Challenging the Boundaries of Consent in India
Written by Divyansh Singh, student at National University of Study and Research in Law Ranchi & Anwesha Mishra After the proceedings in the landmark case of Nipun Saxena Vs. Union of India, there has been a renewed gain in the momentum of symposium surrounding the Age of Consent in India. The current legal age of consent which is 18 years was challenged by Senior Advocate Indira Jaisingh who appeared as amicus curiae in the case who argue for reduction of the legal age of consent to 16 years to address the unintended criminalization of consensual adolescent relationships. The debate initially started after the historic Nirbhaya Case when the minor convict who was reported to be the most brutal of all the other convicts , who gave most brutal wounds to the victim, recieved only three years in reform facility due to his age , he went to trial as per the Juvenile Justice Act. The case raised questions about the challenges of age based legal protection while also holding them accountable for serious crimes, highlighting the need to understand adolescent behaviors and culpability. POCSO Act: Protection or Over Criminalisation? The age of consent according to the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act is 18 years, any sexual activity with person below this age will lead to criminal proceedings regardless of consent. The act was enacted to protect children from sexual exploitation, but the implementation has revealed concerning consequences. Statistical evidence clearly demonstrates the widespread impact of current laws on adolescents. Between 2018 and 2022, POCSO convictions for juveniles (16-18 years) rose from 144 to 213, while detentions increased from 844 to 1,757, resulting in a conviction rate of just 12.12% in 2022. For young adults aged 18 to 22, conviction rates dropped from 13.88% in 2018 to 10.04% in 2022, despite higher arrest figures. Research shows that in cases involving inter caste or inter faith relationships, the POCSO Act was used as a weapon against the juveniles. A 2024 study of child sexual offense cases in India found that 99.2% of cases involved accused persons in friendly relationship with the victims, 85.7% of victims aged 16-18 years had consented to sexual relations, of which all cases were reported by parents or guardians rather than the victims themselves. The human cost faced by those individuals is devastating. Adolescents face imprisonment for years, a huge damage to the reputation and shattered careers. A Karnataka engineering student spent three years in prison before acquittal, rendering his degree worthless and causing severe mental health deterioration. Similarly, a Bihar engineering student spent four years in jail after eloping with his girlfriend, losing job opportunities and attempting suicide twice. Sexual Maturity and Puberty Completion The argument of lowering the age of consent to 16 is strongly supported by biological evidence. The Hypothalamic Pituitary Gonadal axis becomes fully functional during adolescence, hence enabling reproductive capabilities. By the age of 16, most adolescents have achieved complete sexual maturity which includes the development of primary and secondary sexual characteristics. Researchers also stated that sexual development occurs in predictable stages, with most adolescents experiencing first sexual interest and exploration at 14 years of age. The average age of first sexual contact is 14 years, while first intercourse typically occurs around age 16. Sexual hormones like testosterone, estrogen and progesterone experience a surge which drives physical development and also influences cognitive and emotional development related to sexual behaviour . The biological foundation for mature sexual decision making is established since the hormonal changes are largely completed by age of 16. Extensive neuroscientific research reveals that adolescents achieve the same cognitive abilities as compared to the adults by age 16. Studies involving over 900 individuals between ages 10 to 30 demonstrate that logical reasoning, memory, and basic cognitive capacity mature by age 16. Studies have also proved increased maturity and autonomy among modern adolescents compared to previous generations. Improved Nutrition and healthcare coupled with early onset of puberty significantly resulted in today’s 16 years old being psychologically and biologically more mature than their historical counterparts. The concept of evolving capacities was recognized in international human rights law which supported the idea that adolescents should be granted increasing autonomy as they develop. Hence stating that Sexual autonomy is an integral component of human dignity and privacy rights. Social Reality vs. Legal Framework The current legal framework in our country go wrong by not acknowledging social realities. According to the National Family Health Survey (NFHS-5), 6.8% women aged between 15 to 19 years went through pregnancy or had given birth, with states like West Bengal and Bihar with 16% and 11% respectively indicating widespread sexual activities among adolescents in India. The criminalisation of consensual relationships and sexual activities forces young couples to hide their relationship to stay away from legal trouble instead of open talks and education. This approach also undermines public health efforts to provide sexual education and reproductive health services to adolescents. The current age of consent may violate several constitutional provisions. Article 14 provides Right to Equalty to all, but the blinded and blanket criminalisation treats all the sexual activities of person aged under 18 identically without considering context , age difference creating arbitrary distictions. Article 19 provides right to freedom of expression but criminalising consensual relationships restricts freedom of association and expression. Article 21 provides right to life and personal liberty hence sexual autonomy of adolescents should be recognised as part of personal liberty. International Legal Standards Most developed countries in the world have set the age of consent to 16 years. United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and most European countries recognize 16 as an appropriate age of consent. Many jurisdictions also include “close in age” or “Romeo or Juliet” exceptions that prevent prosecution of consensual relationships between adolescents. India’s age of consent at 18 is among the highest globally and is clearly inconsistent with the International standards that believes in balancing child protection while also protecting adolescent autonomy. Judicial Recognition of the problem High courts in our
MODERNIZATION OR MONITORING? THE SURVEILLANCE SHADOW OF THE INCOME TAX BILL, 2025
Written by Ms. Rishita Dasgupta & Mr. Samik Mukherjee students at School of Law and Justice, Adamas University, Kolkata In recent times our lives have become digitalized like banking, communication, medical records, social relationships, even thoughts through digital notes, the Income Tax Bill, 2025 gives unprecedented power to tax authorities to invade into an individual’s private sphere. In the disguise of modernization and anti-evasion measures, this bill’s most debatable provisions risk normalizing a state of digital surveillance, where every little personal data is subject to governmental scrutiny. If left unrestricted, these measures may not just curtail our privacy, it could quietly push citizens into a digital prison, where frequent surveillance replaces the constitutional assurance of freedom. The Income Tax Bill, 2025, which will replace the current Income Tax Act, 1961, from April 1, 2026, is being praised as a step towards simplification of procedures and increase of productivity. However, gently hidden within its legal prose is a shocking expansion of state power, that is the authorization for tax officers to access a taxpayer’s “virtual digital space”. This includes email accounts, cloud storage, mobile devices, social media platforms, investment apps, and several other online apps. Further, officers are not only allowed to request access from individuals, they may even override passwords and encryptions, without any permission from the judiciary. In simple terms, if you’re under investigation, the state can forcefully enter your digital life, extract your private data, and use it against you, all without you even knowing in reality. This isn’t just a tax tool, it’s a surveillance system. Tax compliance is essential, but the instruments employed to enforce compliance have to withstand the test of constitutionality, especially the right to privacy identified by the Supreme Court in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) . This historic judgment held privacy to be a fundamental right, safeguarded under Article 21 of the Constitution. It laid down the threefold test: legality, necessity, and proportionality. The necessity test asks is the intrusion absolutely essential for achieving the state’s objective? While preventing tax evasion is a legitimate aim, the government has other less intrusive tools already at its disposal like PAN-Aadhaar linkage, Income Disclosure Schemes, TDS and GST data tracking, AI-based risk flagging systems. Thus, granting unrestricted access to personal cloud storage or encrypted chats isn’t strictly essential. This broad power looks more like convenience for the state than a necessary measure in a democratic society. Proportionality requires that the measure has a rational nexus to the objective, is the least restrictive option, and does not disproportionately harm rights compared to the benefit gained. In this case granting tax officers unfiltered access to all personal data, with no judicial safeguards, is highly disproportionate. The harms like loss of dignity, fear, censorship, and potential misuse, far outweigh the revenue benefits, especially for ordinary taxpayers. At the heart of the controversy is the phrase “virtual digital space”, a term not clearly defined anywhere in the bill. In legal drafting, clarity and precision are key. Vague terms allow discretionary interpretation by authorities, and in the realm of fundamental rights, this vagueness becomes dangerously elastic. What falls under this space? Is it limited to financial accounts, or does it include health data, romantic messages, or cloud-synced writing apps? The government has left it ambiguous, perhaps intentionally. Such elasticity gives the state a key to every digital lock under the justification of preventing tax fraud. But this trade-off is grossly disproportionate and ripe for legal challenge. This is no longer about tax evasion, it’s about control. One of the most chilling aspects of the bill is its suggestion to bypass encrypted security measures. With cybersecurity threats running amok in the modern world, encryption, as sensitive information, is what keeps citizens safe from hackers, identity thieves, and abuse of surveillance. By weakening encryption, the government is not only violating our personal space but disassembling the entire digital security framework. It violates EU GDPR, DPDP 2023, and IT Rules 2011 by not taking informed consent before accessing their data. It also constitutes a red flag under our Constitution. Article 20(3) of the Constitution also guarantees protection from self-incrimination. When a citizen is compelled to open their digital devices or give passwords, isn’t that a flagrant violation? This coercive tool essentially forces the taxpayer to help build a case against himself. In democracies, aggressive state action is counterbalanced by judicial supervision. Wiretapping, search and seizure, or invasion of private correspondence usually require advance court sanction. But under the new law, tax officials are able to gain cyber access with no such scrutiny. The mechanism is all executive and eliminates the judiciary from the chain. This absence of checks is not merely a defect, it is a risk in the system. It builds an ecosystem where there is much potential for abuse, harassment, and politicization. An official with bad intentions might threaten citizens, expose confidential information, or go after political rivals. History teaches us that unchecked power is often abused, and the state must be designed to prevent, not enable, such risks. When people know they are under surveillance, they talk differently, think differently, and live differently. This is the chilling effect, where the threat of surveillance chills freedom of expression, association, and dissent. Now consider knowing that a government official may read your private messages, memes, jokes, diary entries, or even photos. This fear can result in self-censorship both online and in thought. The bill, in granting complete access to online platforms, instills fear and compels citizens into a state of mental imprisonment. We might have not witnessed prison bars, but they exist in disguise of digital submission and behavioural compliance. Privacy activists have drawn similarities between this bill and China’s surveillance ecosystem, where the state monitors digital behaviour of it’s citizens to assign “citizen scores” impacting their mobility, employment, and social standing. While India is far from such apocalypse, the basic frameworks of a surveillance state are introduced, justified by noble-sounding objectives like security of the citizens or revenue generation. Adding to India’s growing interest
GENDER, JUSTICE, AND JAIL: THE CASE FOR WOMEN’S LEGAL ADVOCACY
Written by Aboo Bakr student at Jamia Millia Islamia From the beginning of human civilisation to the modern era of unprecedented advancement, history bears witness to a grave truth: if there is one being whose dignity has been most violated, whose existence has been most trampled upon, and whose honour has been most ruthlessly exploited, it is none other than the woman. In this 21st century, where everyone talks about human rights, equality, and justice, women are still wrestling with entrenched discrimination and hardship on many fronts. Their rights are often shrugged aside, even with various laws and policies on the principle of justice across the globe, especially in regions where they should be the safest—the prison system, which was primarily designed for the incarceration of men. Women who already suffer from social chauvinism also face discrimination in prison, which is largely occupied by male staff and promotes an atmosphere for female inmates that fail to meet and address their physical, emotional, and social requirements. The gender-specific needs of prisoner women are often overlooked, primarily due to their numerical minority within the prison population. However, statistics also show a slow increase in women in prison and highlight a need to address the current panel framework. This blog examines the challenges faced by women prisoners, the lacunae in their legal protection, and the necessary reforms to address these issues. The Situation Of Women’s Prisons In India: Women incarcerated in Indian prisons are systematically deprived of their fundamental rights and basic amenities, including access to libraries, factory areas, open spaces, and recreational facilities that men can easily access, just because they are part of the male section of the prison. Although the total population of female prisoners remains a small percentage of the overall prison population, increased by 11.7% from 2014 to 2019, women made up 4.2% of the prison population. The report also highlights that 76% of all prisoners are undertrials, worsening the issue of prolonged incarceration without conviction that amounts to a clear violation of the right to speedy trial, as held in Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar (1980). Notably, only 18% of female prisoners get exclusive women’s prison facilities, as only 15 states and UTs have functional women’s prisons. The rest of the population lives in enclosures inside the prison facility. There is a lack of separate medical and psychiatric wards for female inmates. Distressingly, less than 40% of prisons provide sanitary napkins to female inmates, violating Article 21 of the Constitution. Women who are accompanied by their children are also deprived of nutritious food and proper education. Only prisons in Goa, Delhi, and Puducherry permit female prisoners to meet their children without being separated by bars or glass. It is concerning to note that 75% of prison wards for women must share common living spaces and kitchens with male offenders, increasing the risk to security. Judicial Pronouncement & Committee Reports On Women Prisoners’ Rights: The Prisons Act of 1894 or the corresponding State Prison Manuals govern the management and administration of prisons, which are solely the responsibility of state governments. The States bear the parens patriae responsibility to ensure the protection of prisoners’ rights and to amend the prison regulations to align with evolving human rights standards. The State’s duty extends to preventing and penalising violence against women, whether perpetrated by public officials or private actors, as part of its obligation to uphold the principles of natural justice and due process of law. The Indian judiciary has time and again ruled about appalling women’s conditions in prisons. The Same thing happened in the case of Shatrughan Chauhan v. Union of India (2014), wherein the Supreme Court of India dealt with the inhumane treatment of prisoners and emphasised their constitutional right of prisoners under Article 21. In Sheela Barse v. Secretary, Aid Society (1987) too, the Court laid down guidelines for safeguarding the fundamental rights of women prisoners. In its landmark judgement in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997), the Supreme Court of India unequivocally held that any kind of torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment is included in the concept of personal liberty as per Article 21 of the Constitution and thus a constitutional prohibition against custodial violence. The Model Prison Manual, draughted by the Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPRD), also underscores the need for gender-sensitive prison management. The Prison Act of 1894 contains provisions that apply to all convicts regardless of their sex because it makes no mention of female inmates in India. The Need For Gender – Specific Legal Rights: Recognising the plight condition of women in prison, states must adopt a proactive and reformative approach to ensure gender-sensitive prison policies. The measures outlined below, though not exhaustive, are sine qua non for upholding the fundamental rights of women prisoners. The Way Foreward: Across the world, including India, voices are raised against egregious and preposterous violations of human rights, particularly concerning women and children. Yet, there remains one marginalised group that is perpetually overlooked—those confined within the grim walls of prisons, about them our traditional and typical minds think only one thing: that they are not human beings, they do not have access to their basic amenities, they should be deprived of every facility, and they do not even deserve any basic rights. However, the law and justice system is not just for free citizens but for everyone who breathes, who feels, and who is alive. A society that turns a blind eye to the injustices within its prison system compromises the very essence of justice itself. Moreover, the Prisons Act, 1894, is outdated and needs repair. It contains no provision regarding the welfare and the betterment of the women prisoners. Recognising the urgent need for prison reforms, the Supreme Court in 2018 constituted a committee led by Justice Amitava Roy to examine prison conditions. However, the mere establishment of committees is not a panacea—similar efforts, such as those led by Justice A.N. Mulla and Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer in the 1980s, failed to translate into tangible
The War Amongst Brands: The 6E Identity Crisis
