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?
One cant take SCOPUS as an indicator of quality. No serious academic does that.SCOPUS Is a measure of activity and reach and not a measure of quality per se. One can continue to find predatory journals in it. One can also find people publishing in journals that has nothing to do with the discipline and all of these are SCOPUS indexed journals.
Prof. Chimni has written and spoken on multiple occasions about the politics of knowledge production and his comments on AJIL are only a sub-set of that wider body of work. everything that he has said applies with full force to SCOPUS too.
the issue is something else - that legal academia in India is generally sub-standard. and in that sea of not even mediocrity, SCOPUS is not too bad a bet when we make assessments. The stupid thing to do is to take that as the only possible measure through which we can adjudge someone's work.
At the end of the day, a good academic judging the scholarly contributions of another academic cannot be replaced by a numerical metric alone.
Please post the form, their culture, pay and year on year increment!
Recall how she dealt with the SH case against a then serving SC judge (and subsequently Chair of the NGT) that was brought in by a Noojie. Contrast that with the SH complaint brought in earlier by another Noojie (and niece if a TMC honcho) against a retired SC judge.
Op India and cabal are being juvenile. If they seriously wish to expose IJ and Co there is more than enough to dig up. But that requires actual hard work and slandering is easier.
Why is the SJA being soft on him? Exactly what was this man doing at IIM-C? Isn't it strange that someone would leave that and come here.
Best that we concentrate on cleaning our affairs starting with SJA and its loud silence on so many issues as also the inability of the GB to do anything abt it. If we remain doormats, we will get trampled. Also focus on what is actually done and not optics and fancy words. SJA should not be allowed to hoodwink us again.
Planned protests in Nov, ultimatum, laundry list of feckless demands and word salad shouldn't stop us from asking SJA what it intends to do with the upcoming EC and thereafter because this VC will hang on till the very end, which precedent shows is extendable
Also the search committee met again . At Hyatt. Again. The shortlist will get placed in the EC for onward transmission to CJI. But it is likely that the CJI designate will be the one taking the decision when he takes over in Nov. Maybe a rabbit trick may happen then.
EC is expected soon. Is the SJA actually prepared to make good on its ill thought ultimatum? NKC will be dealing in papers showing EC/FC approvals etc. That cannot be countered by hearsay, speculations etc.
The issue actually is about SJA and its recent history of complicity after NKC settled in. After the GC debacle and hilarious flops with gherao etc, will the SJA now produce the incriminating paperwork or more importantly, did it even have it while making the accusations. Even if those accusations were true and SJA now has the papers, do they actually have the bite or just feckless slanders?
SJA brass have to come clean or get cleaned out. SJA is the weak link.
If insiders are to be believed, the blame has been squarely put on Mishraji. Aise nahi bante hai registrar!
Were you able to start your career as in-house counsel?
I’d appreciate any insights on firms or partners known for:
- 1. Good quality work exposure in PE/VC or M&A deals
- 2. Balanced culture - decent work-life flexibility
- 3. Fair pay and growth opportunities.
-
Please share your experiences or suggestions (even mid-size or boutique firms works).
Apna raasta mai khud bana lungi.
Second. I think the left censors, it introduces social sanctions for wrong think and wrongspeak. If you have a contrary political view you wont let LORs, you wont get those networks, you dont get to be in some rooms. When was the last time a centrist even got the rhodes scholarship? Thats career sanction.The left stops debates where possible. It deals by not engaging with ones arguments but by simply characterising those arguments as some sort of ism.
▮▮▮
2. Trump is an egomaniac and also an idiot, while being an authoritarian, too. See recent reports re: activities of ICE, deployments/threats to deploy the national guard, etc. Whatever he may have done re: Israel and Gaza doesn't outweigh the fact that he causes more conflict than peace.
