Anonymous, HNLU Raipur

NOTE [Updated on December 26, 2014 at 11.40 AM]: This is a reader blog, published on an ‘as is’ basis and may not reflect the view-point of Lawctopus. Lawctopus has no responsibility or liability for the contents of reader blogs.

Sexual harassment at work place or demand of sexual favour by any senior in the office is a punishable offence. But what when similar demands are made by a senior in a college that too a law college.

It’s a taboo to talk about this in a law college but this norm prevailing in my college and from what I have heard in most of the other law colleges.

I entered in the law college with the dream to come out at the end of five years as one of the best students this college in Raipur ever had. Within few days I had received all the suggestions possible from the seniors with regard to how to make it among the best.

Mooting is one of the dear topics of all the seniors here, honestly few prepare for winning but when you get all paid trip to any foreign land who would like to miss. But I was not ready to fall in line, I wanted to prove not only I want to take part in the best moots but win also and so took part in the intra-moot.

I prepared well, had a great presentation but ended up in the lower half. More surprising was the fact that many in top 20 didn’t even know how to write and read in English, let alone making a memorial.

However, I moved on with my students without giving much thought to this when I realized the whole idea of organizing an intra-moot by seniors was to just entertain themselves because you won’t even get a team, getting a moot was not even a question.

I had a great 1st semester academically and was all set to take part in moots in the 2nd semester. I made a team with took a challenger but wasn’tt even consideration by the judges, who I would like to mention were our seniors. The moot was allotted to one of the weaker teams according to me but whose boyfriend was a senior and a close friend one of the judges.

Everyone knew beforehand her team was the one to be selected. But then after the results of different challengers that took place that semester I realized it’s not about just being the best prepared team, you should also have the best contacts.

Most of the teams to qualify for the good moots had people who were in relationship with one of the judges or their friends or were simply fifth years, in which case you have no chance.

But I didn’t my spirits fall so easily and took part in challengers the following semester.

sexual harassment and the moot court
Image from here.

This time few days before the challengers one of the judges-to-be proposed me. I simply rejected not realising the consequences. I was disqualified in the first round couple of days later. It was then that one of my friends who is going to a south-east Asian country this summer in his first moot came and offered me to be part of his team.

I rejected his offer as I felt it was not right for me to take part in an international moot without any previous mooting experience and also I didn’t want to just travel to a new country but when. It was then that he made me see the whole story.

He himself knows which asses to lick and it was he who made me realize why I was being rejected every time. He told me that either team-up with people who have contacts or who knows whom to please and how. That this college is no place for morally-correct and if you want to get through you have to let them through.

I am writing all this as my last hope to bring change in my college at least otherwise I am all set to take the path of my classmate who made through in the 2nd semester. In three semesters she has one national and one international moot under her belt and a trip to US. I can’t float alone long and I am sure to board ship sooner or later.

Yes, I am all set to sleep my way through to the top.

I am the Admin of Lawctopus. I am for law students, of law students and by law students. I am Torts and Contracts and moots and internships. I am your boyfriend! And your girlfriend too! Mentor. Friend. Junior. Senior. I am the footnote in your research paper. Foreword in your life. The jugaad for your internship. The side gig which earns you bucks. I am Maggi. Pocket money too.


  1. You don’t have to sleep around to prove your worth , what utter rubbish ? you are a prospective lawyer and not a model or a struggling actress . Read your books right , do your research become assertive , you ll be successful .
    Dont judge your classmate , she is no less of a women than you . There is a latent moral policing in your remarks

  2. In what universe does asking someone out constitutes “sexual harassment” ? The plot seems to be lifted from the movie Disclosure or its cheap bollywood copy aitraaz. And since the girl in question already made plans to sleep around she didnt have morals to begin with.

  3. I would like to travel to a new country, even if I had no prior mooting experience. Shit man, why I didn’t I get that offer ? 😀

  4. 1. It is difficult to classify being asked out as sexual harassment. Admittedly it’s not appreciable but it’s more excusable and a lot less criminal than asking for a sexual favour, the only crime here is hormonal imbalance and minor maladministration.

    2. Even if our rejected judge’s verdict exudes bias, there are THREE on a bench, maybe not being selected suggests your teams incompetence? And instead of ‘sleeping’ your way to the top, prepare a little harder next time.