Written by Yash Somraj Roy student at Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur. Trademarks and India: A Rocky Relationship A trademark is of utmost essence in today’s modern world with thousands of disputes arising each day. Its main motive is to discern the goods and services of one person or entity from those of another. The rise of trademark disputes, only grow year after year and are expected to grow above and beyond with advancements in artificial intelligence and technology. The World Intellectual Property Organisation has recorded a 57 percent growth that is from 3.3 lakh cases to 5.2 lakh cases of trademark disputes being filed from the years 2018-2023. These astonishing numbers state the need for regulations and laws which revolve around Trademark disputes and focus on solving them efficiently as well as urgently. The recent “Indigo 6E” case, is yet another instance of trademark altercations in India. This case between IndiGo Airlines and Mahindra Ltd. involving dispute over the logo “6E” which IndiGo Airlines considers to be its core identity. The dispute emerged under the legal lens when Mahindra utilised the mark on its newly manufactured SUV model. Subsequently, IndiGo claimed that the utilisation of the mark was an infringement of the airline’s brand identity. Therefore, after repeated tries of reconciliation and on failing to achieve common ground with the automobile company, it approached the court hoping for a legal remedy. However, the lack of uniformity in trademark in judgements and orders passed by courts may create legal hurdles for both the parties. This dispute, between IndiGo and Mahindra involves a rather fundamental and substantial question of trademark law: Does the uncertainty revolving around the “6E” case signal a need for uniformity in trademark interpretations? The author by invoking this question, seeks to delve into the intricacies of the recent “6E” case with respect to trademark disputes and further seeks to explore the possibilities of suggesting changes that may be brought within the existing framework. The author also explores effective precautionary means and efficient solutions which can in turn help the judicial ordinances to ensure uniformity in trademark interpretations and could also act as a diminishing force for Trademark disputes in India. The 6E Case and The Lack of Uniformity in Trademark Judgements. The 6E case is a dispute which arose in the “Delhi High Court” when IndiGo Airlines filed a suit of trademark infringement against Mahindra’s newly launched flagship SUV model, the “BE 6E”. IndiGo argued that the “6E” logo was a trademark to the airline and the services it provided, and therefore, Mahindra is deceiving the public by associating with the mark and the company’s image. Mahindra defended itself by stating that the two companies were affiliated with different group of industrial ecosystems and hence, in no way could the utilisation of the mark 6E cause any harm to IndiGo’s image. Trademark judgements in India have no definite boundaries and often have scope for scepticism. In the case of ‘Nandhini Deluxe vs Karnataka Co-Operative Milk Producers Federation’ the court held that similar trademark for products in different industries do not constitute as an infringement of trademark. But contradicting this in the case of ‘L’Air Liquide Société Anonyme pour l’Etude et l’Exploitation des procédés Georges Claude and Anr. vs M/s Liquid AIR & Ors’ the court had a differing opinion and held that even though the products of both the parties were connected to different industries the use of a similar trademark nevertheless comprised of a trademark infringement. The court’s reasoning in the “L’Air Liquide” case to hold trademark infringement was due to a viable functional overlap between both the companies and their involvement in commodities such as air and gas. However, it could be very strongly argued that in the “Nandhini Deluxe” case too, both the parties faced a significant functional overlap with each other as both of them, entailed in the food production sector and hence came under the same umbrella. Therefore, the court, in this case too, should have warranted a finding of trademark infringement. Contradicting judgements of this kind is not rare in the Indian legal ecosystem and multiple cases such as ‘Satyam Infoway Ltd. v. Sifynet Solutions Pvt. Ltd.’ and ‘ITC Limited v. Philip Morris Products S.A’ indicate this. The rigidity and uncertainty of trademark laws in India often have no criteria for distinguishing between what is considered as infringement of a trademark and what is not, and although cases such as the ‘Amritdhara Pharmacy v. Satya Deo Gupta’ have attempted to define what constitutes as trademark infringement. It is important to comprehend that the ruling majorly relies on phonetic similarity while ignoring the scope of cross-industry infringement conflicts. Another major inadequacy of this ruling is its primary reliance on consumer perception which is not only an intangible and unquantifiable factor but also a highly ambiguous factor. A Lackadaisical Approach: Legal Insights from the 6E Case. The Mahindra Group’s utilisation of such a renowned logo has unwarrantedly attracted the eyeballs of the legal fraternity. The Delhi High Court as of now, is yet to pass a ruling, and it is quite possible that it could be in favour of Mahindra considering the different industries the parties operate in, as seen in cases such as ‘ Sony Corporation v. K. Selvamurthy’. Furthermore, the registration of the mark “6E” by Mahindra in class 12 which pertains to vehicles under trademark law, is another primary aspect which could create a favourable ruling for the corporate entity. Registration of trademarks under different classes sets boundaries to the scope of infringement and hence, are an essential factor in deciding on cases of trademark disputes. IndiGo’s registration of the mark “6E link” under classes 9, 35, 39 and 16 and its lack of registration under class 12, paves a way for the automobile giant to argue against IndiGo’s claims of infringement utilizing the contention of different trademark classifications. However, if we plunge deep into the intricacies, there is no way that the risk-to-reward ratios are proportionate with each
BETWEEN PROPAGANDA AND CENSORSHIP: THE TWO-FACED CRISIS OF INDIAN MEDIA
Written by Amit Dang, fourth year student at National Law University Odisha. INTRODUCTION From the genesis of the printing press by Gutenberg, history has witnessed numerous unsuccessful attempts to curb the dissemination of information by the authority. In 1538 CE, Italy was the first to have an ‘Index of Prohibited Books’; this was further followed by other European states. Works of Nicolaus Copernicus, Giovanni Boccaccio, and Niccolo Machiavelli were added to the list of prohibited books. The freedom of speech and expression was made an inalienable man’s right in the French Revolution and is considered an inseparable substantive element of democracy, set in Abrams v. Abrams. The freedom of the press or media is one of the domains of freedom of speech and cannot be curtailed. However, looking into the contemporary media situation in the 20th and 21st centuries. The accessibility, control and dissemination of information have altogether revolutionised. The invention of the internet and mobile devices has not only made the accessibility to information easier but has also handed over the power to generate and create new information. A new dilemma has emerged: the media is being used to promote propaganda. The authority or governments have always tried to control and regulate media for dissemination of their propaganda; the heightened historical account of such use was seen in Nazi Germany by Adolf Hitler. In contemporary democratic states, although there is no direct control over the media, but indirect control. The media houses are owned by businessmen whose political alignment and support are toward any political party affiliation, or are owned by family members or those directly involved in politics. The government is bringing in new laws to regulate the media, and there is apprehension about what the government can regulate or control that is being generated by the media. CONSTITUTION AND MEDIA FREEDOM The Black Law Dictionary defines ‘media’ as “Every broadcasting and narrow casting medium, like newspapers, magazines, TV, radio, billboards, direct mail, telephone, fax, and internet are part of what is the Media.” However, the traditional understanding of media refers to a medium which provides news and information, i.e newspapers, press and news channels. Though there has been a new evolution of news providing sources through digital devices and internet companies like YouTube. Due to this evolution, there is ambiguity in defining or delineation what is media and what is not media. The right to freedom of the press is guaranteed in India by Article 19(1)(a) as Freedom of speech and expression, unlike in the US, where it explicitly states freedom of the press. However, this right is not absolute and is under the restrictions described under Article 19(2) as “ Nothing in sub-clause (a) of clause (1) shall affect the operation of any existing law, or prevent the State from making any law, in so far as such law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with Foreign States, public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence.” So, Article 19 clearly outlines that under the grounds of “the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with Foreign States, public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence” government can impose restriction on the circulation of information by the media. However, these are vague and understanding of what will be constituted as “public order” has evolved from the three landmark judgements in the “Ramesh Thappar v. State of Madras (The Cross Road Newspaper), Brij Bhushan v. State of Delhi (Organiser Newspaper) and State of Bihar v. Shailabala (Bharati Press)” cases. MEDIA REGULATION Media, which are mostly preferred to visual television and digital, are self-regulated through the “News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA)”, and the press or printed media is self-regulated by the “Press Council of India (PCI)” under the aegis of the “Press Council Act” of 1978. The self-regulation means there is monitoring of the work through its own rules and regulations. India and many countries in the world have the self-regulation mechanisms for the media because it is a general postulation that if the media of press comes under the regulation or control of government then it would mean intervention of media autonomy and freedom, ultimately violating the fundamental right under 19(1) freedom of “speech and expression”. The “Central News Media Accreditation Guidelines” are to be complied with by the electronic media houses, and if they are found to be broadcasting any false or fraudulent news, then the media house would face a penalty in the form of debarment form of accreditation up to a maximum of five years. Apart from that, there are internal mechanisms to fact-check the authenticity of the news. The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting regulate the television content through acts such as the “Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act 1995” and associated rules and codes. Furthermore, the “Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, 2023” has proposed to modernize the regulatory framework for broadcasting in India in this digital age. It aims to replace the old “Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995” and expands the scope to OTT content, IPTV, DTH and Digital news on the internet. TWO-FACED DELIMMA India’s position in the world freedom of the press index is 151. There has been a decline in the freedom of the press since the coming of the BJP government in 2014. The case of India is somewhat different from the other countries. There have been attacks on journalists, arbitrary arrests and imprisonment under the allegation of sedition. Business tycoons and politically aligned people own the media houses that promote the agendas of specific political ideologies. This poses a great threat to the free press, which doesn’t disseminate any propaganda. Most of the media houses are either owned by politicians or business tycoons who have
Tunnel Vision of the Apex Court: A Double-Edged Approach to Justice and Parity
Written by Pralipsa Panda student at National Law University Odisha “I wish men had menstruation, then only, they would understand,” Far from being a casual remark parroted by the general public, the quoted text reflects the anguish voiced by Justices B.V. Nagarathna and N. Kotiswar Singh. In 2024, as the apex court took suo-moto cognizance after a decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, the two-judge bench presented a poignant concern that highlighted the perpetuating discrimination against women. Slamming the judgment of the High Court terminating the services of women civil judges in the State and refusing to reinstate some of them added points of gender sensitivity to the books of the Supreme Court. However, with its recent judgment restoring the mandatory three-year practice in advocacy for judiciary aspirants, the top Court has pushed the dreams of women and various aspirants into a dark sinkhole, marking a sharp contrast from standing as the guardian of Fundamental Rights. This ruling came as a response to the concerns raised by multiple High Courts about the absence of exposure in a courtroom and practical experience among recent law graduates who entered the judiciary. By surmising that experience links to eligibility to preside on the bench, the Court failed to consider the impediments encountered by candidates from disadvantaged or humble backgrounds. Earlier Background The mandated three-year practice for judiciary aspirants is not a newly formulated rule but a restoration of what the Supreme Court scrapped in 2002, overruling the 1993 All India Judges Association case. This topic has been a matter of contemplation since the 116th Law Commission Report, 1983, recommended abolishing the rule. To put it chronologically, in 1993, the Supreme Court backed this rule of three years of advocacy. Later when the Shetty Commission in 1996 recommended abolishing this requirement, the Supreme Court in 2002 sanctioned the recommendation. Rejection of harsh realities: the cyclic inequalities. While the requirement appears neutral on paper, in actuality, it perpetuates inequality. In a country like India where the right to work is a guaranteed fundamental right, ironically, the inviolable right to dignity becomes violable to women, particularly in the workforce. In an interview with the Supreme Court Observer, Justice B.V. Nagarthana stressed the crucial role of domestic support in the professional advancement of women advocates. The honorable judge was undoubtedly correct in her view. As women navigate through the second shift, familial support becomes vital to topple the social norms that place a dual burden on women. The Supreme Court has long positioned itself as a caretaker of women’s rights, evident in former Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud’s strong and eloquent opinion in the Indian Young Lawyers’ Association to landmark rulings like Shayara Bano. Contrary to its earlier standpoints, the Court has reversed advancement for women by restoring the three-year mandatory bar practice requirement. These additional years of precariousness will force many women to abandon their goals and submit to societal norms. The judiciary has always witnessed a dearth of gender diversity. According to the Indian Justice Report, 38% of Judges in District Courts are women. While the number marks a clear progress from the old days, this judgment by the apex court reasserts the glass ceiling. What invokes concern is the dismissal of this reality. Over the past few days, numerous instances revealed the discrimination women in law face. For example, in Allahabad High Court, a decree passed by a male judge trivialized rape attempts. Although this judgment was stayed by the Supreme Court, it nonetheless depicts the need for gender diversity in the judiciary to foster a more empathetic and morally sane approach. This approach is feasible only when the presence occupying the benches is diverse. In a judicial diaspora where female judges continue to face entrenched challenges ranging from misogynistic attitudes to institutional neglect, this decision by the Supreme Court aggravates it. Recently, a woman judge in a Delhi court was openly threatened inside her courtroom by a convicted lawyer and his client following a verdict in a cheque bounce case. The female judge faced a direct and gendered threat. This captures the daily risks women in the judiciary bear. Such incidents only sharpen the irony of the Supreme Court’s recent move to make entry into the judiciary more challenging for women. In a vicinity where sitting female judges already face threats and systemic oppression, the three-year practice requirement aids in filtering out aspirants before they can even reach the bench, thus acting as an additional barrier to an already hostile system. In 2023, the Allahabad High Court directed the astrology department of Lucknow University to determine whether the rape complainant was ‘Manglik’ as a response to the accused’s assertion that he could not marry her due to astrological incompatibility. Despite the Supreme Court’s stay in the order, it raises grave concerns. Why should any court apply this outdated rationale in the first place? Such decisions by the bearers of justice betray even the rudimentary standards of legal reasoning. One would anticipate such a superstitious mindset to be disposed of by the admission of young rational minds into the judicial field. However, with the Supreme Court’s mandate, this seems to be an improbable possibility. Another serious lapse generated by the Supreme Court’s ruling is its potential to discourage aspirants belonging to humble or underprivileged backgrounds from pursuing a judicial career. This requirement by the Supreme Court creates an economic quagmire. In many regions, junior lawyers have to work without any formal source of payment. Most senior advocates and law firms offer no stipends, pushing young lawyers to depend on family support, resources many simply do not enjoy. For example, in Tiruchi district, junior lawyers continue to struggle financially despite the Madras High Court’s 2024 order mandating a minimum stipend. The order directs established lawyers to pay juniors at least ₹20,000 per month in cities like Chennai, Madurai, and Coimbatore, and ₹15,000 in other parts of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry. However, this order faces lapses in its implementation, thus exposing the disconnect between judicial
Decades of Tenancy: The Supreme Court’s Verdict on Bona Fide Need and Comparative Hardship