3. Machado seems a good enough choice. Actual credentialed person for that sort of thing. Right decision.
2. However, you aren't wrong, all branches of the legal profession are mentally taxing, so "Law is mentally taxing" isn't incorrect. My first response in my head when I just saw the headline was to say, "Law is mentally taxing would be a surprise only to someone who grew up in a country like India, where law is seen as the profession you go for if you fail at getting into engineering and medical".
Meanwhile, the stupid BJP IT cell is only focusing on the fact that the arrested people are Muslims and the girl is Hindu, instead of treating this as a broader issue of women’s safety and law and order. 😡
The yardstick is electoral wins and thriving politically and economically. Since those haven't got affected in all these years, why change? Also behaviour modification doesn't mean attitudinal change.
And why this surprise after the RG Kar case. Everyone got together for that.
She said private medical colleges should take care of their students and the "culture at night". "They should not be allowed to come out. They have to protect themselves. It is a forest area," Banerjee said.
https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/mamata-banerjee-on-durgapur-gang-rape-horror-why-was-she-out-at-12-30-am-9440942
I don’t want to move into a generic compliance or contracts only in-house role, but I’d still like to continue working on transactions M&A, PE/VC deals.
What kinds of organisations, other than law firms, can I or persons like me join? Is fund houses the only option?
I wish people come to know about his deeds.
Also, according to Wikipedia Gavai’s father was a former Governor or Kerala and Bihar, a former Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha MP, a former MLA etc. So he was born into power and privilege. He can’t be compared with a poor Dalit born to farmers.
https://www.barandbench.com/news/born-into-a-low-caste-family-constitution-made-me-equal-cji-br-gavai-in-vietnam
Is it EVER justified or acceptable to throw shoes at judges - or course not. Katju should be glad people didn’t throw shoes at him for every time they disagreed
Only ▮▮▮ accusing her of insane things all because she chose happiness with a man and bossed up and settled down. Something which she has been craving to do since she was 15. Folks who are upset with her should just admit they like art not because it moves them but because they like the artists politics. The lyricism is there( eldest daughter, Elizabeth Taylor) , the story telling is there( title track, ruin the friendship), the music is there ( Ophelia,wood,opalite) - in the acoustic and the pop versions- there’s no reason to dislike this album if you like Taylor generally. The only reason to dislike it is because there isn’t a song where she’s hating on men which some sad people make their entire personalities. Too bad so sad for them. Taylor swift has always been more than just some mascot for a particular brand of politics. She has always been a sensitive articulate gifted woman who is deeply introspective and who is making art that speaks to your soul. Some people ought to go find theirs.
If only the reality of the Indian legal market were that simple.
Let us set sentiment aside and look at the system as it actually functions—not as it pretends to.
You say the issue is that a lawyer is “approaching random parties and soliciting work.” But do you realise that this is precisely what every major law firm in the country does—just in more polished packaging?
Let’s not be naïve.Each and every Indian T1 -3 firm —and many others—have full-fledged business development teams staffed with MBAs whose sole job is to track cases, identify potential clients, initiate contact, pitch services, and close mandates.
That is not “client communication.”
That is systematic solicitation.
They don’t even hide it.
They sponsor events.
They host “knowledge sessions.”
They quietly contact companies named in filings.
They reach out to general counsel the moment a dispute appears on the horizon.
They even monitor cause lists in real time and make calls before the matter is heard.
To call this “informing existing clients” is intellectually dishonest. It is targeted acquisition of new business.
Let me put it bluntly:
Almost every large Indian law firm actively solicits work—just with better branding, corporate language, and PR gloss.
The “no solicitation” rule exists, yes—but it is not applied to the powerful.
It is selectively enforced against:
-solo practitioners,
-anyone outside the “club,” and
-most aggressively, foreign firms.
So let’s be clear:
The problem is not solicitation.
The problem is who is allowed to do it without consequence.
If the Bar Council truly believed solicitation was unethical, it would start with the biggest offenders—the firms that literally employ business development departments.
But it won’t.
