We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
Also, AP has cheapened their brand so much by doing this that an AP watch itself will lose respect. Stick to Patek.
Under the camouflage of access given to locals, a local club fronted TMC egress who built permanent structures including gym and various other facilities. When the old couple protested, threats followed including forceful takeover and eventual eviction from their own house. The couple then took refuge with a relative in Park Street. Eventually then won reprieve from the Cal HC because local police did zilch.
The club with tacit TMC support even contended that the old couple had given them access for their own protection and the takeover was in public interest since the old couple had no children nor could they properly exploit the property to full potential.
The HC ordered Surajit K Purkayastha IPS who was likely the CP then or something senior (later the first state security advisor to Unkind) that he must personally restore the full property to the old couple and demolish all unauthorised structures. But that remained unfulfilled citing local law and order problem including threat of suicide by local men and women who later got unmasked as local Unkind goons.
Two prominent ministers, Partha Chatterjee and Arup Biswas were the ringmasters and used their ministerial position to abuse govt finances to forcefully acquire the land using central funds under Ganga Action Plan. The then KMC mayor (likely the now discarded Sovan Chatterjee) enthusiastically got involved as well. Invoking special powers that property was "acquired" for a measly amount that was declined by the old couple.
This was spun by the wretched Unkind that the old couple did all the drama for money. Except it was later revealed that the old couple had previously desired to donate the land during Red admin if that helped the cause of Adi Ganga rejuvenation. That standing offer had remained with Unkind govt as well.
The Cal HC was exasperated. But judiciary has its share of ahem too. So a certain judicial restraint crept in when the state govt through its venerable AG (not the usual suspect KD) made its intent abundantly clear. The case was allowed to meander in the judicial jungles. Surajit kept getting promotions. And the old couple stayed away knowing that they wouldn't survive the local goons.
I don't know what happened eventually. But the state did acquire the land but it was not used for the pumping project. Maybe it came up eons later. But the gym and club remained.
Why isn't anyone looking into this? After all now we get to hear wonderful details if how Unkind acquired multiple lucrative plots, organised loot via police, KMC and worthies like Sona Pappu. Why is saffron so quiet about shady deals by Merlin Group and other real estate majors of Kolkata? What about the illegal Wow Momo factory fire? Are we getting warm?
Just three IPS officers getting suspended. For the cited reasons, heads of IAS, WBPS, WBCS,
Ei Samay has an interesting history. It was started by a former ABP editor (who also started Kolkata TV with Aparna Sen et al) with alleged slush funding from Sarada or some other ponzi fund. Later the founder got arrested (alleged persecution by both frenemy Unkind and Saffron Brothers) and abandonment by Reds. Aparna scooter expectedly. Soon Ei Samay gets taken over by TOI and then subsequently becomes a vanity purchase of its present owner.
But the actual case in the court gets lost in the process just like Sarada, Rose Valley, ICore, Pailan, Tower group and other Ponzis
Jai Ho. The Great Indian/Bengal Circus continues and the band plays on.
Unkind and her apparatchiks must face penal action for initiating malicious prosecution against Prof Ambikesh Mahapatra, Kamduni protestors etc.
The new CM is only making sarcastic threats like his predecessor and launching photogenic police action.
I am also stunned by Saffron silence on the bombshell dropped by their own MP, Justice Ganguly concerning RG Kar case. CBI is literally getting a blank cheque to murder the case. Compare that with the conviction it obtained in TN for custodial murder perpetrated by the policemen on father and son.
This clearly shows that RG Kar definitely involved some Princeling and hence sabotage from the highest levels involving all the parties and even questionable action by the DYC Court.
Real estate, Corporate and Litigation - Culture, Toxicity, Pay, etc
https://www.news18.com/india/fortuner-rs-1-crore-dowry-14-month-harassment-noida-woman-jumps-to-death-husband-arrested-ws-l-10097214.html
Here's an article from Harvard Law School on the same topic.
https://hls.harvard.edu/today/transforming-law-into-a-science/
It seems the NLUs are way behind in their thinking and approach, still so skewed towards humanities.
> What does it mean for humanities-heavy NLUs?
> Will science in Class 12 become compulsory for law students?
> Where will the NLUs get STEM faculty from?
For starters, key areas where corporate lawyers require forensics include:
- Corporate Investigations & Fraud: Forensic investigators collect and analyze evidence to uncover financial fraud, misappropriation of funds, and white-collar crimes. This includes tracing money trails and identifying perpetrators.