    3. To the administrator, your job also includes verifying the truth? Especially when you use the words sexual harassment(of which there is none)

    4. Also to the administrator, it is disappointing and shameful to suggest that students of a law university would hush up incidences of sexual harassment. Much to your apparent surprise we also belive in a liberal, meritocratic and just learning environment.

    • Point 1 is very important here and the Administrator is failing to see it. The incident as described by the writer can only be understood as an administrative default on the part of the MCC, if at all such an incident occurred. Tagging it as sexual harassment does not make sense. These two words have the power to malign anyone’s reputation. I think the administrator would agree that those two words should be used wisely and not for the fact that if anything goes wrong with a girl, it ought to be sexual harassment.

  5. Well done Lawctopus for this expose. Someone had made a very serious allegation of a casting couch at HNLU. This needs to be probed as it is sexual harassment and a criminal offence. The VC must take either action against these sex criminals or resign. I hope the mainstream media covers this story as well.

  6. Shame HNLU, Shame. Instead of taking a stand for the poor girl who has been a victim of your outrageous committee politics, you are trying to defend your college reputation here. I personally know people from your college who have faced similar problems in the past. So Dear MCC of HNLU, yes, everything written above is true and instead of defending your act, try and work on your Mooting Elimination system. Your college ranking along with your college standards are going down. Please work on the same before damage becomes irreparable.

    • Thanks bro 🙂 You believe in a blog written by anonymous author and not in several comments backed by evidence? You must have been a fan of Rohtak sisters.

  7. Mr. Administrator,
    First of all, thank you for writing such an elaborate reply to the comments and for letting us know why has this story been uploaded here.
    Here is what I feel about your reply:
    1. Lawctopus is ‘selling’ sexual harassment and this is a cheap popularity stunt.
    I wouldn’t put that blame on lawctopus. I hold the writer responsible for all that stunt and emo drama. I or anyone who has commented here has no such negative impression about the website I believe. You are doing a great work which is benefitting the entire law student fraternity.

    2. This is a lie. Lawctopus should do its due diligence. Lawctopus is indulging in mud-slinging.
    What you write here, Mr. Administrator, is both surprising and shameful. Your first paragraph has portrayed all the students at HNLU as being dishonest who would come out to defend their University despite the knowledge of such occurrence of a sexual harassment in the University. Do you think we are running an institution of such retarded chauvinists? This is not a knee-jerk reaction, Mr. Administrator. It’s a well thought response. Had it not been the case, I would never have admitted the claim of such bias by the writer in the first place which I would not deny has a probability in any institution of the world. The statements made in the write-up are “factually” incorrect. That is the reason why the veracity of the claims is dubious at present.

    Ed: We never say that students of HNLU are being dishonest. We do not even say that the students have the ‘knowledge’ of such an occurrence. That we got a call from the convenor your Moot Court Society, within minutes of publishing the article, to take down the article is a knee-jerk reaction as are many of the comments.

    Not a lie and due diligence
    You say that all you needed to confirm was that the student is from HNLU and that she has written that blog post. Really? I am a student from HNLU and I could start a blog post like that. I mean, we all know it needs no rocket science to start a blog post. I could start a blog like that and write that the warden asked for sexual favours in return for hiding the information that he caught some weed in my room. How does that sound? And I am just as well a student from HNLU. So this much should be enough information for you to publish that blog post on your website and blemish our wardens and the University, shouldn’t it? You say that you’re not expected to do the rigorous investigation of a police officer or follow the procedures of a court of law. At the same time, you’re not expected to be that reckless, Mr. Administrator. And as I have said before, I’m not blaming you for mud-slinging.

    Ed: We haven’t been reckless. We confirmed the identify of the author before putting this up.

    3. The post doesn’t get the internal moot court logistics and selection procedures right.
    I would definitely acknowledge the importance of such minor sexual harassment. But the problem with the story is that it is factually untrue. Her claims of such sexual harassment would occur only if any such procedure existed. But, as the rule is clear, if you fail at the intra, you don’t get to go out for a moot to represent the University. If you allege someone of something, you come out with the truth. It is clearly a lie.