Because the rule isn’t about ethics.
It’s about control.
It’s about keeping the market closed.
It’s about protecting the incumbents.
So before we declare “solicitation is illegal, simple,” we must answer a more honest question:
Why is it only “illegal” when smaller players do it, but “strategy” when the big firms do the exact same thing at scale?
Until we confront that double standard, invoking the rulebook is little more than theatre.
If your boss is contacting a prospect after seeing their name on the previous day’s cause list, he is not engaging in a covert practice. He is operating within the same framework that every major litigation firm on retainer already follows. Top-tier litigation and full-service firms—Karanjawala, Aggarwala, CAM, SAM, Trilegal, Khaitan, Anand & Anand, SK&A—systematically monitor the cause list and alert their clients the moment a case is filed.
Here is a reality that few openly acknowledge:
It is almost impossible to secure an ex parte order against a company represented by these firms.
Why? Because they track filings in real time and intervene before “Day Zero” relief can be granted.
Moreover, these firms are not merely allowed to inform clients—or promising prospects—about a potential injunction or the appointment of a Local Commissioner; they do so routinely. This is not unethical. This is defensive legal strategy in a competitive and high-stakes environment.
The true ethical boundary is not defined by information. It is defined by intent and conduct.
For example:
If a Local Commissioner is appointed to seize infringing goods and capture sales data, and a lawyer advises the client on how to destroy that data or obstruct a lawful fact-finding process, that is a direct violation of both law and professional ethics.
That is the red line.
Therefore, if you ever warn a prospect about a possible LC visit, the boundary, in my view, is clear:
1. You may warn.
2. You may prepare.
3. You may not—explicitly or implicitly—advise on how to destroy or conceal evidence.
This is the distinction between legitimate advocacy and unethical interference.
I hope this offers clarity—and some peace of mind.
If, however, you ever witness your senior advising a client to destroy evidence (which is unlikely, as most understand that calls can be recorded), then—and only then—should you step away.
Now, in principle, reporting such conduct to the Bar Council would be the right thing to do.
But in practice—and this is the deeper tragedy—it would likely achieve little for systemic justice while causing significant damage to your own career. Unless you have the security to withstand the backlash, the system may punish the whistleblower more than the offender.
Why? Because the Indian litigation ecosystem in 2025 tolerates a considerable degree of grey-zone conduct. Even highly respected names cross ethical lines with unsettling regularity.
And this is where the structural failure becomes undeniable:
Our regulatory framework is neither proactive nor genuinely independent.
It does not enforce standards consistently—it responds only when public pressure or media scrutiny forces its hand.
This is why many Tier-1 disputes partners and senior advocates have operated beyond ethical boundaries without consequence. Undermining client interests, leaking information, manipulating negotiations for leverage or fees—happens. Sharing sensitive information with counterparties for personal gain—happens.
The system allows it.
The status quo protects it.
And entrenched interests ensure it continues.
Consider the Bar Council of India.
When genuine reform threatened its control, influential forces did not allow its disbandment —they orchestrated preservation. The BCI received a superficial facelift while leadership returned to the same hands that oversaw the unchecked proliferation of private law colleges without faculty or infrastructure, and simultaneously prevented foreign law firms from entering the market—despite an acute job crisis and oversupply of law graduates from NLUs and substandard private universities. Law students since now put up with the double whammy of a bar exam - which, all things considered, is a good thing- if properly administered.
In such an environment, accountability rarely originates from within institutions.It emerges only when the media forces the system to confront itself. Case in point: the recent shoe-flinging incident in Court No. 1 of the Supreme Court.
Main to 25k ke liye kuchh bhi kaam karne ko ready hu
Kuchh bhi matlab kuchh bhi kaam
Intelligent man
All the same, don't report him - nothign good will come out of it for you personally
Work hours and expectations are insane. The partner needs to learn team management, develop some bit of empathy, spend time in his personal life beyond work, and communicate team's limited availability over weekends/festivals to Clients. I also wish he didn't infuse panic attacks in the team for work that can easily be done across a few days. My health is suffering because of the expectation to be available 24×7 7 days a week. Someday he would understand the value of a strong team that would want to stick with him for multiple years rather than leaving in less than one.