Written by Avinash Verma & Anshu Rahi students at National University of Study and Research in Law, Ranchi Seventy-three years is not just the measure of a tenancy it’s the span of nearly three generations, bound by a legal knot that finally unraveled in April 2025. When the Supreme Court handed down its ruling in Murlidhar Aggarwal (D.) Thr. His LR. Atul Kumar Aggarwalv. Mahendra Pratap Kakan (D.) Thr. LRs. and Ors., it did more than decide a property dispute; it brought closure to a saga that had outlasted the independence of India itself. For 63 years after the original lease expired, this cinema hall in Allahabad stood as a testament to stubbornness, hardship, and the tension between security of tenure and a landlord’s genuine need for their property. The Supreme Court, setting aside the High Court’s decision, allowed the eviction—finally bringing the curtains down on this long-drawn legal drama1. II. The Legal Canvas: A History of Tenancy Law To appreciate this judgment, it’s essential to understand the statutory landscape. The Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (the “Act of 1972”) governs urban tenancy disputes in Uttar Pradesh, balancing tenant protection with landlord rights. Section 21(1)(a) enables a landlord to seek eviction if they require the property for “bona fide” occupation, but this right is hedged by provisos that enforce comparative hardship analysis. In simple terms: The law asks, whose need is greater—the landlord’s, or the tenant’s2? The associated Rules of 1972, especially Rule 16(2), instruct the Prescribed Authority to consider factors such as the length of tenancy and the breadth of the landlord’s current business interests when weighing who faces greater hardship. These rules ensure the process isn’t mechanical but tailored, accounting for real human circumstances. III. The Genesis of the Dispute: A Tale of Two Families This is more than just a battle over bricks and mortar. Murlidhar Aggarwal’s predecessor purchased the disputed cinema hall in 1962, which had been leased to the respondents since 1952. The landlord’s family, beset by financial difficulty, argued for the release of their property to start their own business. Evidence revealed that Murlidhar’s son, Atul Kumar Aggarwal, had a low, unstable income, with assets reportedly “in the negative.” For the Prescribed Authority, the hardship was visceral: necessity, not mere convenience3. On the other end, the tenants Ram Agya Singh and his legal heirs claimed that the landlords belonged to a joint family business, with multiple sources of income. They stressed the hardship of losing a business they’d cultivated for decades, and pointed to earlier rounds of litigation dating back to 1965 as proof of the entrenched conflict and tenacity on both sides5. IV. The Judicial Journey: A Reversal of Fortunes The first stop was the Prescribed Authority, which sided with the landlord, weighing the evidence and finding both the need and comparative hardship favoring release of the property. But litigation is seldom straightforward. The Appellate Authority reversed this decision, focusing not on the degree of hardship, but on whether the landlord truly had “no business”—and found their income sufficient to bar eviction. In doing so, the Appellate Authority effectively constructed a new case, sidestepping the details of the landlord’s financial difficulties and ignoring the original finding that the landlord’s need was pressing4. The High Court affirmed the Appellate Authority, further entrenching the tenant’s tenure. It took the Supreme Court’s careful scrutiny to unravel this web: The Court criticized the lower courts’ reasoning as “wholly unsustainable,” noting their failure to appreciate the evidence or to apply the comparative hardship doctrine in its true spirit1. V. The Guiding Principles: A Landmark Judgment’s Legacy The Supreme Court’s reasoning is a textbook example of judicial analysis. Bona Fide Need: The Court reaffirmed that the requirement for a landlord’s occupation under Section 21(1)(a) must be construed liberally extending not just to the landlord but to family members, as established in Joginder Pal v. Naval Kishore Behal 5 and Dwarkaprasad v. Niranjan and Anr.6 Even more notably, the Court invoked Section 21(7), holding that the death of the original landlord does not kill the claim if an heir, such as Atul Kumar Aggarwal who is crippled and without income demonstrates genuine need. Comparative Hardship: The Court’s approach here was nuanced. Even assuming the tenants’ assertions about the landlords’ other businesses were entirely true, both sides were “equally poised” financially1. What tipped the balance was the tenant’s failure, spanning decades, to make any attempt to locate alternative premises. Citing Mohd. Ayub v. Mukesh Chand, the Bench insisted: “It is not the requirement of law that applicant should sit idle till his premises are not released”. Rule 16(2): Rule 16(2) was used by the respondents to argue that the landlord’s existing business interests weakened their claim. The Court disagreed, holding that business interests, the length of tenancy, and other factors must be considered together, not in isolation. The pressing need for the landlord and the tenants’ inertia neutralized the long-standing tenancy1. VI. Conclusion: A Clear Message for the Future This decision sends a sharp, unambiguous signal through Indian tenancy law: Tenant protection cannot fossilize occupation and frustrate a landlord’s right, especially where hardship is demonstrable and alternatives are available. The right to remain cannot become a lifetime entitlement in the face of compelling, bona fide need. The Supreme Court’s order granting the tenants time until December 31, 2025 to vacate, subject to compliance sets a final, decisive endpoint. A tenant cannot cling to property for decades, hoping law will indefinitely shield inertia. Where a landlord’s necessity is clear, judicial compassion must yield to reason, reminding us that justice delayed need not be justice denied. 1 Verdictum. “Bona Fide Requirement For Occupation Of Landlord Must Be Liberally Construed.” 25 Apr 2025. 2 “The Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972.” Section 21(1)(a). 3 IJTR.nic.in. “By: Justice S.U. Khan – Judicial Training & Research Institute.” Rule 16 of the Rules. 4 IJTR.nic.in. “By: Justice S.U. Khan – Judicial Training &
JUDGING THE JUDGE:RE-VIEWING JUDICIAL RECUSAL THROUGH AN ETHICAL LENS
Written by Bhuvi Gupta & Netra Karnam students at Institute of Law, Nirma University Introduction Every judge, before starting their career, takes an oath “that I will duly and faithfully and to the best of my ability, knowledge, and judgment perform the duties of my office without fear or favor, affection or ill will, and that I will uphold the Constitution and the laws”. These words, enshrined in Schedule III of our Constitution, succinctly summarize the core values of professional, moral, and ethical responsibility and bestow upon them the role of guardians of justice. The Indian judicial ethical values, crystallized over the years through practice, are founded on the twin pillars of impartiality and independence. In 1997, the Supreme Court of India unanimously adopted a Charter on Restatement of Values of Judicial Life. The Charter outlines the principles of an ideal judicial life and supports equitable justice through recusal of judges. This blog aims to delve into the concept of judicial recusal. It will draw a comparative analysis of practices of recusal followed in different countries. Further, it will examine the same in the Indian context and provide recommendations. Concept of Recusal Black’s Law Dictionary defines recusal as the “removal of oneself as a judge or policymaker in a particular matter, especially because of a conflict of interest.” When a judge has some interest in the case before him, he may, voluntarily or at the behest of either of the parties, recuse himself from the case. Interest may create bias in the mind of the judge, leading to the possibility of partiality against or preference towards a party.For justice to be delivered in its true sense, it is necessary that the same be done by an impartial adjudicator. This is a prerequisite to give meaning to the other components of due process of law, such as the right to an advocate, a hearing, and cross-examination of witnesses. Impartiality here connotes the absence of bias, real and perceived. There should not only be freedom from partiality but also from the appearance of partiality. Thus, the judicial codes and practices aim to prevent biased individuals from presiding over cases. The rationale behind judicial recusal emanates from the idea of bias rule, originating from the principles of natural justice. The rule was established in Dr. Bonham’s case where Lord Coke had propounded the maxim nemo judex in causa sua, which translates to “no one is a judge in his own cause”. This means that no person should be a judge in a case where he or she is a party to it or has any interest in its outcome. The principle preserves judicial sanctity and institutionalizes the aspect of fairness in judicial, quasi-judicial, and administrative work. Over the years and across jurisdictions, various grounds have been identified as rationales for recusal. Automatic disqualification occurs when the adjudicator may have a monetary interest in the outcome of the case. In the case of N.B. Jeejeebhoy v. Assistant Collector, Thana Prant, Thana, the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India reconstituted the bench when it was found out that one of the members was a member of the cooperative society for which the land had been acquired. Another ground for recusal is personal bias that the judge may develop with respect to the subject matter or his relationship with the parties. In A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India, the acting Chief Conservator of the forest was a member of the selection committee for the All India Forest Services Cadre and was also one of the candidates who had applied through the same. While it was ascertained that he hadn’t involved himself in the selection process, the court held that there was a definite conflict of interest and that there was a definitive likelihood of bias. A subject-matter bias is when the adjudicating authority has a predisposition towards any issue. For example, in the case of Gullapalli Nageswara Rao & Ors. v. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation & Ors, the Hon’ble Supreme Court quashed the Andhra Pradesh government’s decision to nationalize road transport stating, that the secretary of the transport department who pronounced the hearing held a subject-matter interest. The judge may recuse himself voluntarily or be asked to recuse himself at the request of the litigant. If a recusal takes place due to an objection raised by a litigant, reasons for the same should be provided to promote transparency and avoid forum shopping. For example, Justice U.U. Lalit automatically recused himself from the hearing for the land dispute in Ayodhya after it was brought to his notice that he had earlier appeared as counsel for the former Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh in the 1997 contempt hearing. However, in Assam Sanmilita Mahasangha v. Union of India, the then CJI, Ranjan Gogoi, was requested to recuse himself from hearing the case as he had made certain comments during a previous hearing causing the petitioner to believe that the CJI had certain preconceived notions about the matter. However, the CJI refused to comply with the request. Lord Hewart, in R. v. Sussex Justices, had remarked, “Justice should not only be done, but it shall also seem to be done.” In addition to recusal due to actual and apparent bias, the judge may also recuse himself to avoid an appearance or apprehension of bias in the mind of an observer. However, here the possibility of bias should be “real” and not a remote probability. The test to determine bias involves two stages. First, the judge must identify any factors that could cause a well-informed observer to reasonably fear that the case might not be decided solely on its merits. Second, the judge must determine whether there is a clear and logical link between those factors and the apprehension of bias. Recusal in Foreign Nations English Common Law:The custom of recusal globally stemmed from the maxim “nemo judex in causa sua”, which has its genesis in the common law of UK. There is an absence of any codified law on recusal in
Revising Section 63 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita to Make it Gender Neutral
Written by Akshat Kumar student at National University of Study and Research in Law, Ranchi & Shruti Udayan, student at National Law University, Jodhpur. INTRODUCTION: With the implementation of BNS, many changes were brought with it, aiming to modernise legal provisions; however, like many legal provisions, certain sections remain rooted in gender-specific language. One such section is Section 63 of the BNS. In 2007, a survey was conducted by the Ministry of Women and Child Welfare, a government body of India, where it was found that 53.2% of children reported having been abused sexually at least once in their lifetime; out of these, 52.9% were boys. According to a study done by SP (Railways) and a commandant of a women’s police battalion of Kerala in November 2020, boys were victims of sexual abuse in 17 per cent of cases, and in several of these incidents, culprits were women. In a country where male rape is more stigmatised than female and where male survivors find it difficult to come forward and talk about such incidents due to the fear of being mocked by society, such gender-biased laws make the situation even worse. This article explores the necessity of revising Section 63 to make it gender-neutral, it will delve into the changes in Laws related to the rape of males, transgender individuals, and animals that were brought after the implementation of BNS it will also delve into the global approach of different countries regarding male rape cases. Changes in Laws Related to the Rape of Males, Transgender Individuals, and Animals in Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS): With the implementation of BNS, several changes were brought, to the the legal definition of various words; one such word is “rape”. The new definition of rape which is given in section 63 of BNS reduces gender neutrality which was already a significant concern in our legal system. Now section 63 of BNS, which is a reproduction of Section 375 of IPC, starts with “A man is said to commit “rape” if he…” Here, words like “he” and “man” vividly indicate how the BNS limits the instances of rape where the perpetrator is male. The BNS does not recognise forced intercourse with adult males as a criminal offence. This absence creates a legal void where male victims have no recourse under the law for sexual violence. Apart from this, in the new law, even the word “animal” is omitted, which means the new law not only excludes the rape of men and transgender but now even acts of bestiality is decriminalised. Contrary to this, section 377 of the IPC reads, “Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman, or animal shall be punished with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to a fine.” However, men and transgender persons may seek limited redress under Section 18 of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 or Section 114 of the BNS, which talks about grievous hurt, and it is a bailable offence with a maximum imprisonment of seven years. But, the penalties in these provisions are only between 6 months to 2 years, notably lighter than the punishment for rape under Section 63, which mandates imprisonment of 10 years to life. Furthermore, acts of bestiality are no longer criminalised under the new framework. This is clearly against Article 14 of the Indian Constitution, which forbids unjustified discrimination and ensures equality before the law. Here, the concept of “reasonable classification” mentioned in the case of Gauri Shanker v. Union of India, where the Court emphasised that “equals should not be treated unlike and unlike should not be treated alike”, becomes irrelevant because there is no rational justification for the trauma and experience of rape to vary according to the gender of the perpetrator or the victim. Global Approaches and lessons for India’s BNS reforms: The global approach to addressing male rape and gender-neutral sexual violence laws reveals significant variations, with progressive frameworks in some jurisdictions offering lessons for India’s BNS. The Sexual Offences Act 2003 of the United Kingdom recognises male victims, but it restricts perpetrators to males by defining rape as the non-consensual penetration of the mouth, anus, or vagina with “a penis.” However, female perpetrators can be charged under Section 4 of the same act for “causing sexual activity without consent“, which carries the same penalties of life imprisonment as rape. South Africa, under its Sexual Offences Act (2007), uses a better definition of rape and follows more gender-neutral laws. The act says rape occurs when a person forces another to have sexual intercourse without their consent. The law explicitly protects men, women, and LGBTQ+ individuals. It also provides provisions for the support and protection of the victims who experienced sexual assaults, providing access to both psychiatric and medical services as well as legal aid for the protection, development and help of all victims. The US, too, have gender-neutral laws for non-consensual sexual acts under Chapter 109A of the United States Code. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) defines sexual assaults and rapes as ‘penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person without the consent of the victim’ and the term ‘another person’ implies gender neutrality in the provision. In Singapore, there are two different sections for sexual violence for women in section 375(1) of the penal code defining rape as male-perpetrated penetration of a female, “unlawful sexual penetration”, and for males or transgender individuals in section 376. However, both carry identical penalties. France criminalised any non-consensual sexual penetration (vaginal, anal, or oral) as rape, regardless of the victim’s gender. This includes male survivors and cases involving female perpetrators using objects under Article 222-23 of the French Penal Code. Conclusion We can conclude from this article that excluding men, transgenders, and animals from the definition of rape
ECI’s Roll Revision: A Legal Overreach
Written by Kritagya Sinha & Gaurav Kumar Mandal senior member at KS- NUSRL & Student Convenor at KS-NUSRL. The Election Commission of India (ECI) has invoked Article 324 of the Constitution and Section 21 of the Representation of People Act to undertake a “Special Intensive Revision” (SIR) of Bihar’s rolls ahead of the October 2025 polls. Citing a 22-year gap since the last intensive revision (2003), the ECI claims the exercise will “scrupulously” include all eligible citizens and remove ineligible ones under Article 326 (adult suffrage). In practice, however, the SIR imposes stringent documentary tests. Voters already on the 2003 roll (about 63%) need only submit a simple form, but the remaining 37%, roughly 2.9 crore people, must provide detailed proof of their date and place of birth (and even their parents’ birth details, depending on age). The ECI’s own “indicative” list of 11 acceptable documents includes only formal Indian-issued papers (birth certificate, old government ID, passport, etc.), and notably excludes ubiquitous IDs like Aadhaar, voter ID (EPIC) or ration cards. EC notices even warn that “Aadhaar is proof of identity, not of citizenship”. This means many ordinary voters scramble for rarely-issued certificates. Field reports from Bihar’s villages are stark, labourers and migrants clutch their Aadhaar and ration cards only to learn “none of the three documents” count as proof of citizenship. Block-level officers report that most constituents are on the 2003 list and sail through, but the few who are not often landless, poor or from marginalized communities,“don’t have any of the acceptable documents”, and are being hurried to obtain caste or residence certificates on short notice. Demanding decades-old certificates from millions of voters is a “draconian” shift that risks taking away the only right crores of people have, the right to vote. Indeed, a Public Interest Litigation filed by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) argues that nearly 3 crore Bihar voters (close to half the electorate) lack the mandated papers and could be purged from the rolls. With historically low birth-registration in Bihar and many rural poor never issued formal IDs, the “onus” of proving citizenship has effectively shifted onto voters who may simply have no documents. The revision disproportionately endangers the poor, migrants and minorities. Farmers, daily-wage labourers and migrant workers (a large share of Bihar’s population) may lack fixed addresses or birth certificate. Seasonal migrants working outside Bihar are particularly vulnerable, as they must rely on online forms or proxies while monsoon rains and short deadlines loom. This downright anti-poor move”, even that excluded voters could lose not only their franchise but also eligibility for government benefits tied to voter registration. Smaller communities -Dalits, Muslims and other minorities. The SIR breaches core constitutional guarantees. The ADR petition contends that subjecting voters (and even their parents) to such arbitrary proof requirements violates Article 326 (universal adult franchise) and Article 325 (no discrimination in electoral rolls by religion, race, caste or gender). It also impugns Articles 14, 19 and 21 (equality, liberty and life) by shifting the burden of proof from the state to individuals and by denying due process. elections are meant to be inclusive, Article 326 entitles every person over 18 to vote, and that disqualifications must follow clear law, not sudden, overreaching directives. The petitions warn that forced exclusions on flimsy grounds can “arbitrarily…disenfranchise lakhs” of citizens. and undermine India’s commitment to universal suffrage. Indeed, the Supreme Court itself expressed concern on July 10 that real voters could lose their franchise if they cannot meet these new criteria or complete appeals in time. In my view, the ECI’s process has been marked by a troubling lack of transparency and undue haste. The entire SIR spans barely three months: Block-level enumeration must finish by July 25, objections sorted by August, and a final roll published on September 30, all in a heavy monsoon period. such a task normally requires much more lead time, public consultation and clarity of purpose. The ADR notes that no satisfactory reason was given for “drastic” mass revision just before elections indeed, a special summary update had just been held in late 2024.Unlike past exercises (such as in 2003), there was no advance debate with political parties or civil society, the June 24 notification seemingly came with zero warning, sowing confusion on the ground. the ECI was designed to be an independent bulwark against executive overreach, moves that appear politically motivated risk turning election administration into a tool of those in power. At stake is nothing less than the integrity of India’s democratic franchise. The commission’s duty is to expand inclusion, not to erect new hurdles for the disadvantaged. The courts and voters alike will be watching closely to ensure that no citizen loses the fundamental right to vote through this unprecedented revision.