    4. If this were true, the whole college would stand behind the girl.
    Whether the University would stand behind her or not is a thing that can only be verified after it comes ‘out’. If at all such a thing happened, she had the resort of complaining to the MCC Convener. What the writer claims here could happen to anyone irrespective of their sex. As I’ve said earlier, I don’t deny the probability of such a bias if it’s a student Bench. But tagging a bias by a senior as sexual harassment if it is on the ground that the senior is more acquainted with the other team is not right I feel.
    Do you really think that a University of about 800 young students will hush down entirely if they even had a scent of such a thing happening just for the sake of keeping our college up in the CLAT rankings?

    Ed: It’s every reasonable man/woman’s experience who’s ever studied in a college. Such exposes are generally kept hushed, ‘insider stuff’ which shouldn’t be ‘out’ to save the reputation of college. Be in NUJS, UPES, HNLU or any other college. This is the general experience. Exceptions are of course there.

    5. Take the post down because it lowers the reputation of HNLU and will affect CLAT preferences.
    After introspecting deeply, I say what I say here. Let me tell you, Mr. Administrator, I would not give a damn about the reputation of my University if I had the slightest bit of faith in the veracity of this story.
    The legal points you throw also have to have some reasonable restrictions. And as it has been admitted by you that you’ve not undertaken proper steps to find out the truth, you cannot take the defence of truth for so long as we do not know the veracity of this post. About prior restraints, I should bring to your notice two judgements in the cases of Sahara Real Estate and Swatanter Kumar in the years 2012 and 2014 wherein the Courts have established that prior restraint on any publication owing to the impairment of the process of justice is valid. Clearly enough, this post is going to cause prejudice in the minds of the readers till the time any appropriate action is taken by the authorities. Besides, you are supposed to presume the institution’s innocence before you taint its image by admitting just one side of the argument.
    This debate here, Mr. Administrator, is not about the capability or willingness to go to the court. It is about you taking care of your responsibilities honestly without any prejudice whatsoever.

    6. The author has bad English writing skills.
    I don’t care about the English for so long as it is comprehendible.

    7. The author is undermining those who work hard and achieve success. She’s a sour loser. She wants her 2 minutes in the sun.
    I don’t claim any of this. She has all the right to write about what happened with her, honestly.
    Your work of throwing the impertinent statistics appears like a political spokesperson on a news channel who when runs out of an argument says any impertinent negative thing about the opponent.
    So, it is again being requested to you, Mr. Administrator, please take this post off.

    • It’s unfair Mr. Administrator how you’ve written in the middle of my comment. 🙂

      Firstly, I think that you’ve either misunderstood my post or have replied inappropriately. When you say that you do not expect any loyal HNLUite to come out and admit this story, you do mean that all the loyal HNLUites are dishonest who cannot see through the reality of the post or would never admit a negative thing about the University.
      About recklessness, I would again say that if I wrote a post like that and made any fallacious statement, would you admit the statement on your website just after you find out that I am a student at HNLU?
      I am not denying that general experience of bias. I am only saying here that you cannot tag that bias as sexual harassment. That’s all!

      • We are not saying that loyal HNLUites are dishonest, just that it’s very natural for students of a college to defend their institution vehemently, not matter what.

  8. A frivolous write up, a grave issue and an expected episode of allegations and defenses.
    From this article to HNLU’s MPL ranking history, to the placements… seems like we got carried away much?

    So basics first…as has already been mentioned by my seniors and batchmates, the whole premise of this incident is factually flawed, safe to say… impossible.

    But even if the slightest bit of the very instance is true, dear Ms.Anonymous, this very HNLU hasn’t been ashamed to go on a strike to demand what it deserved, unfettered by the fact that this might shift the limelight to its ugly insufficiency and not so promising realities of the time, unperturbed by the kind of publicity it invites.

    Then why would you, in your most apprehensive of senses, assume that this same place will refuse to stand by you, and against such injustice, or slip over the flimsy film of reputation? A few pervs here and a few lechers there is the undisputed status quo of the society as a whole, let aside this particular university. But for the rest of us here, rather, most of us here, we have only inherited to stand for what’s righteous, what’s right, from the HNLU history… and it wouldn’t have taken us two thoughts to take the legacy forward, this time either.

