the full tuition), but I'd much rather have you clarify this before you pass your friend off as an example in any respect.

Honestly, one cannot rule out the possibility that a PR stunt is going behind all these 'JGLS comments'. Duh, there are always some peeps pushing the narrative that JGLS > NLUs.

Otherwise, some butthurt grads are still lamenting over the fact that they couldn't make it to an NLU.

Honest advice: don't go to an NLU. Go for Amity or GLC. Not only are studies easy, but you will have time to work part-time in your dad's chamber and get excellent experience, far superior to any NLU student. NLUs are far away from the city and are also strict on attendance. Children of some of the most eminent lawyers in Delhi have studied at Amity, such as Arun Jaitley and Mukul Rohatgi. As for GLC, children of A-list law firms in Mumbai have attended it. If you feel conscious about not having a "brand name" college, do an LLM abroad after you finish. There have been enough people at Amity and GLC who have been to good college abroad, especially those who have interned with Supreme Court judges and top lawyers (which I guess you can manage). You can even consider two LLMs: one from the UK and on from the US.

Another option is to do your LLB or JD from abroad. Many have done this, e.g. Rishabh Shroff (son of Cyril Shroff), Akhil Sibal (son of Kapil Sibal) etc etc. Thee days NLUs have a conversion course, so you can do that, if you want an NLU tag (i.e. LLB abroad + additional study at an NLU to quality in India).

Trust me, this is a better route. NLUs may be helpful for those from middle-class backgrounds who lack contacts and access, but you don't fall in that category. Don't board a train when you have a place ticket!

My only objection is the presumption that established people send their kids to JGLS / non NLUs willingly. If you know any of these star kids closely, you will know that the ones not studying in NLUs are the ones who could not clear CLAT. If you want to confirm, you can either ask them for their CLAT scores. If you know about the star kids who joined between 2010-2014, do check out the CLAT Merit Lists for those years. You will find a lot of familiar names.

You have kids of ministers, lawyers, judges etc in those merit lists. If your friend graduated between 2015-2020, their clat score will be out there in the website of Jagran /Lawctopus/ Nalsar etc.

CLAT became opaque after around 2014. So there on, you will probably never get to know about the results. Such a shame they made the merit list private. It makes the system so opaque.

I think that's only for individual NLUs and those would show only people who paid the 50k and opted for the counselling. If your rank is 10000, your name won't show on any list, nor would it if it's 5, but you don't pay the 50k. So verifying it for an outsider is indeed difficult now. Consortium no longer publishes the full list of 60k students with marks.

JGLS is a superior choice in every way to NLUs if you are from a privileged family and are assured anyway of a good job . The amenities are a lot more luxurious (food court, swimming pool etc). The crowd will be more to your taste. There will not be cut-through competition at NLUs and there will be people you probably know already from before. You will also get a chance to go to different countries on semester exchange. The admin will also give you more attention than NLU admin.

See Alma Matters on Netflix: that's the crowd at NLUs.

Then why do NLU kids work like mules and suck popsicles that aren’t meant to be sucked to get into prestigious law firms? What does it change when you get into a tier 1 law firm when compared to a tier 2 law firm? If better facilities and affordability of more luxury is your answer then your comment is baseless and you’re a hypocrite.

And the more liberal environment has actually helped students grow. A 10 year old university is being ranked in the top 5 and in the QS. Students have their own startups, law firms and even collaborative ventures with students of international affair, public policy and PGDM programme. They are getting scholarships are being admitted to top universities worldwide. We literally have celebrity professors (national and internationally) teaching us who recommend students for some of the most unique internship and job opportunities.

Stop with your negative PR bud, why do NLU kids like so much of unpaid labour? What is your criteria of “getting better”? Let the kid decide on his own. Be honest and tell him about everything that is better. If he got the money, he’d go for it.