The Procedural Limits of the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act: The Need for Scientific and Equitable Apportionment Frameworks
Written by Mahvish Kazmi, Programme Manager, Kautilya Society, Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy & Gaurav Kumar Mandal, Student Convenor at KS- NUSRL & student at the National University of Study and Research in Law, Ranchi Abstract India’s interstate river water disputes reveal the complex intersection of constitutional mechanisms, statutory frameworks, and ecological concerns. While Article 262 and the Interstate River Water Disputes Act, 1956, provide a procedural framework for adjudicating disputes through tribunals, the focus has remained on administrative allocation of water based on historical usage, irrigated area, and crop patterns. Environmental principles such as sustainable development, ecological flows, and long-term climate considerations remain marginalised within this system. Case studies from the Cauvery, Krishna, Mahadayi, and Vamsadhara disputes show tribunals’ limited engagement with ecological health and biodiversity. This article argues for reform by incorporating multidisciplinary expertise, mandating environmental impact assessments, and adopting a science-based methodology for equitable and sustainable water sharing. Only by embedding environmental jurisprudence into interstate dispute resolution can India safeguard both its people’s needs and the ecological integrity of its rivers. India has more than 400 rivers across the subcontinent which are majorly classified into Himalayan, Deccan, Coastal and Inland. A whooping 65% of the Indian population is heavily dependent on water which also leads to water distribution disputes amongst states. The recent Punjab-Haryana water dispute has resurfaced another inter-State conflict concerning the equitable sharing of surplus waters from the Ravi and Beas rivers. This involves Haryana’s challenge in accessing its share due to the non-completion of the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) Canal. Recently, Haryana reported a sharp decline in water supply from the Bhakra dam and requested the Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB) to increase its allocation. The Punjab government opposed this, arguing dam levels were critically low and Haryana had exceeded its share for the depletion period. Despite a partial approval by BBMB and advice from the Centre, the BBMB subsequently cut Haryana’s allocation, citing low reservoir levels, resulting in a continuing deadlock. The BBMB is empowered by the River Boards Act, 1956 (RB Act) to provide for the establishment of River Boards. The core purpose of the Act is the regulation and development of inter-State rivers and river valleys. Under the RB Act, the Central Government may establish a River Board for advising the Governments interested (Governments of States likely to be interested in or affected by the Board’s functions) concerning the regulation or development of a specified inter-State river or river valley, and for performing other functions. Different Boards are established for different inter-State rivers or river valleys. While the procedural limitations are mentioned in the Act, it is imperative to note that bias in terms of political influence, vested interest and differing priorities among states could lead to biased decisions. Picture Description: India’s interstate river water disputes. The Central Government empowers the Board to perform specific functions under Section 13, which include advising Governments interested on matters concerning regulation and development, such as co-ordinating activities, conserving water resources, promoting schemes for irrigation, water supply, drainage, hydro-electric power development, flood control, navigation, afforestation, soil erosion control, and pollution prevention. The Board may also be empowered to prepare schemes, including multi-purpose schemes, for regulating or developing the inter-State river or river valley, and advise the Governments interested to execute these schemes. The Board has general powers within its area of operation, including acquiring and disposing of property, undertaking investigations, inspecting works, conducting research, collecting data, and publishing information. It can also require Governments interested to furnish information. The powers of these Tribunals can be traced in the constitutional framework, particularly Article 262, and the Interstate River Water Disputes Act, 1956 (ISRWD Act). Article 262 grants Parliament the power to legislate for the adjudication of disputes concerning the use, distribution, or control of waters in interstate rivers and river valleys. Notably, Article 262(2) allows Parliament to exclude the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and other courts in such disputes. This is reflected in Section 11 of the ISRWD Act, which states that neither the Supreme Court nor any other court shall have jurisdiction over water disputes referred to a Tribunal under this Act. While water is primarily a State subject under Entry 17 of the State List, the Constitution provides these mechanisms for Union intervention when inter-state interests are involved. The ISRWD Act of 1956 serves as a primary statutory framework for addressing these disputes. It provides for the constitution of ad hoc water dispute tribunals when the Central Government is satisfied that a dispute cannot be resolved through negotiation such as the BBMB. The process begins when a State Government lodges a complaint with the Central Government, stating that a water dispute has arisen or is likely to arise because its interests in the inter-State river waters have been or are likely to be prejudicially affected by another State’s executive action, legislation, failure to act, or failure to implement agreement terms. The State Government requests the Central Government to refer the dispute to a Tribunal for adjudication in a prescribed form and manner. Upon receiving such a request, if the Central Government is of the opinion that the water dispute cannot be settled by negotiations, it shall, within a period not exceeding one year, constitute a Water Disputes Tribunal for the adjudication of that specific dispute. Once constituted, the Central Government shall refer the water dispute and any connected or relevant matters to the Tribunal for adjudication.There have been 9 tribunals constituted out of which 5 have been disposed and 4 are active. The tribunals are tasked with investigating the matters referred to it. It must forward a report setting out its findings and decision to the Central Government within a period of three years, which can be extended by the Central Government by a further period not exceeding two years for unavoidable reasons. If, after considering the decision, the Central or a State Government requires an explanation or guidance on a point not originally referred, they may refer the matter back to the
“No Means No”: Section 149 BSA and the Evidentiary Dignity of the Prosecutrix
By Onam Sourabh & Avinash Verma, Students at the National University of Study and Research in Law, Ranchi Pink, the 2016 Bollywood courtroom drama that transcended beyond the boundary of a cinema to reflect an elementary yet intense subject: ‘No means no’. Amitabh Bachchan takes on a whole lot of conventional wisdom to declare that clothes or lifestyle or sex partners do not indicate consent. What played out on the big screen was a realisation of a legal state our courts had been articulating for long and finally one which finds legislative sanctity under Section 149, Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA). This provision prohibits cross-examination with regard to the character of the general immoral or a prior sexual experience of the victim in prosecutions for sexual offences for proving consent. The in-built anchor is constitutional (protection of the dignity, privacy and autonomy of the prosecutrix under Articles 14 and 21) but it also reinforces the integrity of the fact-finding process by ensuring that a trial remains focused on facts of the particular incident rather than be derailed via character assassination or to start passing a moral judgment. From Colonial Evidence Rules to Victim-Centric Safeguards Section 120 BSA (formerly Section 114-A of the Evidence Act), which stipulates that once sexual intercourse is proved and the prosecutrix testifies to absence of consent, the court shall presume non-consent. This statutory presumption shifts the evidentiary burden to the accused a deliberate policy choice recognising the unique evidentiary challenges in prosecuting sexual crimes, where often the only direct evidence is the testimony of the victim herself. The principle underlying Section 149 had been taking shape in judicial pronouncements. In State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh (1996) 2 SCC 384, the Supreme Court famously declared: “Even if the prosecutrix… has been promiscuous in her sexual behaviour earlier, she has a right to refuse… because she is not a vulnerable object or prey for being sexually assaulted by anyone and everyone” (para 16). Likewise, in State (NCT of Delhi) v. Pankaj Chaudhary (2019) 11 SCC 575, the Court observed: “Even if the allegations of the accused that the prosecutrix is of immoral character are taken to be correct, the same does not give any right to the accused persons to commit rape on her against her consent” (para 27). And in State of Maharashtra v. Madhukar Narayan Mardikar (1991) 1 SCC 57, the Court went further, stating: “Even a woman of easy virtue is entitled to privacy… and is equally entitled to the protection of the law” (para 12). These pronouncements dismantle the “implied consent” myth and firmly anchor the legal standard in the prosecutrix’s autonomy, underscoring that her past cannot diminish her present rights. The Presumption of Absence of Consent Section 120 BSA reinforces this protection with a presumption that, once the prosecutrix testifies to the absence of consent and sexual intercourse is proved, the court shall presume non-consent. In Yedla Srinivasa Rao v. State of A.P. (2006) 11 SCC 615, the Court clarified: “…where sexual intercourse by the accused is proved and the question is whether it was without the consent of the woman alleged to have been raped and she states… that she did not consent, the court shall presume that she did not consent” (para 15). Similarly, in Anurag Soni v. State of Chhattisgarh (2019) 13 SCC 1, the Court held that such a presumption leaves no scope for drawing inferences of consent from surrounding circumstances or prior intimacy unless the accused can produce compelling and credible rebuttal evidence. In Maksud Sheikh Gaffur Sheikh v. State of Maharashtra, 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 2151, the Bombay High Court reaffirmed the fundamental principle that sexual consent must be explicit, informed, and contemporaneous, and that its absence renders sexual intercourse an offence under §375 IPC. The Bench, speaking through Nitin B. Suryawanshi and M.W. Chandwani, JJ., emphasised that rape is not merely a sexual offence but an act of aggression violating the victim’s bodily integrity, mental autonomy, and privacy. The Court categorically rejected any presumption of consent based on a woman’s past sexual history, invoking §53A of the Indian Evidence Act to exclude character evidence as irrelevant to the question of consent. Significantly, it clarified that prior intimacy does not confer perpetual licence for sexual access, and that a refusal a “No” is conclusive in law. The judgment further underlined that even within prior or ongoing relationships, consent must be specific to each act and may be withdrawn at any time, thereby reinforcing the autonomy and dignity of the prosecutrix. In Rajkumar v. State of Karnataka, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 257, the Supreme Court, per Aniruddha Bose and Sanjay Kumar, JJ., reaffirmed that consent in sexual relationships is not a static or once-for-all grant, but must be present at every stage of the relationship. While acknowledging the precedent in Shambhu Kharwar v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2022 SCC OnLine SC 1032) that a genuinely consensual relationship does not attract the offence of rape, the Court clarified that the consensual nature of an initial phase does not immunise later acts from scrutiny if one partner withdraws consent. The Bench stressed that the moment one party expresses unwillingness to continue, the relationship loses its consensual character, and any sexual act thereafter would be assessed in light of §375 IPC. By distinguishing between past consent and continuing consent, the judgment reinforced the principle that sexual autonomy is ongoing, dynamic, and revocable. In RIT Foundation v. Union of India, the Delhi High Court engaged in a profound constitutional and human rights analysis of marital rape, holding that non-consensual sex within marriage is as violative of dignity, bodily integrity, and personal liberty as sexual assault outside it. The Court underscored that under Article 21 of the Constitution, the offence of rape is defined by the absence of consent, not by the identity of the perpetrator, and that the marital relationship cannot be a shield for forced sexual intercourse. Observing that modern marriage is a relationship of equals, the Court rejected
Reimagining Centre-State Relations in India: Lessons from the Sarkaria and Punchhi Commissions Amid Governor–Chief Minister Conflicts
Written by Aman Rungta & Shamya Kumari students at Chanakya National Law University, Patna India is a union of states. It has a “Union government” at the central level and different “State governments” for each of the states. The three lists under Schedule VII of the Constitution outline the division of legislative power between the “Union and the State governments.” The “Union government” has plenary authority to legislate on subject matters enumerated in the Union List. The “State governments” have exclusive powers with respect to matters enumerated under the State List in regards to their own respective states. Under the Concurrent List, both the governments have power to legislate and in times of conflict, the law made by the Union prevails over the State made laws. This exclusivity is protected under Art. 246 of the Constitution. When we talk about legislative bodies of the State, it comprises of the “Vidhan Sabha”, the “Vidhan Parishad”, if any and the respective “Governor of the State”. Each of the bill passed by the legislature has to be necessarily accorded assent by the Governor. Under Art. 200, the Governors are authorised to either assent to the bills or send them back for reconsideration by the Assembly or reserve it for consideration by the Hon’ble President. Further, the Governor may exercise executive powers only under the advice of the State’s “Council of Ministers”. Therefore, in conclusion, the Governor must give assent to the bills once the “State government” has passed or reconsidered the bill, except in cases it has to be reserved for presidential assent under the applicable laws. In recent times however, the relationship between the “Union and the State governments” has witnessed increasing strain. The role of the Governors, a figure appointed by the “Union government” to oversee the administration of each state has emerged as a particularly contentious aspect of this intergovernmental dynamics. “State governments”, especially those governed by parties in opposition to the parties ruling in the “Union government”, have increasingly voiced concerns over the perceived misuse of the Governor’s office to advance the Union government’s political agenda. This article aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of India’s federal structure and the multifaceted causes of the escalating friction between the “Union and State governments” and along with a discussion of perspectives and recommendations for fostering a more harmonious union-state relations in the Indian federation. Sarkaria Commission’s Recommendations on Cooperative Federalism The Commission, chaired by Retd. Justice R.S. Sarkaria of the “Supreme Court of India”, was established by the “Government of India” in 1983 to review the existing relationship between the “Union and the States” and suggest appropriate reforms in the evolving socio-economic landscape. The Commission submitted its report to Rajiv Gandhi, the then “Prime Minister of India” in October 1987 with 247 different recommendations, divided into 19 chapters, aimed at maintaining national integrity and unity by identifying reformable governance asymmetries in centre-state relations. The Commission, in its report noted the criticisms expressed by various “State governments” over the unfettered power conferred by Art. 200 and 201 of the Constitution, arguing that the reference of a State’s bill for matters covered under the State List for the President’s consideration encroaches upon the powers of the State legislatures and unconstitutionally subordinates it to the Union Executive. According to the Commission, the Governors may reserve a bill for the President’s consideration only when the bill is tainted with “patent unconstitutionality.” In all other cases, he has to abide by the advice of the Council of Ministers. The discretion of Governor is limited to rare and exceptional circumstances where he is “compelled by the dictates of good conscience and duty to uphold the Constitution.” Prior to the “Sarkaria Commission”, the government of Tamil Nadu had set up the “Rajamannar Commission” to analyse the “Centre-State relations” in a federal setup. It also opined that the Governors’ discretionary powers are “only in relation to the matters in respect of which there are express provisions” and they have to act in “accordance with the advice of the cabinet in all matters.” Further, to maintain the constitutional sanctity of the “Governor’s office”, the “Sarkaria Commission” recommended that politically detached and eminent persons from outside the state should be selected as Governors by the “Vice-President of India” and the “Speaker of the Lok Sabha” in consultation with the Prime Minister. Thus, the Sarkaria Commission has recommended that the Governors should rise above politics in exercise of their official powers and act as the constitutional head of the States. They should aid and assist the functioning of the “State governments” and oversee that their activities conform to the spirit of the Constitution and in the public interest. Punchhi Commission report on Refroming the Federal Relations The Commission was constituted on 27th April 2007 by the “Government of India” to review the contemporary issues of “Centre-State relations” in India. It consisted of “Mr. Dhirendra Singh, Mr. Vinod Kumar Duggal, Dr. N.R. Madhava Menon and Mr. Vijay Shanker” as members. It was chaired by Retd. Justice Madan Mohan Punchhi, former “Chief Justice of India.” The report was presented in seven volumes to the Government on 30th March 2010 with 273 recommendations. Before the “Punchhi Commission”, the “National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution” (NCRWC), chaired by “Justice M.N. Venkatachalaiah” recommended a four months’ time for Governors to decide on giving assent to bills or reserving it for the presidential consideration, and proposed restricting their discretionary powers unless constitutionally mandated. With these recommendations, the NCRWC aimed to do away with the practise of ‘killing’ of “State government’s” bills by the “Union government.” The “Punchhi Commission” recommended that these reforms should be implemented immediately by bringing in Constitutional Amendments. The Commission further recommended that the impression that Governors had discretionary powers under Art. 163(2) “needs to be dispelled.” The Article does not envisage unfettered discretion to the Governor to act contrary to or independent of the advice of the “Council of Ministers.” The exercise of such power must be guided by reason,