    If this REALLY did happen to you, with you, then irrespective of the fact whether it was during an intra moot, or a challenger or a benchmark, why dint you speak out? To your friends? Your seniors? Other girl seniors, for that matter? The faculty? The Police, if it got to that?

    Was there NOT A SINGLE PERSON who could address this issue more effectively, (maybe)? Than this random, misconstrued, haphazard post on a public forum?

    Had you made a few ‘effective’ attempts in this regard, and had they succumbed to futility, we can assure you that this ‘post’ would’ve had the maximum support from this very HNLU fraternity, and this issue too.

    For, as they say, the world isn’t all about the good men, but is definitely survived by them. And our alma mater, clearly, isn’t in a dearth of such people.

    But in case this is false, imaginary & fictional, it is a humble request to not forsaken the University’s hard earned prestige to a sheer ‘grapes-are-sour’ or ‘lech-me-not’ bitterness…for it is this delicate sense of pride that the other hundreds of us take along, wherever we go.

    Pretty please? 🙂

    • Please understand that it is difficult sometimes for people to share things happening to them. In today’s world also, and I am not talking about India only, people keep suffering in silence, perhaps, women more then men.
      To a neutral mind, the incident is not entirely dis- believable.
      At the same time, without knowing full facts, lets not blame either the MCC/seniors of the college or the blog writer. Let us not base ourselves only on versions given by the two sides only.
      Its difficult to get the full facts without any thorough enquiry and so meanwhile, we can make do with not having any mud-slinging on either side.
      Let us take a lesson to be more sensitive and careful to prevent any such happening in colleges and to be careful not to malign someone just to prove a point or take some revenge.
      Above all lets not jump to take sides without proper verification. Thank you.

  9. Its unfortunate to read the above post..

    During our times in college we too had student benchmark/challengers as well as teachers benchmark/challengers and there were always a few who would crib that the bench was biased….i think you are one of those…however, there were many amongst them who will keep trying and keep participating to actually be chosen to participate in a moot….you should crib when you tried enough and still you didnt get it (unless you ain’t deserving at all)

    if you actually had an issue with the judgement then you should have challenged it…taken up with the authorities….asked for the score sheets…asked for an explanation,,,instead of writing an anonymous post alleging that the judges were biased….”oh i am pretty”…”i got so many proposals”..but i am ETHICAL”…

    Its a law school with 200 people in a batch…and there ought to be competition….fight for your rights & merit and please don’t hide behind the veil of being a female…

  10. Although the whole article is nothing but a piece of shit, I also want to ask my seniors a few questions.
    Firstly we claim to be one of the best law colleges in India but our mooting and placement record shows something else. We haven’t been in top 10 of MPL for last 2-3 years, we participate in moots which better ranked colleges don’t even give a damn.
    And in HNLU we don’t talk about placements because we don’t have any. More than 100 goes unemployed, even higher than the batch size of most of the other NLUs. So why so? There exists flaws in our whole system which even my seniors are patronizing which in no way benefiting our college or us. So, maybe her article is a lie but our mooting system is a sham.