- Digital Forensics: Essential for cybercrimes, data breaches, and digital fraud, this involves recovering deleted files, tracing online activity, and analyzing corporate devices.
- Forensic Accounting: Used to quantify financial losses, detect fraud in financial statements, and assist in legal proceedings regarding white-collar crimes.
- Document Examination: Analyzing handwriting, signatures, forgeries, and alterations of documents.
- Internal Investigations: Conducting workplace investigations involving harassment, embezzlement, or breach of duty.
- Cross-Examination of Experts: Understanding technical terms and forensic methodologies allows lawyers to effectively question expert witnesses, such as medical professionals, IT experts, or forensic accountants.
- Chain of Custody: Understanding procedures to ensure the integrity, preservation, and admissibility of evidence in court.
- Risk Management: Using forensic insights to implement proactive measures to prevent future fraud or legal issues.
NFSU has changed the rules of the game. Now, NLUs will have to comply in an area which not their forte.
Has SAM started rolling out offers for the batch of 2027? Have the interviews been completed? How were the interviews? Which partners took the interview? Has there been any intimation regarding when HR will get back to candidates? Has any team given out a straight PPO?
who is going to be our vc? who else but our registrar.
Do an LLM , and subsequently a PhD ONLY if you want to be a professor or researcher !
A basic LLB is more than enough to practice anywhere. Instead work on increasing your work experience. If you need to move forward, maybe a MBA will help. But DO NOT DO AN LLM !
While this associate was made to work on matters till the last day
White-collar crime - a hilarious practice area when you realise half the job is glorified inbox excavation marketed as elite legal advisory. One misplaced reimbursement, one “urgent payment” email, and suddenly a 14-member team is building a 68-slide “governance risk assessment” while speaking in consultant dialect about ethics culture and tone from the top. No deals, no negotiations, no courtroom drama — just Ctrl+F, chronologies, whistleblower templates, and the annual discovery that someone accepted a Diwali hamper worth ₹4,999 instead of ₹5,000.
Every matter sounds like a Netflix scandal until you realise the grand “internal investigation” is about a reimbursement policy violation and ends with a whistleblower refresher training and a 73-slide deck on ethical culture. Entire teams billing Tier 1 rates to discover that an employee accepted cricket tickets from a vendor.
2. Should you call someone out, you’ll be dealing with lawyers whose job it is to make and break arguments, regardless of the practice area. It’s a profession based on credibility and reputation, so if you try to call out someone without proof or documentation, you’re just asking for a defamation lawsuit against you at the very least.
3. Not enough people care since everyone understands nuances and subjectivity also. What’s toxic to you may be normal for someone else, so unless it’s an actual crime and again, well-documented, it’s very difficult to call someone out.
He has politicians/businessmen or vip's in general waiting for him to engage with them and be their go to counsel.
Plus he's from a big legal family as his father was a big judge and himself was a AG. So probably a combo of ego and being a snob.
Looking back now, I’m really glad I left, because it made me realise there are better opportunities ahead. Had I stayed, I probably would never have seen that for myself.
Of course, this is just my personal experience, and I’m not saying everyone should do the same. But one thing I’ve learnt and something many seniors also say is that if you join a boutique firm, do it with the mindset of learning and eventually moving forward. Don’t get too comfortable too early. The learning can genuinely be incredible, especially in the first year, but staying indefinitely in a difficult environment can take a toll professionally and personally.
I’ve seen many capable seniors continue in spaces that no longer serve them, perhaps out of familiarity or comfort, and it’s honestly a little sad to watch because they deserve better.
So my only advice would be: learn as much as you can, build your foundation well, stay professional, stay grateful but also know when it’s time to move laterally and grow. One good year of learning can take you very far. Don’t underestimate your ability to find something healthier and better suited for your growth :)
As of now, it is practical to expect that the number of OMS (Outside Maharashtra Students) candidates has fallen by a lot this year....Moreover, both the slots were much more difficult compared to past year papers and were somewhat the same in difficulty when compared with each other.
I'm sorry if this isn't the right place to be asking this, but my anxiety got the better of me. Looking for GLC and ILS students, preferably 1st or 2nd years who could give an idea of the marks vs percentile for the years they appeared for the exam and make an educated guess as to what could the cutoff be for this year, especially for the oms category.
How good the law school is and how have you studied/ interned for 5years is what matters.