All the 'achievements' of JGLS grads that you boast of vaguely (without any supporting stats etc), NLU grads have already achieved and more. Your deliberate attempt to portray that NLU students only join law firms is laughable. And for those who are claiming equality if JGLS with Harvard should definitely get their brains checked. The fact remains that there is absolutely no difference in quality between a student who has graduated from a top NLU, and one who has graduated from JGLS. Not in any field of law whatsoever. If you claim otherwise, show some evidence first. I am not claiming that JGLS grads are worse, you are the one who's claiming that they are better, so the onus is on you to prove that. Assuming that both are equal in terms of quality, it is a logical question to ask then what is the value addition of all these extra facilities? Flaunting the QS rank won't help, because it does not measure graduate quality in any way.

See, that’s the point, you come and give out opinions to freshers without even knowing an ounce about JGLS. These are facts established in the area of legal education, I plead legallyindia to mark my comment as “fact contested” if anything in there is dubious. Kian knows, infact even you do but you’d ignore because you’re so full of your hierarchy.

Quote:

And for those who are claiming equality if JGLS with Harvard should definitely get their brains checked

Tbh you need a rebirth because you are still stuck in colonial era “gora hai to better hoga”. You need to explain why? Instead of asking people to get their brains checked, maybe explain how does Harvard as an institution produce better law graduates than top Indian law schools. I am not talking about where people end up, because it’s one of the oldest law schools with strongest alumni group, it gets some of the best talent in the world. But how would it have been different if the same talent came to a university which provides nearly equal opportunities? And if you believe that harvard provides more international exposure to kids, then you’re practically saying that Jindal is better than NLS because more collaborations with international universities? You need explain how Harvard as an institution (an not a brand) contributes in creating a better lawyer when compared to someone graduating from a lets say university placed on 100th rank in QS rankings.

Also I am not comparing Jindal with Harvard, someone else which can’t organise a proper exam is anyways busy claiming itself as the Harvard of the east. There are other obvious benefits with Harvard but what I am rebutting here is that how can institution beyond a point create students with unequal lawyering capacity?

Exactly, I agree there’s no difference in quality between a student who has graduated from a top NLU, and one who has graduated from JGLS. But you insisted that there’s a possibility, i am asking how? Now why did the Harvard thing seem so absurd to you? It’s because Harvard facilitates more than what other universities may do. There library is better and the opportunities they float are better. Which is exactly my point about Jindal, when you’re paying more money, you’re paying it for stuff that you won’t get in an NLU. It’s okay man, I am not judging NLUs, they literally fund themselves and get nothing from the state and they have achieved a lot with less funds. JGLS has more funds and it provides more academic and subsidiary services for the money that you pay. Harvard doesn’t magically make you a “better lawyer”, your perception of Harvard stems from the fact that it facilitates more services and opportunities than a lot of other universities. That is what you for. All this time you’ve been proving me right.

I never claimed JGLS is better than any NLU, all I claimed is that you get better facilities because you’re paying more. Even what you’ve classifies a tier 3 NLU could be better than JGLS if a student does it right. But same stands for NLS too. After a point it’s all about the facilities and services that you pay for. And it’s on this kid’s wish and whim to weigh those services against his wants, needs and family finances and then make an informed decision.

You are still going on about Harvard and Jindal? Okay then. The difference is in faculty quality for one. The former hand picks their faculty who are top of the line. The latter takes in a few marquee names and a host of freshers with a foreign LLM without any screening. I am aware of that, because I know some of them. The difference is also in terms of student quality. Hardly 5000 people appeared for LSAT last year, and people getting through top tier NLUs still don't choose Jindal as the first option. Nobody who has studied or taught at a top NLU and then at Jindal would claim that they have had better classroom experience at the latter. One can go on. Your argument that Harvard is what it is only because of age and alumni network is ridiculous and frankly, sounds like sour grapes. There are older institutions in the world, and if the Harvard alum are well established, it means that they are good, which in turn is at least partly because of what they learnt at the university. Jindal student output can't even claim to be better than NLUD, which is a contemporary university. So again, with all those facilities and five times the money, what is there to show for it? Keep thinking that Jindal provides an edge to its students over any other institution, that's your prerogative. There is no evidence to support that. And tying up with foreign universities for exchange programmes doesn't make you equal to those universities. You want me to say that Jindal has got better exchange programmes than NLSIU? Sure, that's a fact. You want me to say that Jindal students are getting and using those programmes to become better lawyers than those from NLSIU? Show evidence of that, and I'll readily agree to it, not before that. The fact remains that today, if someone has an option between NLSIU and Jindal, and chooses the latter, they would end up spending a lot more money, but would have precious extra to show for it in terms of legal education, other than the luxuries. If they are okay with paying the money for that, then that's their choice. But claiming institutional superiority of Jindal to lure them in is in bad taste.