  11. Dear Miss Anonymous,
    I’m a student from HNLU and I have some problems with your write-up that is ostensibly denigrating the University. But before I say anything specific with respect to your story, I would like the readers to know a little about the present mooting format in HNLU.
    The first semester students are not allowed to moot. In the second semester, an intra-batch moot is organised by the seniors who are also the judges. There are no teams here and individuals only participate. Top 1/3rd of the total number of participants are selected who are then permitted to form a team and attempt any moot. Thereafter, anyone from the third semester and above can form a team and attempt for a moot. The Moot Court Committee (MCC) of the University organises the Challenger/Benchmark round for the team(s) that register(s) for any moot. Here, the faculty members are judges.
    Now I would like to express my problems with your write-up.
    Miss Anonymous, I don’t know which batch you are from and I also don’t know of any present batch in the University which would be so dumb as to have “many” students who don’t even know how to write and read in English in its top 20 qualifiers for the intra-moot. I have participated in that competition in my own time and I can say it with proud that it is a highly competitive moot. There was not a single student in my batch who cleared the intra-moot and who I know to be incapable of writing and reading in English. However, admitting your claim for the fact of its gravity, I may agree that it is not a totally bias bereft competition though I did not experience any of that. But I want to state here my deep belief in the fact that the seniors do not organise the intra-moot for entertaining themselves. It is for the sake of enhancing and inculcating the mooting culture in the University that they take this pain. And getting a team or a moot is not difficult at HNLU. It is all about your talent and willingness.
    With respect to your seventh paragraph, I would like to make a clarification here. You said that you could not clear the intra-moot. So how could you attempt for a challenger if you’d already failed in the intra-moot? That is a big paradox which makes me disbelieve your entire story. Also, the Bench in Challengers/Benchmarks is held by the faculty members and not the seniors. So, your talk about bias by boyfriends and acquaintances is not true factually about the present status of the mooting culture. It may have happened when the seniors could sit on the Bench during Challengers/Benchmarks. I say this because my primary concern here is that your story is belittling the University’s PRESENT image in view of the independent readers or even CLAT aspirants.
    So, Miss Anonymous, your entire story is actually A Liar’s Autobiography, an Untrue Story. I don’t know what intentions have led you to write this, but they sure as hell aren’t bona fide. It’s a humble request to the Editor of this website to cross-check the content that is being uploaded here. Many times has this story failed to make a point and you still upload this nonsense which, for all we know, could have been written by a non-HNLUite, considering the fact that the writer is even unaware of the mooting Rules of the University. And the emo drama at the end is a disgrace to your website too, Mr. Editor. This is not a display of courage. This is a display of a cheap popularity stunt. My only fear is that the comments wouldn’t always reach out to the readers and they would directly fall for believing this baloney. So it would be in the best interest of everyone if you removed this post from your website.
    Humbly pleading,
    A believer in MCC, HNLU.

    • Hi, our responses to most of the points raised in your comments. Please let us know in case we’ve missed any.

      1. Lawctopus is ‘selling’ sexual harassment and this is a cheap popularity stunt.

      Our traffic: This post has garnered around 2900 views till now. udgets around 400,000 views every month. This post makes less than 0.75% of our monthly traffic.

      We are doing good with our usual internship experiences, opportunities etc. We don’t need to indulge in such cheap tactics as suggested by some of you to ‘sell’.

      How websites make money: Earlier, websites could make some buck by a ‘pay per click’ advertisement thingy (Google Adsense), but now it’s going to make us richer by probably rupees 2 a year.

      We do not depend on the number of clicks to make money. We are lucky and proud to have created a good brand which attracts good companies as its annual advertising clients.

      2. This is a lie. Lawctopus should do its due diligence. Lawctopus is indulging in mud-slinging.

      This is an expected knee-jerk reaction. We do not expect the Moot Court Society at HNLU or HNLUites to come and say “Yes. That’s what happens. It’s true. It’s true.” Any loyal college student will defend his/her college to the hilt and we are not surprised!

      Not a lie: This is a blog post containing a ‘life experience’ of a student of HNLU. (That’s what most of the blog posts are about; life experiences). A life experience ‘happens’ to you. Others cannot refute one’s life experience.

      Due diligence: Our job here was to confirm whether the ‘life experience’ was of someone who really is living that ‘life’, someone who actually had that ‘experience’. For that we needed to confirm if the student is from HNLU. And yes, we did.

      A media publication is not expected to do the rigorous investigation of a police officer or the follow the procedures of a court of law.

      Mud-slinging: Why would we indulge in such mud-slinging? What’s in it for us? Please do let us know.

      3. The post doesn’t get the internal moot court logistics and selection procedures right.

      She has alleged minor forms of sexual harassment in the post which I am sure you’ll all acknowledge is an issue of critical importance.

      The details regarding the logistics of your internal moot selections are of secondary importance (maybe she’s writing of her experience in the last year and it’s only now that such changes [faculty judging] have been made?)

      4. If this were true, the whole college would stand behind the girl.

      A. The whole of HNLU will not stand behind this issue because most probably it will never come ‘out’.

      Unfortunately, rarely do people come in the open with such complaints. Maybe that’s why this girl has decided NOT to take it up with the college authorities (maybe she will?). Maybe that’s why this girl has raised this issue via an anonymous blog post.