Green Infrastructure: Building Resilient and Sustainable Cities in the Face of Climate ChangeGreen infrastructure
Written by Bhumika Rani student at Amity University Jharkhand Abstract The rapidly rising temperatures have accelerated the effects of climate Change. Green infrastructure (GI) has become a viable and affordable Solution to these problems, incorporating natural systems into the urban Fabric. This essay examines the concept, significance, components, and our potential contributions to the proper shaping of green infrastructure, as well as its alignment with the main Sustainable Development Goals. While it may seem challenging to implement such changes, data shows that green Infrastructure is essential for improving urban resilience, promoting Ecological health, and shaping sustainable cities. Given the increasing Uncertainty of our environmental future, the conclusion of this essay Emphasizes the necessity of adopting GI methods. Introduction Green infrastructure refers to a network of natural and semi-natural Systems that help in the management of rainwater, reduce urban heat, Support biodiversity, and provide a healthier surrounding, which not only Mitigates environmental impacts but also offers other benefits like Enhancement of public health and economic advances. The study and Implementation of green infrastructure will be the steps that pave our way Towards a more sustainable and inclusive future. According to NOAA’s 2023 Annual Climate Report, the combined land and ocean temperature has Increased at an average rate of 0.11° Fahrenheit (0.06° Celsius) per decade Since 1850, or about 2° F in total. The rate of warming since 1982 is more Than three times as fast: 0.36° F (0.20° C) per decade. These alarming numbers highlight the rate at which we are accelerating toward global warming, not only rising temperatures, but also air and water pollution, biodiversity loss, and many such issues are a sign that taking immediate action is the need of the hour. Green infrastructure comes as the right solution to these problems, as the traditional ‘grey’ infrastructure seems to be inadequate in several situations, whose consequences are not just faced by humans, but by our whole ecosystem. Significance of GI Green Infrastructure is crucial in today’s world, as is the importance of studying it. Understanding GI helps design cities and develop solutions like urban cooling, flood control, and carbon sequestration. Understanding GI reveals how green spaces improve public well-being and help in urban planning and policy making, which encourages innovation and green jobs. There is great importance of GI as it not only helps us to tackle environmental issues but also has economic and social benefits. GI mainly helps in reducing pollution as it filters out air and water pollution, manages storm water by providing permeable surfaces like green roofs and rain gardens, and enhances biodiversity by serving as habitats for wildlife, which promotes ecological balance. Along with this, it is cost-effective compared to traditional “grey” infrastructure and also boosts property value by making the neighbourhood attractive. The green surroundings offer people improved mental health and encourage them for physical activities , ensuring their overall well-being. Components of Green Infrastructure Many components of GI work together to create a connected and multifunctional landscape that benefits both the environment and people. It consists of Green Spaces like parks, community gardens, and urban forests that’s provides cooling and purification of air as well as supports local food production; Vegetated Systems like Green Roofs, green walls, rain gardens and bios wale that helps in purifying air and directing storm water; Tree canopy and permeable surfaces along streets and park That help reducing urban heat and willows water to seep into the ground; Wetlands and water bodies likes ponds, lakes, and rivers to maintain Ground water levels and green corridors and networks that connects parks And open spaces which will supports wildlife movement. Green Infrastructure’s Role in Climate Change Adaptation Green infrastructure causes a huge impact on communities’ ability to Adapt to climate change. Trees, green roofs, and various forms of Vegetation help in reducing urban heat through shading and evapotranspiration. Their soils capture carbon, contributing to adaptation to climate change, and they also contribute to reducing the risk of floods When intense rainfall and storms occur, making it an effective rainwater Management aid. The implications of green infrastructure enhance the Overall quality of water and air and assist wildlife in naturally adapting to Changing conditions. In conclusion, it can be stated that green infrastructure serves as a Nature-based solution that enhances communities’ capacity to cope with The effects of a rapidly changing climate while ensuring the health, Economy, and well-being of other species. Global Examples of Green Infrastructure Green Infrastructure has shown how effective it is by serving several Functions like urban cooling, flood control, and biodiversity enhancement, And these could be seen globally. In New York City, USA, GI initiatives Include multiple rain gardens and green roofs, which help manage sewer Overflow and urban heat while improving air quality. In Singapore, the “Gardens by the Bay” features vertical gardens, Green roofs, and a network of parks, exemplifying the integration of ecology With architecture. Likewise, London’s Green Grid links woodlands, parks, And wetlands throughout the city, effectively managing storm water and Promoting urban cooling. Several such worldwide examples of GI include Denmark’s Climate-Resilient Neighbourhoods, which handle extreme rainfall and reduce floods. Melbourne’s expanded tree canopy, to tackle climate change. The Netherlands’ multipurpose public spaces, like Playgrounds that also serve as water retention areas, help in rainwater management. Green Infrastructure’s connection to the SDGs The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) advocate for Environmental protection, social well-being, and economic sustainability, Which is deeply connected to the concept of Green Infrastructure. There are 17 key Global Goals for sustainable development as identified by the SDGs. SDG 3, titled Good Health and Well-Being, emphasises that Green spaces enhance both mental and physical health. SDG 6, which Pertains to Clean Water and Sanitation, recognises that green Infrastructure such as wetlands, bios wales, and permeable pavements Effectively filter pollutants, thereby aiding in storm water management and Improving water quality. SDG 7, which states Affordable and Clean Energy, And GI highlights that green roofs and walls contribute to improved energy Efficiency by decreasing urban heat. SDG 9,
The Consent Illusion: Tribal Autonomy and the Failure of Participatory Governance in India
Written by Akhil Yadav student at Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar. Introduction India’s constitutional safeguards grant self-governance to tribal citizens in the Fifth Schedule and the PESA Act of 1996. Close to three decades after PESA took effect, the gap between constitutional promise and ground reality is a testament to a constitutional failure in its very essence. This blog tries to analyze how well-intentioned legal frameworks generated an illusion of consent without ever posing a threat to actual tribal self-determination. Tribal participatory governance theory is based on the premise that the natives must get actual power to decide about their lives and resources. Practice has always led to what could be described as a “consent illusion” rather than actual decision-making authority in the form of actual choices. Constitutional Engineering and PESA’s Potential The Fifth Schedule of the Indian Constitution regulates tribal regions in ten states, and PESA was passed in 1996 to extend panchayati raj provisions to Scheduled Areas with adaptations which accorded weightage to tribal culture. PESA was a deviation from the top-down model of development, vowing to place tribal people at the center of decision-making. Theoretical foundations of PESA are in three basic principles: strengthening Gram Sabhas as part of the institutions of governance with decision-making authority over natural resources, recognition of traditional institutions and customary law, and provision of mechanisms for conservation of culture. The act grants statutory rights of consultation to Gram Sabhas in the event of projects affecting tribal people and minor forest produce and water bodies. Implementation Failure: The Reality Gap Even with progressive provisions, PESA implementation has been characterized by grave issues that reflect structural inadequacies. The most rudimentary one is the dearth of congruence between legal provisions and administrative practice. The state governments have been hesitant to decentralize significant powers to the tribal people, especially in the issue of resource management and developmental activities. Bureaucratic resistance has also manifested itself as delayed action, institutional duplicity creating parallel structures that go around the Gram Sabha, and the creation of independent development bodies that function outside the tribal institutions. This side-stepping is an indication of institutional biases that treat tribal societies as hindrances to development, and not as co-operators in governance. Capacity building is also a problem. PESA assumes that tribal citizens will be able to rapidly develop technical and administrative capacity to perform high-level government activities. However, decades of underdevelopment have deprived most of the people of human resources to interact with modern administrative machinery. The Illusion of Consent in Practice Illusion of consent is defined as the case where procedural mechanisms of consultation exist but devoid of material engagement of the community or where consent is elicited through coercion or shallow exchange of information. Tribal developmental programs of the region always invoke consent of the community in terms of Gram Sabha resolutions, but problems expose consultations that are carried out without meaningful exchange of information or with involvement of small groups instead of grassroots community-level debate. Conventional decision-making in the mainstream based on conventional tribal consensus rests on consensus-making with a requirement of extensive deliberation and broad consensus. Formal requirements under PESA are, however, read in the context of majoritarian democracy, and the majority vote constitutes valid consent. This tension between conventional consensus-making and formalism opens up room for manipulation. Power asymmetries between external entities and tribal communities create the illusion of consent. During state agency or corporation-tribal community negotiations, the negotiations were always going to be unequal with external entities possessing more resources and communities not having independent expertise. Ground Realities: Hasdeo Arand and Niyamgiri Chhattisgarh’s Hasdeo Arand forest, almost 170,000 hectares in area, is one of India’s largest remaining forest blocks and the home to a number of Adivasi groups, such as the Gonds and the Oraons. Even after the Forest Rights Act (FRA) and PESA, there have been charges that sanction to Hasdeo Arand mining projects were forged. A 2024 investigation by the Chhattisgarh State Scheduled Tribes Commission discovered permissions to mining in the Parsa block issued on the basis of forged documents, in vindication of long-time claims by residents that their sanction was neither sought nor given. It was the same with Odisha’s Niyamgiri Hills, which are sacred to the Dongria Kondh tribe. The hills were a location of indigenous protest against Vedanta Resources’ bauxite mine. In a historic 2013 judgment, India’s Supreme Court upheld the rights of the Dongria Kondh and declared that any mine proposal in the region must be vetted by local Gram Sabhas. All twelve villages consulted later rejected the mine project, voting unanimously against it, thereby stopping the project in its tracks. All these examples underscore the imperative need for participatory government and compliance with legal requirements to safeguard indigenous rights. The Challenge of Implementing Forest Rights Act The 2006 Forest Rights Act, following in the steps of PESA, provides yet another lens through which to view participatory governance problems. While the act provides rights to the community over the forest and increases tribal authority over forest resources, implementation of the act has been persistently thwarted by opposition from forest departments. In Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra, for instance, forest departments have used bureaucratic strategies to slow down recognition of community forest rights, keeping the process under central control. This resistance signals institutional cultures that view tribal communities as a threat to forest conservation, rather than able custodians of forest ecosystems. Where rights in community forests have been conferred, the experience has been positive. Tribal communities in some areas of Maharashtra and Chhattisgarh have shown good forest management, balancing traditional conservation practices with the most advanced monitoring technology. These are exceptions, not norms, and the distance between policy promise and performance in implementation delivery is wide. The Double Displacement Dilemma: Displaced from Land, Excluded from Power Tribal land displacement is always a second-order act of bodily displacement it is frequently a process of gradual dispossession. What the tribal people experience is double displacement: the first, spatial, and material is dispossession from their homelands;
UNFAIR WORKING AND WAGE CONDITIONS OF GIG WORKERS IN INDIA
Written by Piyush mani Tripathi student at INDIAN INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES, SILIGURI Introduction– Do you know about the gig economy? Yes, it is a market system that mainly depends on temporary and part-time jobs instead of traditional full-time employment or the conventional employer-employee system. In simple terms, gig work is also known as freelancing job’s, which includes services such as food delivery and digital works. The gig market system has played a vital role in the growth of the economy and has introduced significant changes. Talking about India, over the past few years, the gig working culture has been booming. If you refer to NITI Aayog’s report titled “ India’s Booming Gig and Platform Economy” you will see that before the COVID-19 pandemic, there were around 3 million gig workers in India, which increased to 7.7 million (77 lakh) in 2021. This number continues to rise.¹ The main reason behind the booming gig working culture in India is unemployment.Apart from unemployment, the gig system offers an easy hiring and easy firing process. In this system, if an employee is not working properly, it is easy to immediately remove them and, if required, the company can quickly appoint someone else. This creates convenience for both employers and employees. Additionally, in the gig working system, workers have the option to take up multiple jobs or do gig work as part-time employment for extra income. It also offers the flexibility to work from anywhere depending on the nature of the job, and the working hours are often flexible.But, as we know, every coin has two sides. The other side of gig working culture is very dark and disappointing. Unfair Working and Wage Conditions of Gig Workers- We can broadly divide gig workers into two main categories: Service-based gig workers include those who are unskilled or semi-skilled, commonly referred to as blue-collar workers. On the other hand, knowledge-based gig workers include individuals engaged in highly skilled and highly qualified jobs such as data scientists, AI trainers, consultants, etc., who are also known as white-collar workers. Since white-collar workers receive adequate income and have access to multiple opportunities—due to the high demand and low supply of highly skilled labour—their working conditions are relatively better. However, if we look at the condition of service-based gig workers, such as those involved in food delivery services and other delivery-related jobs, they face multiple difficulties, including very inhuman working schedules. Therefore, this research primarily focuses on the working conditions and wage-related issues of service-based, or blue-collar, gig workers. The problem associated with service based gig worker are large in numbers some of them are following- 1. Exhausting Working Conditions and Long Hours– Particularly those involved in delivery services like food delivery and app-based transportation, service- based gig workers sometimes deal with quite demanding working conditions. Usually riding for 8 to 11 hours a day these workers reach their daily targets. Many food delivery app have rules like “delivery within 30 minutes,” and the pressure to reach these targets mostly rests on the shoulders of the delivery personnel . This compels them to engage in over speeding and choose dangerous paths , which increasing the risk of accidents. A National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER), analysis indicates that workers of app-based food delivery platform work approximately 69.3 hours per week. In contrast, if you see the Periodic Labour Force Survey suggests that the average working hours for a worker should be around 56 hours per week. Which clearly indicates that delivery workers are putting in nearly 23% more working hours than the standard, clearly reflecting the inhumane and exploitative nature of their working conditions.