Incomplete and unsubstantiated data, what kind of legal education are they providing to you at NLUs but I’ll just destroy you with some

1) Regarding Faculty:- You could have cited so many criteria for justifying your claim of Harvard superiority but you chose the primary one to be faculty? Seriously? This is what Jindal is known for. I mean atleast in India, Jindal has got the best faculty, no law school would argue against that. Let me cast a very few completely randomly picked names for you:-

Prof. Michael C. Davis:- LEGEND (https://jgu.edu.in/jgls/faculty/michael-c-davis/)

Professor Shaun Star: This guy literally represented English Premier League teams. He was yesterday awarded the Australia India Impact Award at the India Australia Business & Community Awards Gala 2021. The Australia India Impact Award recognises an individual's contribution to the bilateral relationship. (https://jgu.edu.in/jgls/faculty/shaun-star/)

Prof Agnieszka Gora: She is quite literally a sitting judge in Poland (https://jgu.edu.in/jgls/faculty/agnieszka-gora-blaszczykowska/)

Prof. Raphael Lorenzo Aguiling Pangalangan: A living legend in the field of Public International Law, his father Raul Pangalangan is a judge in International Criminal Court and multiple high end arbitrations too. (http://www.jgu.edu.in/jgls/faculty/prof-raphael-lorenzo-aguiling-pangalangan/)

Prof. (Dr.) Kenneth Holland: (http://www.jgu.edu.in/jgls/faculty/dr-kenneth-holland/)

Prof. (Dr.) Ramin Jahanbegloo: In April 2006 Dr. Jahanbegloo was arrested in Tehran Airport charged with preparing a velvet revolution in Iran. He was placed in solitary confinement for four months and released on bail. He is the winner of the Peace Prize from the United Nations Association in Spain (2009) for his extensive academic works in promoting dialogue between cultures. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramin_Jahanbegloo)

Prof. Gudmundur Eiriksson: He was a member of the United Nations International Law Commission from 1987 to 1996 and a Judge at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea from 1996 to 2002. He was a member of Icelandic delegations in numerous international forums, including the Council of the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organization where he served as President from 1984 to 1988. (http://jgu.edu.in/jgls/faculty/gudmundur-eiriksson/)

These are just some of them, I haven’t even mentioned all. I don’t know if you noticed that I haven’t even mentioned the likes of Upendra Baxi, B.B. Pande, M.P. Singh, B.S. Chimni, Justice Swantenter Kumar, A. Francis Julian because you only suck up to colonialism.

Also you’re a hypocrite because I am quoting you from comment 2.1.1.1 wherein you said (in relation to Jindal)

Quote:

Better faculty + infra + exposure = same students

Now in Jindal’s case better faculty doesn’t matter and in Harvard’s case faculty is your primary criteria. Also you are praising Jindal’s faculty earlier in 2.1.1.1 but here you are criticising it. Hypocrisy much? As I suggested later, don’t go for a moot please, do your university a favour.

But right since your yourself agreed that Jindal’s faculty is better and in while justifying Harvard’s superiority your primary criteria is faculty, it can be easily assumed that you are insinuating that Jindal >>> any NLU in India. These are not my words, these are yours. I don’t believe this, in fact argued better against jindal than you have. I don’t know if you know, we have 3 professors and 1 TRIP fellow in each class. The professors that I have mentioned are senior professors who teach us and are accompanied by two junior professors who are fresh graduates from top universities in the world. That’s the quality we are talking about, I never said JGLS is better than Harvard but by applying you theory it is certainly the best in India.