      It will also never come out because raising such an issue can easily lead to the complainant being victimized in multiple possible ways.

      B. The whole of HNLU will not stand behind this issue, because you’ll be worried how ‘it affects our standings in the CLAT ladder’ (that’s what the comments point out to).

      PS- We are not saying that these are not HNLU endemic issues (victimization, come-what-way defence of one’s college).

      5. Take the post down because it lowers the reputation of HNLU and will affect CLAT preferences.

      On this, we all need to introspect deeply. Is ‘reputation’ of our college so important that we brush this issue under the carpet? Is it not a facade of a reputation, something which countries like China put on? How long will such a reputation sustain?

      Even if this post does lower the reputation of HNLU, we have our defences to defamation. Otherwise, any write-up which speaks against anything would be defamatory. Maybe it’s time to revisit the lessons on free speech, truth as a defence to defamation and the lesson on fair comment.

      Moreover, under Indian Law prior restraint on any publication is not allowed. Defamation proceedings can be initiated once the publication is complete. No restraints can be imposed prior to the publication.

      And yes, we are ready to fight such a case in court.

      PS- Putting up a status on Facebook on free speech is easy, living up to that ideal in real life is where ‘the work’ starts.

      6. The author has bad English writing skills

      A lot of the comments are about the English language writing skills of the student concerned. Really? That’s your response to the issues raised in the post?

      This is ridiculous and shameful and we will not respond to this anymore. It trivializes a serious issue.

      PS- We think the author writes pretty well!

      7. The author is undermining those who work hard and achieve success. She’s a sour loser. She wants her 2 minutes in the sun.

      We don’t know if she’s a sour loser or a courageous girl who spoke out against a disturbing trend.

      Even if she’s a sour loser, she has every right to write about what happened to her. Isn’t a murder of a murderer too a murder?

      PS- Isn’t this victim blaming? Again, it’s very easy to put a Facebook status, it’s difficult to act on the ideal.

      8. WE’D LIKE TO ADMIT A MISTAKE. This is, as it’s evident, a reader’s blog and not a ‘report’ by Lawctopus.

      We should have added the usual disclaimer “This is a reader’s blog, published on an ‘as is’ basis and may not reflect the view-point of Lawctopus. Lawctopus has no responsibility for the contents of reader blogs” but we didn’t. Sincere apologies for that.

      9. A post on Lawctopus doesn’t bring any ‘justice’: Yes, and that’s not our job, unfortunately.

      Media’s job is the bring an issue to limelight and encourage introspection. We hope, we’ve done that.


      Amidst so many comments defending HNLU, we forgot an important point. This is not about HNLU. This is about mild forms of sexual harassment that happen everywhere. This is NOT an HNLU endemic issue (any reasonable person will understand that). Many committees, societies in many colleges do have such cases of minor sexual harassment happening. The same is true for a lot of offices and work places!

      Also, while you are free to engage in such a stout defence of HNLU, here’s a food for thought…a few important things that will impact how CLAT aspirants think of a college:

      HNLU’s Not-So-Impressive Placement Record:

      In 2014, 29 out of 81 students found jobs. Moreover, out of these 15 jobs were at the Chhattisgarh Law & Legislative Ministry. Such a dependence on one recruiter is again not a good sign.


      In 2013, 21 out of 50 HNLU students found jobs. 6 out of 21 jobs were at the Chhattisgarh Law & Legislative Ministry.


      HNLU’s Mooting Record: Many would place HNLU among the top 10 law colleges in India. Here are the mooting (MPL) ranks:

      MPL 1 (2009-10): 20
      MPL 2 (2010-11): 6
      MPL 3 (2011-12): 17
      MPL 4 (2012-13): 8
      MPL 5 (2013-14): 11

      An average mooting rank of 15.

  12. Lolwa!

    HANLU ka scene ho gayeva!

    Editor ne veracity check karne ke bina cheezein daaldiwan!

    #cheappublicitystunt on hanlu and lawctopus ke naam par ho gayi va

    #parashar bhaiya is so coolwa

  13. What the fuck. []. It doesn’t look like a moot team but some high level organization where females are exploited and “they have to sleep with men” to reach the top of the chain. But let’s get serious here. This is a very serious allegation. The veracity of such statements must be checked and full enquiry carried out.