² 2. Financial Challenges and Income Fluctuation – According to a report by NCAER (National Council of Applied Economic Research), which is a prominent think tank, food delivery platform workers in India work an average of 69.3 hours per week—23% more than the average reported in the Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS). This is not a single example ; there are large number of gig workers nationwide put in lengthy and taking workdays. Even though working much harder, their pay is very less. According to a report by Business Manager,³ the average monthly salary for a service-based gig worker is approximately ₹18,000, which is incredibly very less considering the amount of time and effort required. As most of the app based gig workers do not receive a fixed salary. Their earnings are usually depend upon completion of specific targets or tasks, which leads to significant income fluctuation. This lack of income stability is one of the major financial difficulties faced by gig workers. Overall, it is estimated that Approximately 75% of Indian gig workers face financial challenges.⁴ 3. Lack of Legal Protection and Gig Workers’ Rights- Because they do not fit into the traditional employee- employer framework, gig workers in India are still unprotected by traditional labour laws.Widespread discrimination, suchas wrongful termination as per the comfort and need of employer and denial of basic benefit like Health Insurance ,paid leave and retirement benefit this caused by not having proper legal Framework for gig workers. Although Section 2(35) of the Code on Social Security, 2020,⁵ introduced by the Ministry of Labour and Employment, defines a gig worker as “a person who performs work or participates in a work arrangement and earns from such activities outside of the traditional employer-employee relationship.” While the Code mentions provisions for old-age protection, disability coverage, and accident insurance, but still it is not implemented adequately. However Few state have taken independent initiatives specifically Rajasthan government enacted “the Rajasthan Platform-Based Gig Workers (Registration and Welfare) Act” on July 24, 2023, and becoming the first state having legislation specifically for service based gig workers. However, taking stapes from the end of few states is not enough. there for acomprehensive, uniformly implemented national legal framework is essential to ensure fair working conditions, wages, and Rights for gig workers across the country. 4. Unionization and lack of Collective Bargaining in the Gig Economy- Unlike
Environment and Sustainable Development policy : Pathways to a Greenery Future Endeavour
Written by Faijul Islam, Lecturer of Law, Prime University of Bangladesh Introduction The 21st century stands at a critical juncture of success where humanity’s survival and prosperity depend heavily on how we treat the environment in different ways. Environmental degradation, climate change,environmental justice and resource depletion are pressing issues confronting global society for many times.So Sustainable development emerges as the most viable approach to balance economic growth with ecological preservation for the future . This blog explores the intricate relationship between the environment and sustainable development with intergenerational equity with the legal frameworks governing this nexus and the future path for achieving a harmonious balance between human progress and optimistic nature. Understanding Sustainable Development The concept of sustainable development delves global recognition through the 1987 Brundtland Report which defined it as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs with their ability .”[1] Sustainable development emphasizes a balance among three core pillars: economic growth, social inclusion and environmental protection at a same time. While economic development has historically been prioritized by human Being unchecked industrialization has led to severe environmental consequences including deforestation, pollution,famine and biodiversity loss. Sustainable development reorients economic planning to consider log way ecological and social consequences at the end. Environmental Challenges to Sustainability Global environmental challenges are multifaceted and interconnected issues nowadays. Climate change is arguably the most significant threat with rising temperatures, melting glaciers,sea level rising and extreme weather events already impacting millions worldwide drastically . The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has emphasized that global warming must be limited to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels to avoid catastrophic outcomes severally .[2] Other pressing issues include: Air and water pollution which compromise public health issues and depend on ecosystem integrity. Loss of biodiversity weakening the resilience of natural eco systems Unsustainable land use contributing to soil degradation and desertification of the green measures Plastic pollution, posing threats to marine life and food safety measures These issues necessitate an integrated approach combining science, policy, and law. International Legal Frameworks on Environment and Development International environmental law has evolved to address sustainability through conventions,Avenue, treaties, and soft law instruments. Key international frameworks include: These agreements reflect the growing recognition that environmental issues are transboundary and require collective global nominal action. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) In 2015, the United Nations adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development which includes 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Among them Goal 13 (Climate Action), Goal 14 (Life Below Water), and Goal 15 (Life on Land) directly address environmental sustainability for the common future .[7] These goals promote policies such as reducing carbon footprints from the universe, protecting ecosystems, saving greenery and promoting renewable energy. The SDGs also recognize the interdependence of environmental sustainability with poverty eradication by protecting gender equality, and good governance. Principles of Environmental Law Supporting Sustainability Several key legal principles underpin sustainable environmental governance: The Precautionary Principle: Preventive action should be taken when environmental harm is suspected even in the absence of full scientific credible of certainty.[8] Polluter Pays Principle: Those responsible for pollution should bear the costs of managing it to prevent damage to human health or the environment legacy.[9] Intergenerational Equity: Present generations also must conserve the environment for future generations.[10] Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR): Acknowledges different capacities and responsibilities of countries in addressing global environmental degradation that directly involved in the man made created probl.[11] These principles are embedded in both international and domestic laws and guide decision-making processes in sustainable development. National Environmental Legislation and Sustainable Policies Many countries have incorporated sustainable development into national law as per their norms. For example: India’s Constitution, under Article 48A and Article 51A(g) mandates the state and citizens to protect and improve the environment by various means.[12] The United States enforces the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) which requires environmental assessments for federal development projects.[13] Bangladesh made vulnerable to climate change has adopted the Bangladesh Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan (BCCSAP) to align development with environmental resilience project [14] National governments play a crucial role in implementing sustainability by integrating environmental impact assessments (EIAs), regulating emissions prevented and promoting clean technology movement. Role of Judiciary in Promoting Environmental Justice Our Courts worldwide have played a proactive role in environmental protection measures. In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, the Indian Supreme Court expanded their intention to prove the scope of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution to include the right to a healthy environment.[15] Similarly, in Urgenda Foundation v. State of the Netherlands, a Dutch court ordered the meaning of development relating to the government to cut greenhouse gas emissions, citing obligations under international law and human rights principles.[16] Promoting Judicial activism and public interest litigation have become effective tools in holding governments accountable for environmental protection and sustainable development movement Corporate Responsibility and Green Economy Businesses are also key players in the sustainability agenda involvement . They made initiative on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) mandates are increasingly incorporating environmental stewardship.These Concepts such as Environmental, Social,Practical and Governance (ESG) metrics guide sustainable investment. The green economy emphasizes economic growth with minimal environmental impact on society promoting sectors such as renewable energy, sustainable agriculture, and green infrastructure for development .By this way Governments incentivize green business models through tax benefits, subsidies in agriculture and public-private partnerships. Technological Innovation and Sustainability Technological innovation is a critical in transitioning to sustainable development for the future. Renewable energy technologies (solar, wind, hydro), electric vehicles, and sustainable agriculture practices are revolutionizing these resources which we should use. Digital tools, such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS), remote sensing system , and blockchain that enhance transparency and efficiency in making environmental governance. However, the digital divide must be addressed to ensure equitable assessment to access to sustainable technologies across developing countries. Challenges to Achieving Sustainable Development Despite global efforts, several challenges persist: Lack of political will and short-term economic considerations will priorities often undermine long-term environmental
Reimaging Data protection for the Marginalized: Why India’s Digital Policies Must Prioritize the Vulnerable First
Written by Setu Kumar Rai & Tanisha Nath students at National Law University, Meghalaya. Introduction India’s digital revolution has transformed commerce, education, governance, and social interaction at an unforeseen speed. From the introduction of Aadhar in 2009 to the large-scale adoption of 4G networks in the late 2010s, more than 820 million Indians now regularly use the internet from a mere 250 million in 2014 , yet this growth remains geographically, gender-wise, caste-wise, and income-wise unevenly distributed. While the urban hubs enjoy average broadband speeds of 50 Mbps, numerous rural districts still fight for 2 Mbps connections, with some panchayats reporting a complete lack of reliable service. This dichotomy fuels a digital divide that both constrains opportunity and makes marginalized populations increasingly vulnerable to data exploitation in the absence of proper safeguards, individual information like biometric data, financial transactions, health records can be gathered, abused, or weaponized by state and corporate actors. Across the world, regulations like the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) have increased the standards of individuals’ rights, requiring transparency, consent, and minimization of data. These, however, assume an architecture of digital literacy and agency as a given ,privileges that are simply not available to millions of Indians, particularly women, rural dwellers, and economically poor constituencies. As India is finishing its Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Bill, 2023, it is at a crossroads: mimic global standards or lead a “vulnerability-first” approach that centers the interests of the least empowered in its data governance. This blog pleads for the latter drawing out the digital divide in India, discussing the increased risks faced by marginalized groups, critiquing current legislations, and presenting tangible, inclusive policy reform suggestions. The Digital Divide in India India’s base of internet users grew from 400 million in 2017 to more than 820 million as of the end of 2023, yet penetration is persistently skewed. The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India’s 2021 report estimated urban internet penetration at 72%, versus only 38% in the countryside. In Jharkhand and Bihar, rural connectivity had fallen as low as 24%, whereas Kerala and Punjab had more than 60% rural coverage. Such differences are rooted in the infrastructure deficit—only 42% of Indian villages were covered by 4G by 2022—and the affordability barrier, with rural users paying an average of ₹130 per month for data, compared to ₹250 in cities. Indian women are disproportionately impacted by the digital divide. Based on GSMA’s 2020 Mobile Gender Gap report, just 37% of Indian women use mobile internet—approximately 20 percentage points behind men. Socio-cultural values restrict women’s mobility and education, hindering both access to technology as well as digital literacy training. Smartphone ownership is still taboo for women in certain patriarchal rural communities, while safety issues and online harassment additionally deter women from joining online. Exclusion based on caste adds to these disparities. Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) have average internet adoption of 30% and 28%, respectively far less than the overall national average. Poorer households, which incur less than ₹150 a month on data, must make a choice between basic internet connectivity and irreducible necessities. Additionally, digital literacy programs frequently go to waste in marginalized hamlets since NGO and government outreach efforts target more accessible and denser areas. Vulnerability of Marginalized Groups in the Digital Ecosystem In K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, the Supreme Court of India affirmed privacy as a fundamental right under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. Yet the subsequent rollout of Aadhaar—a biometric database covering over 1.3 billion residents—underscored the perils of large-scale data collection without adequate safeguards. Although Aadhaar aimed to streamline welfare delivery, authentication failures disproportionately impacted rural residents. In Rajasthan, 15% of users experienced failed authentications due to worn fingerprints; in Tamil Nadu, women laborers with manual-skill-induced fingerprint erosion faced a 20% higher failure rate than men. When we speak, these failures have grave material effects, denial of rations, pension payments, and LPG subsidies, services essential for subsistence. Privacy International’s December 2021 report highlights that over 2 million individuals faced service exclusion in 2020 alone, primarily from marginalized castes and remote hamlets. Unable to navigate complex grievance-redress mechanisms or contest data inaccuracies, these citizens endure bureaucratic limbo. Beyond state surveillance, private platforms routinely harvest user data under opaque consent clauses. Economically disadvantaged users—unaware of the implications—click “agree” on lengthy, jargon-laden terms to access essential mobile banking or health apps. The result: granular behavioral profiles used for targeted marketing, micro-credit algorithms that penalize the poor, and risk assessments that reinforce existing socioeconomic biases. International human-rights organizations underscore that vulnerable groups worldwide suffer similar fates. Access Now’s 2023 report documents how indigenous communities in Latin America faced algorithmic profiling for resource allocation, while African informal workers were excluded from digital lending services due to biased credit scoring models. These global parallels reinforce the urgency for India to design data protection that explicitly shields its most vulnerable cohorts. Evaluation of India’s Digital Laws The Digital Personal Data Protection Bill, 2023 The DPDP Bill, tabled in Parliament in August 2023, is India’s effort to legislate data protection principles. The main provisions are: These are GDPR principles closely adhered to, though there is still much to be done about marginalized users: Comparative International Frameworks These examples demonstrate that embedding equity provisions—accessible communication, mandatory impact assessments, dedicated oversight—yields more inclusive outcomes. Policy Proposals for Inclusive Digital Reform To make data protection meaningfully benefit India’s most marginalized, the following practical reforms are essential: Implementation: Collaborate with panchayats, self-help groups, and grassroots NGOs to provide customized workshops on data rights, consent mechanisms, and foundational cybersecurity. Metrics: Synchronize with NITI Aayog’s 2021 digital transformation strategy reaching 10 million rural beneficiaries per year. Design: Implement Interactive Voice Response (IVR) technology in local languages, visual consent cards, and in-app audio descriptions. Spain’s Data Protection Authority pilot of elderly audio-visual consent resulted in a 40% increase in informed assent. Requirement: Modify the DPDP Bill to mandate VIAs for all large-scale data processing—especially national ID schemes, financial inclusion initiatives, and health-data projects.