2) Quote:

people getting through top tier NLUs still don't choose Jindal as the first option

How do you say that? I have a lot of batch-mates who didn’t want to get into a top NLU, in-fact thanks to NRI quota, it’s really easy to get into one. There are people who have joined jindal cracked clat and left jindal too, these are people with finanacial issues. AIR 38 of CLAT 2020 (Shivansh studied at Jindal for a year) and that speaks about the quality of students. We have a lot of students on scholarships and most students who have achieved 98+ percentile on LSAT usually have offers from top NLUs but choose to come to Jindal. We have a good 60 students who choose Jindal over NLUs (again unlike you I am not insinuating Jindal is better than any NLU), they’ve got scholarships and they’re happy to stay here for their own reasons.

Quote:

Nobody who has studied or taught at a top NLU and then at Jindal would claim that they have had better classroom experience at the latter.

Please introduce me to this person because I’ve seen people dying to teach at Jindal and I don’t see any reason for celebrity professors (international faculty) to say in the village of Haryana earning in rupees and not euros and also enduring “a pathetic classroom experience”. You can’t make bogus claims, cite this data.

Quote:

Your argument that Harvard is what it is only because of age and alumni network is ridiculous and frankly, sounds like sour grapes. There are older institutions in the world, and if the Harvard alum are well established, it means that they are good, which in turn is at least partly because of what they learnt at the university

No they are well established because there were no universities in the world when they were getting established. There was a lack of universities, especially like Harvard with state of the art facilities. Read your history

Quote:

Jindal student output can't even claim to be better than NLUD, which is a contemporary university. So again, with all those facilities and five times the money, what is there to show for it? Keep thinking that Jindal provides an edge to its students over any other institution, that's your prerogative. There is no evidence to support that

Well Indian government and QS Ranking don’t believe what you said her but i do I never claimed jindal is better than NLU D. Jindal has better faculty and infra. But it was you who is indicating that jindal is better because it has better faculty not me. You understand the chronology of what happened here? You were doing negative unpaid pr here on a post completely unrelated to Jindal where i happened to accidentally stumble upon. To which I replied that at jindal you get better faculty, exposure and infra in exchange for money to which you replied that these things don’t mean anything because GOOD UNIVERSITIES PRODUCE BETTER QUALITY OF STUDENTS, i rebutted this assumption and never did I say that Jindal is better than any university. In fact my argument has been that beyond a point, university can not produce better student, it can only facilitate. Now when asked you’ve changed your argument and are back to dogging Jindal, but what about your initial argument, how does a university produce better students?

Quote:

The fact remains that today, if someone has an option between NLSIU and Jindal, and chooses the latter, they would end up spending a lot more money, but would have precious extra to show for it in terms of legal education, other than the luxuries. If they are okay with paying the money for that, then that's their choice. But claiming institutional superiority of Jindal to lure them in is in bad taste.

Seriously? Go read your comments please you’re looking like an epitome of hypocrite.

Please don't start speaking about other's ability to moot, your own display of lack of logic or shocking. You seem to conflate two different arguments altogether for your argument's sake and can't even understand nuances.
About faculty, first of all, I said the faculty at Harvard is better than faculty at JGLS. If you want to contest that, please go ahead and make yourself a laughing stock.
About you misquoting my statements to support your argument, I never said the faculty at Jindal is the best in India. The sentence that you quoted is one that I actually was sceptical about, hence the badly balanced equation end. Clearly, that went over your head. Maybe you need 3 professors and one fellow to hammer things into your brain.
About you name-dropping 8-9 people, that point has already been made about marquee hires by me earlier. At the same time, you have close to 300 faculty and more than 800 students including the 3 year llb batch. The point that I made about a large number of fresher LLMs making up a bulk of faculty strength is also accurate. I won't start naming those people, you can check your faculty list. The lack of screening is also very real, any academic in this country who has applied or been invited by Jindal knows that. If you are a student, then you are unlikely to be aware of it.
As for your claim that academics are dying to teach at Jindal, only people who have got no connection with academia make such stupid claims. There are plenty of good faculty at the NLUs whom Jindal has tried to poach in vain. Those who do go to Jindal do so for two main reasons, one is the salary, which is the highest among all law schools in the country. The other is that they get research perks. Nobody goes there to get better classroom experience. Maybe you should ask your faculty why they say so in their familiar circles instead of demanding that I name people who said that.
Even more importantly, let us accept your argument as valid that Jindal's faculty is the best at present in India. We again return to the familiar question then, why aren't Jindal students doing ostensibly better than other students in any particular field? Shouldn't law students, when taught by better teachers, become better lawyers and professionals? The day you can give a logical answer to that question would be the day that Jindal's claim to being a better and more superior institution not meet with ridicule.