No regrets. Though I would say I was unlucky to start my career with this partner.
People don’t talk much about it on LinkedIn because the hype usually goes around top 3 NLUs
The usual proper placement scene, top firms like CAM, SAM, 3L, B&P, SRL, AZB, K&C, etc., came for Day 0. The Batch of 2025 had slightly fewer Day 0 placements, but there were multiple assessment internship opportunities, and a lot of students ended up with PPOs from those.
Also, because Christ has strong Commerce and Management schools, firms like KPMG, EY, Deloitte, and others regularly recruit from the university, it’s just easier and more convenient for them to hire across departments.
The location (right in the heart of Bangalore) and the overall campus vibe definitely help too.
Tbh, Jindal’s fees just don’t justify the outcome. Christ gives solid exposure and opportunities at a fraction of that cost.
At the end of the day, bright and proactive students from Christ can absolutely be considered Tier 1 in terms of skill, exposure, and placements.
The firm doesnt actually fire anybody, what they really do is ask you to quit to save you the embarrassment.
The British are making it harder to settle permanently, almost doubling the the qualifying period needed to get permanent residency (or ILR, as they call it). So if you get an MC kind of a job and they aren't willing to sponsor you in the UK for that long, make another move after some UK experience.
For example, move to Ireland. Maybe pick up a second citizenship, i.e., in our example, Irish (or if your law firm is really willing to sponsor visas for you for around ten years, and you are happy to keep staying in Britain too, British). Then once the U.S. returns to a state of sanity, go back.
This way of doing things gives you what you want in terms of leaving India for a life overseas. Additionally, it gives you a safety net/insurance mechanism. What if what is happening in the U.S. happens again? You always have a visa-free, easy-access country to go back to, should you desire it. Also, most other citizenships don't have double-taxation bullshit, like what the U.S. does (ie, they aren't taxing you on worldwide income and you wouldn't get taxed unless you were tax resident). Therefore, it might be stupid (from a tax perspective) for somebody who, let us say, had become a British, to then also become a dual American citizen (especially if she wanted to live in Britain), because, even if she had a safety net, that would come at a huge price (taxation from the British, who tax very highly, as well as from the Americans). However, for an American to pick up let us say an Irish passport would be very cool for them, because Irish passport not only gives safety net (and due to being English-speaking country, does not pose disproportionate difficulty), but also because of how the EU concept of free movement works, means you have the right to live visa-free, forever, in any EU27 member state other than Ireland, for as long as you wish. So, for example, if you wanted to live in Austria, you could, without any trouble. In addition, because of the CTA between Ireland and UK, Irish passport could mean you can live, work, use the health system (NHS), claim benefits, even vote in some British elections, if really you so much want to live in Britain.
With a British passport, however, your options would be a little bit more restricted. You can visit most EU countries for either three or six months (I forgot which) visa free, but you'd need to get something similar to what British citizens (who are, of course, part of the Visa Waiver Programme (VWP)) get for going to the U.S. Additionally, due to the CTA, you could live, work, get healthcare, claim benefits... freely in Ireland, just like you could do in Britain with an Irish passport. However, the British passport just doesn't give you the same level of EU visa free access as the Irish one does. Plus, as was said by the deep-voiced actor on John Oliver's show about the British national mood, "We have not even begun to fuck ourselves". Their determination to fuck themselves yet hasn't exhausted itself (just like that of your fellow Americans), which has resulted in the weakening of the passport due to BREXIT.
Hope this helps. If anyone finds any inaccuracies in these suggestions, please do not hesitate to correct, but also don't jump on me, because trolls won't be fed.