THE EQUILIBRIUM OF ADR AND JUDICIAL SAFEGUARDS IN THE CPC
Written by Ankush Saxena & Kushagra Nigam student at UPES, Dehradun The code of Civil Procedure, 1908. serves as a Cornerstone of India’s civil justice system, which strives to strike a delicate balance between two crucial objectives that is, the fostering growth of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Mechanisms for the amicable and speedy settlements on one hand, and preserving a strong procedural framework so as to ensure thorough and just adjudication of disputes within the formal Court of Justice on the other. This dual approach tells how well balanced the vision of aiming to reduce the burden on quotes is while safeguarding the right to justice through due process. In this article, the significant provisions of the CPC that promote ADR, like Section 89 and Order XXIII, are critically examined, followed by an examination of procedural steps to ensure a fair trial as well as mechanism ensuring finality of orders. Section 89 of the CPC was introduced through the Amendment Act of 1999 to reduce the burden on courts by mandating judicial referral to ADR mechanisms in appropriate cases. It provides for resolution through arbitration, conciliation, mediation, judicial settlement (including Lok Adalats). The objective is to ensure speedy and cost-effective dispute resolution, aligning with India’s policy of reducing litigation backlog. The following are a brief about the different modes of ADR for which the court may direct the parties: Judicial Interpretation of Section 89 The Supreme Court in Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. v. Cherian Varkey Construction Co. (P) Ltd. clarified that Section 89 must be read with flexibility to promote ADR and avoid procedural hurdles. Similarly, in Salem Advocate Bar Association v. Union of India, the Court emphasized that ADR mechanisms under Section 89 must be actively pursued by judges and litigants. Order XXIII of the CPC governs the withdrawal and compromise of suits, ensuring that disputes can be amicably settled at any stage of litigation. Rule 1 allows a plaintiff to withdraw a suit with permission to file afresh if there is sufficient cause. Sub-rule 1 of Rule 1 states a plaintiff may withdraw a suit at any stage without seeking permission from the court. However, in cases like these, they four feet the right to institute a fresh suit. Further, sub rule two of rule one States that if the plaintiff wants to withdraw the suit and file a fresh one they must obtain the court’s permission which is only granted if the withdraw of the initial suit is due to formal defects or other reasonable grounds. This provision helps in safeguarding against frivolous litigation, While ensuring that the plaintiffs Are not unjustly penalised for the procedural shortcomings. Case Law on Order XXIII In Banwari Lal v. Chando Devi, the Supreme Court held that once a lawful compromise is recorded under Order XXIII Rule 3, it operates as a final judgment and is enforceable like a decree. The promotion of ADR under CPC aligns with constitutional mandates such as Article 39A, which emphasizes access to justice. Further, ADR mechanisms reduce judicial backlog, lower litigation costs, and promote amicable resolution, fostering commercial and social harmony. The various provisions of the CPC establish procedural safeguards evidence rules including fair pleadings, impartial adjudication ensuring fairness and litigation, complying with the CPC’s main objectives. Principles of Natural Justice The CPC incorporates several procedural safeguards so as to ensure a fair trial routed in the principles of natural justice. These include audi alteram partem the right to be heard, and nemo judex in causa sua the rule against bias. To make sure that the justice is not hindered by the technicalities section 153-A of the CPC empowers courts to amend any defect or error in proceedings. In Manohar Lal Chopra v. Rai Bahadur Rao Raja Seth Hiralal, The Supreme Court underscored that the procedural rules are intended to not to hinder but to advance the cause of justice. This principle was laid down in the Order VI Rule 17, Permitting the amendment of pleadings and to ensure that the true matters in the dispute are effectively resolved. Order V mandates proper service of summons, ensuring the defendant is informed and has the opportunity to contest the suit. In Sangram Singh v. Election Tribunal, the Supreme Court held that the CPC aims to ensure a fair hearing and prevent ex-parte decrees in the absence of due service. Order XVIII governs the examination of witnesses, reinforcing procedural fairness. Cross-examination rights ensure that parties can challenge adverse evidence, a principle upheld in K.L. Tripathi v. State Bank of India. The principle of audi alteram partem, embedded in Order IX Rule 7, guarantees a litigant’s right to present their case. Further, Order XLVII provides for review, enabling corrections in case of procedural or substantive errors. Ensures reliability of evidence through cross-examination. Provide options to challenge faulty judgments. Ensuring Impartiality and Transparency The CPC also ensures transparency and fairness through provisions such as Order XVIII, which requires witnesses to be examined in open court, and Order XIX, which governs the issuance of commissions for the witness examination. These provisions ensure that the trial process is conducted fairly and that parties have an opportunity to present their case effectively. In State of Punjab v. Shamlal Murari (1976), the Supreme Court held that the examination of witnesses in open court is essential to maintain public confidence in the judicial process. This underscores the importance of procedural safeguards in ensuring a fair trial. In Satyadhyan Ghosal v. Deorajin Debi, the Supreme Court emphasized that procedural safeguards in the CPC prevent miscarriage of justice. However, judicial delays often undermine these safeguards. Malik Mazhar Sultan v. U.P. Public Service Commission led to case flow management rules, introducing mandatory timelines for different litigation stages⁵. Finality of judgments is crucial for maintaining judicial efficiency. The CPC establishes mechanisms to prevent endless litigation and ensure certainty in legal outcomes. The doctrine of res judicata prevents parties from re-litigating an issue that has been conclusively adjudicated. In Daryao v. State of U.P., the Supreme Court held that res judicata applies
Reimagining Welfare Delivery: Leveraging Digital Public Infrastructure for Inclusive Governance in India
Written by Akshat Jain student at Christ (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru. Modern public policy reveals technology governance convergence as its dominant characteristic during the twenty-first century. India leads this transformation through its goal to establish Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI), which serves as a model for the rest of the world. DPI serves as a program that has the potential to transform welfare delivery through its modernized public service accessibility approach. The inclusive application of DPI demands solutions to obstacles involving digital access, rights, and governance practices. What is Digital Public Infrastructure? These components are modular, open-source, and accessible to both the public and private sectors, making DPI a “public good”, with the condition that these must be managed responsibly. DPI and Welfare Delivery: A Game Changer The integration of DPI into welfare schemes has revolutionized how government benefits are distributed. The Aadhaar-powered Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) mechanism eliminated delays and secured benefits such as LPG subsidies and rural employment wages from reaching beneficiaries without wastage. As of 2024, DBT has delivered ₹3.48 lakh crore worth of savings by stopping duplication as well as ghost beneficiaries, and corruption. Financial inclusion shows extraordinary expansion at present. The combination of Jan Dhan-Aadhaar-Mobile (JAM) with UPI provides millions of people with their first chance to use formal financial services. The Economic Times reports how UPI handled 11 billion transactions on its own during a single month in 2024, while also showing growth in rural and semi-urban communities. The system promotes both convenience and empowerment for women, along with marginalized groups of people. Moreover, platforms like DigiLocker allow citizens to access government documents (such as PAN cards, driving licenses, and educational certificates) in a secure and verifiable manner. This reduces bureaucratic friction and enhances access to education, employment, and mobility. Constitutional Backing and the Right to Digital Access The Indian Constitution, while silent on technology per se, offers a powerful basis for digital equity through its guarantees of equality (Article 14) and life and personal liberty (Article 21). The Supreme Court of India, in a recent judgment, recognized that digital access is intrinsic to Article 21. In the context of Aadhaar-based exclusion and KYC verification issues faced by disabled persons, the Court directed the government to ensure that all digital systems are accessible, inclusive, and non-discriminatory. Furthermore, the landmark K. S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India judgment affirmed the right to privacy as a fundamental right. This ruling reshaped the debate around Aadhaar and DPI, pushing the government to adopt stricter data protection measures, though gaps still remain in practice. Challenges to Inclusivity and Access Despite its transformative promise, DPI implementation is fraught with issues that, if unaddressed, risk reinforcing existing inequalities: 1. The Digital Divide India’s digital access remains uneven. The growth of smartphones and internet penetration occurs, yet rural areas maintain substantial deficiencies. Namely, the Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI) found in 2023 that 38% of rural Indians used the internet while 67% of urban Indians maintained regular internet access. Genital and age differences, coupled with illiteracy problems, combine to prevent millions of people from using digital services unassisted. 2. Exclusion by Design The 2024 report from Amnesty International demonstrates that entities operating PDS and MNREGA schemes have wrongly excluded eligible beneficiaries through automated resolution systems with both biological inconsistencies and technical issues, and inflexible automation protocols. The accountability of algorithms in public welfare delivery faces serious doubts because of their implementation. 3. Privacy and Data Protection The Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023 exists to reduce existing privacy risks regarding personal data. Numerous critics point out that the Digital Personal Data Protection Act contains wide governmental exceptions while lacking enough independent oversight functions. The Aadhaar database remains under scrutiny because its database faced security breaches along with problems in obtaining proper consent from users. 4. Public-Private Blurring The implementation of digital governance relies on private tech companies to build, operate, or manage sections of the DPI. DPI technical efficiency increases through digital governance, yet this enhancement creates problems because public infrastructure becomes private and oversight becomes restricted. Experts at The Wire argue that DPIs must prioritize citizen interests over corporate profits, especially when data and service access are involved. The Way Forward: Inclusive, Rights-Based DPI To ensure DPI serves the public good, especially the marginalized, India must adopt a human rights-centric approach to digital governance. 1. Bridge the Digital Divide 2. Enforce Data Privacy and Consent 3. Inclusive Design and Accessibility 4. Legal Accountability and Auditing 5. Federal Coordination Since many welfare schemes are co-administered by central and state governments, DPI must enable seamless interoperability while respecting local autonomy. The One Nation One Ration Card scheme is a good example, allowing interstate migrants to access food rations regardless of location, provided the system functions effectively. 6. Establishment of DPI Research Centre The Indian government intends to build a research and development hub known as the Centre of Excellence for Digital Public Infrastructure and Digital Public Goods. The center will support innovation through academic involvement and research body participation to create digital solutions which scale effectively and work with interconnectivity. The center will conduct DPI implementation operations within G20 nations together with Global South countries to spread India’s digital roadmaps worldwide. 7. UPI 3.0: Advancement in Digital Payments The latest 3.0 version of UPI now enables users to make payments through Conversational Voice Payments. The upgrade offers a voice command interface that allows users to proceed with transactions, making the system more accessible for people with low literacy or speakers of regional dialects. The AI-based voice recognition system incorporated into UPI 3.0 strives to establish digital payments that are friendly for all users. Global Recognition and Collaboration The Digital Public Infrastructure of India is attracting global attention across international circles. Through its partnership with the National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI) various countries within Africa combined with South America are adopting digital payment systems based on Unified Payments Interface (UPI). Peru and Namibia signed agreements with the Indian National
REFRAMING COMMUNITY SERVICE AS A REFORM TOOL: A MODERN APPROACH TO JUSTICE IN INDIA
Written by Bhardwaj Netam student at Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur. INTRODUCTION The past year has been tumultuous in terms of sentencing within the Indian criminal justice system. Indian law has always been dependent on some form of penal measure be it imprisonment, fines, and forfeiture of property, but it has increasingly acknowledged their limitations as punishment. Throughout history, punitive justice has come under growing scrutiny, as societies seek better ways to address criminals and rehabilitate perpetrators. Presently India’s prison population is expected to rise to approximately 5,73,000 prisoners by the year 2024, resulting in pains of overcrowding as overcrowding as this figure translates to over 52% more inmates than their rated capacity. This scenario underlines the lacksof the present set of punishments, which includes a myriad of methods such as life imprisonment, death, forfeiture of property, imprisonment of various regimes whereby fines may also be levied as per section 53 of Indian Penal Code. Most of these punishments are antithetical to reformative justice which seeks to rehabilitate rather than punish. In response to these concerns, the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita reforms have attempted to address some of these issues through the introduction of community service as a form of punishment. Community service has emerged as a vital potential reform tool and with these parameters prioritizes modern behaviour that is centred on rehabilitative vengeance. In effect this shifts the attention from punitive action towards the restoration of the communal ecosystem towards rehabilitation. The inclusion of community service punishment within the Indian legal framework serves as a welcoming hope for reform from altering societal expectations within the country while working towards a balanced and effective justice system. In India, the sentence involving community service marks a shift from imprisonment to a more restorative and rehabilitative form of justice. It includes scenarios where offenders perform voluntary labour for the society to recoup for their transgressions in a symbolic way. The motivation for this is, rather, to be part of restorative justice which highlights on reforming and reintegrating the offenders back into the society instead of just punishing them. Additionally, the rate of recidivism is lower among those who have participated in community service, indicating that they are highly effective in reducing recidivism and preventing further criminal behaviour. This paper aims to explore the origin and potential of reframing community service as a central component of the justice system, analysing its potential for transformation for criminals as well as the communities they serve. Historical Evolution of Community Service in Justice Systems Community service has long served as an innovative solution for addressing societal issues outside the confines of traditional confinement. The concept can be traced dating back to the 16th century around 1553, where in London under the House of Correction at Bridewell palace, deals with the enforced labour aimed to curb the ill effect of vagrancy and idleness, representing an early imposition of community service for punitive purposes. The modern philosophy of community service truly began taking form in early 1900s. Notably, in Alaska, community service was incorporated into probation condition in 1949. However, the 1970 Wootton Report proved a turning point in the law-and-order debate for England and Wales. Formally titled “Non-custodial and Semi-custodial Penalties”, its proposals advanced different types of punishments to replace imprisonment. Most notably, it shone a light on community service’s potential as a viable substitute. With compassion as its guide, the report paved the way for reforms that treated people, not just crimes. The report emphasized the cost-effectiveness of community service and it’s potential to address harm done to local communities. The recommendation from the Wootton Report were later enshrined in law through the Criminal Justice Act of 1972, which was eventually renamed the Powers of Criminal Courts Act of 1973. This statute established the framework for community service orders, specifying that offenders aged sixteen and older could be sentenced to perform between 40-240 hours of community service within a year if convicted of an offence punishable by imprisonment. India’s Shift to Community Service as Sentencing: In India, the Main form of punishment for India’s criminal judicial system has long been to imprison people as emphasise in the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 (CrPC). However, faced with overcrowded prisons that have become very expensive detention facilities and conditions inside them which resemble nothing more human than those suffered by wildest animals in nature (people living like this is no longer rare) there has been cries in favor of alternatives like community service. The Indian Penal Code Amendment Bill of 1978, clause 18, proposed community service as a sentencing alternative. This bill suggested that non-remunerative work be made available to criminals convicted of crimes for which the maximum penalty is 3 years in prison, and the duration should range from 40 to 1000 hours. But it was not given approval, nor were subsequent recommendations approximately like those contained in the 156th Law Commission Report when they concluded community service was impracticable compared with other reforms like open prisons. The community service term appears to be new notion to us, but it has actually been present, particularly within under Section 18(1)(c) of the Act, 2015, in which Juvenile Justice Board can give community service to young offenders if deemed necessary on both the nature of the offense and the unique circumstances surrounding the young person. As prisons throughout India are staggeringly overcapacity at 130%, pressing reform is direly needed. In a landmark case, Pappu Khan v. the State of Rajasthan highlighted not only severe overcrowding but also the immense financial burden of incarceration on the State. Facing this crisis, India must pursue alternatives to imprisonment that are not only more humane but also potentially more cost effective. The interest in community service as an alternative penalty can be traced back to 1949, when the Pakwasa Committee first recognized its value. The committee proposed utilizing inmates for public works like road maintenance. This helped introduce the concept of prisoners receiving compensation for their labour. Additionally, the Malimath
Threshold for Justice: Legal Analysis of Section 7 Proviso for Homebuyers