Oh, and by the way, Harvard's better faculty actually produce better graduates who get an edge on an average in most fields over others. Reputation of faculty is cemented by the students whom they teach, and not only by their CVs. Research scholars and teachers are not one and the same. As for your argument about a lot of JGLS students having chosen it over NLUs, anecdotal examples won't cut it. Since CLAT doesn't release the full merit list anymore, it is difficult to conclusively establish either your point or mine, but mine has the advantage to be supported by the fact that last year only 5000 people sat for LSAT and close to 55000 for CLAT. The numbers don't lie. You've got a humongous batch size, very little quality control about student intake, and very little screening of non-marquee faculty. Does this mean that JGLS doesn't have brilliant students and very good faculty? Not at all, they certainly have both. Just like NLUs. Just like both have got their own share of not so good students and sub par faculty. If you are not arguing that JGLS is better than NLUs, and I'm certainly not arguing that it is any worse, then what are we arguing about exactly? My only point so far has been that students who have opted for NLUs and JGLS respectively are found to do equally well in life after graduation in any sphere of law, so people not spending the extra money in the hope that it would give them access to some superlative legal education, aren't making a bad choice. Minus the infra though. I completely agree that JGLS is better than any other law school in terms of infra, and people willing to pay extra to enjoy those comforts are welcome to their choice.

Your personal ad hominem attacks I would ignore because they aren't really worth responding to.

Working like mules is supposed to be your comeback? Your superior education is showing. Maybe you should ask your celebrity faculty how much effort they used to put while studying, because so far, one of the main peeves that good JGLS faculty usually have about their students is that the latter just do not work hard enough.

Damn this guy’s right! My bad! NLU Shimla >>>> Harvard law school fffs, a harvard degree would be like 10 times what an NLU Shimla degree would cost, and after law it’s the same student, what is the degree adding even? NLU Shimla even has an RCC which would help you get placed but after Harvard you’ll have to find a job for yourself.

My life has been a lie. I feel bad about myself now. Why didn’t I have a mentor like you?

If you can't spot the quality difference between a Harvard grad and one from HPNLU, then that's your problem. If you are under the impression that any such difference exists between a JGLS grad and, say, an NLSIU grad, then that too is your problem. The results are out there for everyone to see.

4.1 is correct - was at GLC in another era & I have had a SC Judge' kid as a fellow; likewise, some other students also had strong law firm connects.
At least in that era at GLC, no one cared.
Caveat: it could also be because we were not residential folks and were already trying to hustle through various law firm jobs; so our interaction with fellow students was much less compared to a typical NLU cohort staying at campus, full time.

I wish all those people who had been lamenting on other threads about why JGLS always gets a bad name would come and visit this one and get their queries answered. The palpable superiority complex without having any substance or quality to back it is in equal parts comic and tragic. It is not enough for them to establish that they are studying in a good place, they have to prove it to be 'superior', without actually ever being to prove that it produces lawyers who are doing better than others in any field.

[...] stop manipulating people, they can literally read the comments.