    However, I have a feeling that this is written by an incompetent first or second year who could not make it through to the internals and is bitter about the whole affair. Comeon man, I do not believe that students would start demanding sexual favors for some silly moot court competition. Judge me not cause I am a hardcore feminist and a strong supporter of “women empowerment” but this time my support for this is not needed.

    The person in question should work on her written English. Maybe, that could help her in actually getting a berth at one of these “prestigious” moot court cmpetitions. Because had I been the judge I would have rejected the memo based on such pathetic grammar.

    Just my two cents.

  14. Are you sure you are from HNLU. Because it doesn’t sound like you are from HNLU. In your college (which is fyi is HNLU). To get through a moot you need to do hardwork in HNLU. There are some people (like you miss) who instead of doing hard work blames the system and the college and the judges, seniors and everyone. Please don’t play such stunts to negatively portray our college. Life is peaceful here, please don’t ruin it.

  15. Dear Anonymous,
    There are other ways to vile an institution’s name. There was no need at all to vilify it with fictitious, fabricated fallacies.
    Merry Christmas. May you get the gift of getting a life. Or help. Whichever comes handier.

  16. Hidayatullah National Law University and the teams representing us achieved unparalleled glory in mooting arena in the year 2014. This post is likely to overshadow the hardwork and efforts of the individuals who represented us and brought the trophies home.

    Having been closing associated with mooting culture at HNLU, I won’t deny the prejudice and unfair in challengers. But alleging seniors of sexual harassment and undue favour is bit too much. Losing may be sore, and difficult, but blaming the seniors for your loss is sad. And that’s the reason why you are where you are, and the others are where they are, simply because – “they deserved it, and you didn’t”.

  17. The concerned article is flooded with myriad inherent contradictions , to name a few:
    Firstly, the author has very clearly brought forth that she had failed to clear the Internal Challenger Rounds and the condition subsequent which flows out form this is that she would have been precluded from even participating in the Internal Challengers for the entire first year. However, the article mentions that she had ‘participated’ in the Internal Challengers in her second semester itself which quite apparently is not possible.
    Secondly, the system of ‘Student Benchmark’ has been scraped out completely pursuant to the new MCC rules which have been in effect since last year.
    – MCC Student Convener (HNLU, Raipur)

  18. I really think that a site like Lawctopus should take care to carry out some degree of due diligence before allowing posts of such inflammatory character. Firstly, none of the Challengers are ever judged by a student bench, Even Benchmarks( wherein there is no challenging team) for that matter, are nowadays judged by a faculty bench, so the question of student influence does not really stand.
    A note to the editor here, please carry out a factual check before allowing such posts, your popularity ratings actually fall when you engage in such mindless fact-less mud slinging. Moreover, you being the editor of a magazine can be held liable for defamation. Please do not take such things lightly.
    Secondly, a note to the author. Your English is worthy of a slow mexican wave. It’s that horrid. Moreover, you should rather focus on being awesome at what you do than hide behind the garb of “sexual harassment” because its not really going to help you in any aspect of your life, rather try and better yourself. Most of the A Class Mooters in our college are girls and they are what they are because of their sheer hard work. Please, don’t demean yourself and more importantly their efforts by bringing up such frivolous claims. And yes, work on your English, Please.

  19. Or maybe you didn’t make it because you were not capable enough. Stop looking for excuses. People always think the female is right in such cases without thinking about the other side of the story. What if her rejection has got nothing to do with this and she is suffering purely because of her lack of ability?
    P.S. Look at all these silly grammatical mistakes she has made. I wouldn’t want her to be on my mooting team. Just saying!

  20. It’s rather unfortunate that you had to go through all this. But the kind of lesson you have drawn from this experience is depressing, if not foolish. You don’t have to “sleep your way through the top”. That’s the worst conclusion you can draw. And it’s all in your hands to fight it out if you really want to stand out from the crowd. It’s you who has to decide whether you want to be one in a hundred, or create a niche for yourself. Whatever you do, choose wisely. Because whatever you decide in the formative years of law school, either makes you or breaks you. All the best!


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here