You are doing unpaid PR work (like all your internships) out here and making dubious claims which kind of suggest that law schools inject some sort of secret knowledge in their students which make them better lawyers. You were propagating an ideology which has always ostracised kids from newer law schools which you call “tier 2 universities” as pointed out on a separate conversation I read today. You only got rebutted and now you’re a crybaby. Don’t get into moots (just a suggestion).

If you’re making a claim here, please refer me to the comment where it was claimed that JGLS is a better university. The claim was that you get more academic and subsidiary services (like air conditioned room and cockroach-less food) because you pay more. That’s it. Stop being insecure of other universities dude. Nobody even praised JGLS here, infact it was satirically called out for being full of privilege, you came in here and started with your unreasonable banter and NLU supremacy theory.

Start listening to contrary opinions, if any claim made here is false, I again urge LI to flag it as facts contested.

A. I never commented before in this thread.
B. I never claimed in any thread on LI that NLUs or even NLSIU is 'superior' to any institution. For the sake of disclosure, I did my LLB from abroad. I don't even believe in the institutional superiority of my alma mater.
C. I certainly don't believe that institutions can force you to become a good lawyer. They can at best provide an environment conducive to it. It is a point of fact that certain institutions, because of multiple factors, including the quality of the students joining those, do a better job than others in this, yet students from others can bridge that gap if they put their mind to it.
D. I have worked with a lot of graduates and interns from the universities here, including NLUs and JGLS. I'm only naming the latter among the private universities because it does differ in its approach from those. I have not really seen any institutional trend of some of them being better than others. There have been good students from NLUs and bad ones. Same for JGLS.
E. If you are claiming that nobody in this comments section has claimed the superiority of JGLS over other institutions, then you are factually incorrect. Please go through the comments more carefully. Not that I believe that they must have been made by people actually from JGLS, which is why I had used a qualifier in my earlier comment.
F. I do happen to believe that at present, if a student joins some of the NLUs (and yes, there is an institutional difference, since not all NLUs are alike, some are languishing in neglect, lack of faculty, incompetent administration etc), then they are going to get almost all the opportunities necessary to become a good lawyer. If they join JGLS, they would get those too. Whether one joins either, depends on their choice. They are unlikely to regret their choice one way or the other. If someone wishes to actually see tangible worth for the additional money spent at JGLS, they would get it in terms of the infrastructure and comfort. If they want to say that their wards have become better lawyers at JGLS than they would have become at the NLUs, they are unlikely to get any evidentiary support for that at this stage at least.
G. I am still confused about the reference to PR and moot. Which institution did I do the PR for? And what does anything that I said here have got anything to do with moots?

Aah, Legally India.. forever a battle ground for which law school is best or which Tier 1 firm pays best but also sucks. One wouldn't be wrong to assume that a large number of India's lawyers or future lawyers are just insecure boys. I wonder where the insecurity actually comes from. Maybe that should be a new conversation in itself.

To answer the original question though - sure you could get picked on for your privilege, or for your appearance, speech, etc. Humans can be very insensitive, especially in the blinding years of youth.

Or you could be adored for your privilege, befriended for the benefits that come with knowing someone whose dad is a biggie in the industry.

Both are toxic for you. In time, you will learn that your constant companion is only yourself, and Fairweather friends or foes, both are impermanent. Stay in your lane. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Maybe you will find some genuine friends who will make life feel better on the bad days, and who inspire you to do the same for others. The romantic lawyer would say that is his role in society, to make life better for others, and inspire by example.

Good luck, and enjoy law school.

My advice to all rich kids is to go abroad and settle there. India is ruined. Our Prime Ministerial choices for the next 20 years are Feku Modi, Pappu Rahul, "Romeo Squad" Yogi, Chit Fund Scam Didi and a dude literally called Stalin!! Take a one-way ticket and board the first flight out.

Quote:

Prof. (Dr.) Ramin Jahanbegloo: In April 2006 Dr. Jahanbegloo was arrested in Tehran Airport charged with preparing a velvet revolution in Iran.

Then how did he get a work visa in India? Hasn't the Iranian govt protested? Iran and India have good relations, so this is strange.