Written by Aanchal Ahuja student at Maharashtra National Law University, Aurangabad Abstract This article delves into a comprehensive analysis of the threshold requirement introduced under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, specifically concerning homebuyers. It requires that in order to start CIRP, at least 100 allottees or 10% of allottees in the same real estate project, whichever is smaller, must jointly submit an application. The article assesses the justification for this modification, which was proposed to limit pointless or speculative filings, and looks at its applications. It outlines the scope of its applicability to ongoing and new cases, its operation in single and multi-tower projects, and the administrative burden it imposes on allottees. The article also highlights procedural challenges such as determining the number of allottees in a project, collecting consent, and delays caused by compliance requirements. It identifies ambiguities in the interpretation and application of the provision and attempts to clarify them through judicial pronouncements. Keywords: IBC, 2016, Section 7, homebuyers, 2020 Amendment, threshold The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 describes two kinds of creditors. Section 5(7) defines a financial creditor as a person to whom a financial debt is owned and may include any person to whom such a debt has been transferred or assigned legally. Whereas, Section 5(20)defines an operational creditor as a person to whom an operational debt is owned or any such person to whom such debt has been legally transferred or assigned. The key word herein is legally, such transfer must not be illegally or for any unlawful purpose. There had been a perpetual ambiguity and confusion existing regarding the position of homebuyers in India under the Code. However, subsequent to the landmark judgment of Chita Sharma v. UOI , where the Hon’ble SC expressed apprehension in regard to the position of homebuyers. Following the judgment, an Insolvency Law Committee led by Injeti Srinivas was set up by the govt. which recognized the catastrophic consequences of the non-inclusion of home-buyers depriving them of their rights. The first major amendmentin 2018 was a turning point which explicitly gave the status of FCs to home-buyers and recognizing financial debts,Section 5(8) now included the money raised from allottees in the real-estate projects.Such allottees were also entitled to file an application under Section 7 to initiate CIRP against the corporate debtor. The landmark judgment of Pioneer Urban Land and Infrastructure v. UOI upheld the constitutional validity of this amendment wherein it was clarified that home-buyers who are not allotted houses within the stipulated time-period will be treated as FCs. Furthermore, it was also observed that in real estate projects, money is collected from homebuyers in return for the promise of getting property in the future, which clearly reflects the time value of money. This credit collected from homebuyers falls under Section 5(8)(f), even without needing to refer to the explanation added later through the amendment. Furthermore, the 2020 amendment by virtue of Section 3 added Proviso 7, specifying the minimum threshold required for filing an application by home-buyers/ allottees. The petition initiating the CIRP against the builders can befiled only if it is done by at least 100 homebuyers/allottees from the same real estate project, or by at least 10% of the total number of homebuyers in that particular project, whichever is lesser. Further, Section 7(3)also requires that a financial creditor must bring on record the proof of default, either from an information utility or any other evidence, along with the name of the proposed interim professional. Non-compliance of either of these requirements leads to rejection of the application. As per Proviso 4 of Section 7, the information provided by IUs holds evidentiary value, and the AA is required to determine the existence of a financial debt default within 14 days of receipt of the application. In Manish Kumar v. UOI, the issue pertaining was that the classification made by the IBC by setting a threshold limit for home-buyers alone, levying no such condition for other Financial Creditors was unreasonable and violative of their rights. The 3 Judge Bench of the Hon’ble SC held that the position of home-buyers cannot be considered to be identical or compared with other financial creditors and the threshold limit set is not violative of Art. 14 or arbitrary. The 2020 amendment does not infringe upon the rights of the home-buyers to initiate CIRP, but only puts a minimum threshold limit for the same. A petition for initiation of the CIRP by home-buyers is maintainable subject to the minimum threshold limit as specified being met. A petition is rejected if the petitioners do not meet the requirements set up by the 2020 amendment. One of the most notable requirements is that all the allottees must be of the sameproject. In the judgement of Pankaj Mehta v. M/s Ansal Hi-Tech Township, the Hon’ble NCLAT rejected the application since there were several individual projects and the allottees were spread over and associated with different projects, and hence the threshold limit was not met.The NCLT has expressed a similar view by rejecting the petitions not meeting the minimum requirement. In Mr. Rajesh Khanna & 82 Ors.v. M/s. Vardhman Infradevelopers Pvt. Ltd., the applicant claimed that the application out of 929 units in the project, the application was filed by 209 allottees. But the memo of parties displayed only 83 applicants, therefore the NCLT rejected the petition since it was unable to meet the limit set. The Hon’ble SC in the Manish Kumar Case (supra)held that the quoram of 100 or 10% of the allottees from the same project is to be seen as “on the date of presentation of the petition” rather than at the time of admission or hearing of the petition. The legitimacy of a petition must be assessed based on the facts that existed at the time it was filed. Furthermore, in Tarun Ahuja v. Puri Construction Pvt. Ltd., the NCLAT held that the withdrawal of certain allottees in pursuance of a settlement or any other reason would not
Justice at the Margins: Legal Empowerment as a Tool for Social Transformation
Written by Rohaan Thyagaraju, student at Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad. Access to justice in India’s multifaceted socio-legal environment is heavily conditioned by class, caste, gender, religion, and geography. Constrained by constitutional promises of equality and non-discrimination, the poor and marginalized remain far from able to access legal institutions that are geared mainly towards the affluent. Traditional approaches to access to justice have accepted “the narrowing focus on formalizing legal aid services as a necessary, but not sufficient response to deeply entrenched patterns of exclusion” that an unequal state justice system perpetuates. This analysis looks at an alternative paradigm. Legal empowerment is a change that changes power relations so that marginalised communities are empowered to become active agents of their struggle for justice and rights. Albeit not the only way to conceive of legal empowerment, in the analyses presented in this work, legal empowerment involves more than the provision of legal services to people experiencing poverty; it involves processes through which the people that they are designed to empower develop capacities to know, use, and master the law. This approach acknowledges that possible access to justice is conditioned by institutional changes in systems of law and by the development of capacities within the communities that would be able to work with the systems of law. Through a study of novel legal empowerment programs in India, this analysis outlines the successes, trends, pitfalls of practice, and possible policy architectures by which such transformative approaches may be sustained and scaled. The traditional “access to justice” paradigm has concentrated chiefly on eliminating barriers to formal legal institutions via mega aid, simplifying procedures and institutional reforms. Although these initiatives remain vital, they typically present marginalised communities as passive recipients of legal services, rather than as integrated participants in legal justice procedures. The legal empowerment approach, in contrast, thrives on agency, capability and structural change. Based on the capability approach and legal empowerment scholarship of Amartya Sen, the following framework conceptualises justice as fair procedures and expanded substantive freedoms. Legal empowerment initiatives then seek to build citizen capacities, such as legal knowledge, confidence and resources, to act in legal systems in concert with efforts to change those systems themselves. This combined attention sets up opportunities for sustainable change that consider immediate needs and underlying power gaps. Legality literacy initiatives are grounded on building the base of knowledge of rights and laws as a precondition for claiming justice. In contrast to the traditional one-way flow of information dissemination of conventional legal awareness campaigns, practical legal literacy takes the participatory methodologies of linking legal concepts to lived experience. The Multiple Action Research Group (MARG) has enriched the legal literacy methods with its “Legal Empowerment Through Community Action” program in seven states. Instead of merely presenting laws, MARG utilises participatory rural appraisal techniques, community mapping, and case-based discussions to enable communities to pick up on patterns of rights violations and formulate collective action. In Rajasthan, these approaches empowered the Dalit community to document systematic exclusion from government schemes and mobilise that evidence against local officials, significantly improving scheme delivery. However, Jagori’s Gender Resource Centres in Delhi have produced contextualised legal literacy materials to empower women in informal settlements to challenge their particular problems. Community workshops and peer learning circles active through regular legal literacy camps have enabled these centres to equip women with skills to identify discriminatory patterns and develop strategies to counter such patterns. The reach goes far beyond individual legal problems to question the larger norms. Women learn to move through public institutions simultaneously as they change household and community dynamics of power. These initiatives illustrate the face of legal literacy (participatory methodologies) as a consciousness-raising project that relates individual grievances to structural patterns. To emerge from marginalisation, communities acquire the instruments to label violations, assert rights, and question systemic inequalities by building critical legal consciousness. Strategic litigation initiatives use individual cases as a gateway through which larger forms of injustice can be challenged, based on such litigation being provided in court decisions. These legal strategies are turned into potent instruments of structural change when inscribed in social movements. The Socio-Legal Information Centre (SLIC) has developed an integrated model integrating grassroots mobilisation with strategic public interest litigation. In Chhattisgarh, SLIC partnered with Adivasi communities displaced by mining projects, combining legal action and community organising. Following the documentation of violations of forest rights and environmental laws, they launched strategic litigation culminating in landmark judicial determinations that provided a forum for community consultation rights. Importantly, the legal strategy was designed and implemented with constant community engagement so that advocacy in the courts aligned with community priorities and facilitated the strengthening of grassroots mobilisation, rather than its eclipse. Similarly, the Criminal Justice and Police Accountability Project (CPAProject) integrates legal representation in marginalised communities targeted by criminal law with systematic documentation and advocacy concerning patterns of criminalisation. By linking each specific case to the big structural critique, this effort turns the very legal defence into a means of challenging the discriminatory practices of the police. These approaches illustrate how strategic litigation can connect the individual complaints and systemic change if anchored in community mobilisation. Instead, these initiatives view marginalised communities as clients, co-strategists for ongoing legal struggles to fulfil urgent needs, and as momentum behind a policy reform strategy. Legal empowerment is being enhanced because of digital technologies: reducing information asymmetries, facilitating documentation, and collective action across geographical boundaries. Such tools, when developed with consideration for accessibility and community needs, can have a significant effect on legal capabilities. The Haqdarshak has also designed an application for mobile phones that enables community members to identify deserving beneficiaries of the government schemes and assist them by making applications. The technology streamlines intricate criteria of eligibility, presents them in an understandable form, and even gives step-by-step instructions on manoeuvring bureaucratic inertia. Crucially, the digital tool is housed within the human infrastructure of knowledgeable community facilitators who operate at the site-specific level. This hybrid method has allowed more than 900,000 citizens to benefit from
Digging Responsibly: The Legal Side of Sustainable Mining
Written by Keshav Agarwal student at Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar Introduction: Can mining fuel progress without wounding the planet? In India, mining powers essentials such as the electricity, steel, smartphones, roads. India, with 95 minerals, is a global mining leader, exporting resources like iron ore, bauxite, chromite, and copper. But behind this industrial might there lies a stark reality: vanishing forests, polluted rivers, displaced communities, and a deepening gender divide. As one of the top five mineral producers by volume, India stands at a crossway. Sure, mining drives GDP and growth—but at what cost? This blog dives into the legal frameworks, sustainability efforts, corporate responsibilities, and social-environmental challenges shaping India’s mining future. The question now isn’t about how much can be mined, but about how responsibly it’s done. Legal and Policy Framework: Building the Foundation for Sustainable Mining The mining industry employs about one million workers, or 4% of India’s workforce. It is governed by numerous central and state laws, mainly the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (MMRD), and the Mines Act, 1952. The MMRD regulates the sector under a unified national framework, while the Mines Act focuses on health, safety, and operational standards. While the MMRD Act (1957) provides a unified legal framework, the Mines Act (1952) sets health and safety standards.” Several key environmental laws also play a significant role in regulating mining activities. For instance, the Environment Protection Act of 1986 aims to prevent and control pollution while ensuring the maintenance and restoration of environmental quality, including water resources affected by mining operations. Similarly, the Forest Conservation Act of 1980 restricts the diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes, thereby placing limits on mining in ecologically sensitive areas. But, the Supreme Court in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India (1997) emphasized the urgent need for implementation over mere statutory existence. Furthermore, “The National Mineral Policy, 2019” which aims to ensure that minerals, as vital natural resources, are explored, extracted, and managed in alignment with national economic goals. It outlines that it’s the state’s role as a trustee of mineral wealth for advocating for fair and transparent allocation, environmental sustainability, stakeholder participation, and equitable benefit-sharing with affected communities. India has no shortage of sustainability-related laws and regulations. However, their effectiveness is frequently undermined by weak implementation and enforcement mechanisms. Regulatory agencies often lack the resources or autonomy needed to monitor compliance consistently, and penalties for violations are either minimal or poorly enforced. As a result, many companies full-fill only the formal requirements—filing reports or obtaining clearances—without making meaningful changes to reduce their environmental and social impact. Laws achieve lasting impact only when compliance goes beyond box-ticking and becomes a matter of internalized values and proactive practice. Corporate Social Responsibility in Mining: Doing Good or Doing the Minimum? Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in India’s mining sector is a legal obligation, but whether it translates into real, lasting impact is a different question altogether. Under Section 135 of the Companies Act, 2013 and the Companies (Corporate Social Responsibility Policy) Rules, 2014, companies above a certain threshold are mandated to spend at least 2% of their average net profits over the previous three years on CSR activities. Mining PSUs like Coal India Ltd. (CIL) have set geographical parameters for this spending, such as allocating 80% of their CSR funds within 25 km of project sites and the remaining 20% within the states they operate in. However, studies reveal that in practice, CSR often takes the form of short-lived, surface-level interventions such as installing water tanks, distributing school kits, building clinics , projects that look good on paper but offer little lasting value once a mine shut down. Most mining companies do not integrate CSR into the overall mine lifecycle, resulting in community support that fades when operations cease. This disjoint becomes especially harmful for vulnerable populations—indigenous groups, women, and informal workers, who are often left with polluted lands and few economic alternatives. True CSR should be rooted in system-building: vocational training, micro-enterprise support, mobile health care, and education that lasts beyond mining activity. For instance, initiatives like those at Tata Steel’s Noamundi mine, where CSR aligns with mine closure and environmental restoration goals, show what’s possible when community development is embedded into core business planning. What ultimately matters is that the CSR must shift from being a compliance checkbox to a strategy for long-term, inclusive development, which could be made possible by several practical steps and legal reforms such as Mandating impact assessments and audits , Linking CSR to mine closure planning, promoting pooled CSR funds , and strengthening monitoring mechanisms. Waste Management: What Happens to All That Dirt? “It might come as a surprise, but in 2015, India recorded the highest number of pollution-related deaths globally.” According to The Lancet, 2.51 million lives were lost due to polluted air, water, and soil which is nearly 28% of global pollution deaths. According to the State of Global Air 2019 report, children born in South Asia today face a potential reduction in life expectancy by up to 2.5 years solely due to exposure to air pollution. Consider the mining industry, not just the familiar image of trucks transporting coal or iron ore, but the often-overlooked environmental consequence: for every tonne of mineral extracted, several tonnes of hazardous waste are generated and left behind, over a billion tonnes each year in India alone, this waste isn’t harmless. We’re talking over burden, tailings, slag, sludge, and dust, all dumped dangerously close to villages and water sources, untreated. So, what can we do? Innovations like geopolymer concrete, sedimentation tanks, and bioremediation show promise but lack widespread adoption. Some companies like Tata Steel are testing these innovations. But unless these become the norm we’re just putting a Band-Aid on a growing crisis which was as also stated in the case of Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India (1996), where the Supreme Court advocated for the “polluter pays” principle, but implementation remains inconsistent. It’s time mining got a sustainability
Attempt to Rape: Trapped Between Rape and Outraging Modesty – A Legal Dilemma?
Written by Saumya Tripathi student at Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow Introduction Attempt to commit a crime takes place when a person develops the intention to commit an offense and does everything that is required to commit it but fails. Attempt is punishable under the Section 62 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter, ‘BNS’). Although the BNS does not clearly define the term attempt, the Supreme Court has interpreted it through cases. The law regarding attempts remains complex and unclear due to several reasons, inter alia, a lack of a precise definition of attempt, differences in mental and physical elements, and the lack of a narrow interpretation. This article seeks to analyse the jurisprudence surrounding the attempt to rape in India and how the subjectivity and inconsistency in law has been unfavourable to women in general. In light of the recent controversial verdict of Allahabad High Court which held that groping and untying strings of the pyjama of a minor girl does not constitute attempt to rape, has sparked the debate around the blurring lines of what constitutes preparation and attempt, specifically in rape cases, which is one of the most stigmatised crimes for the victim. The ground is fraught with difficulties due to the sensitive nature of the crime and the non-adaptation to the 2013 amendment which broadened the net of rape laws. The judicial ambiguity about what is the penultimate act in rape cases is a by-product of the fact that it is still stuck in the discarded statutory definition of rape, wherein penetration was the ultimate requirement. The only new input is that the intention of the accused is the key factor in distinguishing cases of attempt to rape and outraging the modesty of women. But again, the matter of fact is that intention is to be gauged by the acts of the accused. Analysing Attempt to Rape Between rape and attempt to commit rape, there is a rare area covered by section 354 IPC i.e. assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty or indecent assault. The dividing line between attempt to commit rape and indecent assault is not only thin but also is practically invisible. The contemporary understanding of the law is intention-centric. In Koppula Venakat Rao, it was held that an accused guilty of an attempt with intent to commit rape, court has to be satisfied that the accused, when he laid hold of the prosecutrix, not only desired to gratify his passions upon her person, but that he intended to do so at all events, and notwithstanding any resistance by her. Incidentally, the line from judgement, “Indecent assaults are often magnified into attempts at rape..” is often quoted to support the argument that to constitute an attempt to rape, severe circumstances of culpability are required. However, it is well to be noted that surrounding factors may not necessarily indicate whether an infallible determination to rape existed. It is to be noted that it is a case of the year 2004, and had this been a case post-2013 amendments, it would squarely fall within the boundaries of the offence of rape. State of MP v. Mahendra was a case where the limits of proximity test were extended and the court recognized that the stage of preparation ends, and attempt begins in a rape case begins the moment accused with a carnal intent takes the victim to a secluded location. The Court held that the act of the accused of closing the doors and taking the victims to a room with the motive of carnal knowledge was the end of ‘preparation’. His following action of stripping the prosecutrices and rubbing his genitals against theirs was deliberately done with manifest intention to commit rape and was reasonably proximate to the offence. On these lines, the judgement of the Allahabad HC in Akash and Ors v. State of UP, that the actions of the accused—grabbing the X’s breasts, breaking the string of her pyjama, and attempting to drag her beneath a culvert—did not constitute an attempt to rape raises significant concerns regarding its interpretation of the law and its application to sexual offences. The accused’s actions in breaking X’s pajama string and attempting to drag her beneath the culvert constitute a direct movement towards commission of rape. The next immediate step would have been rape itself, had the witnesses not interrupted. The Court failed to recognize that the accused had progressed beyond preparation and into the realm of attempt, as they had already engaged in acts directly proximate to the completion of rape. The Problems with the Proximity test Different Interpretations The Supreme Court has established two different criteria under the proximity rule to distinguish between preparation and attempt. The first is an intention-based approach, where the proximity of the act is gauged in relation to the individual’s intention rather than physical actions. The second focuses on physical proximity, considering an act to be an attempt if it is physically close to the commission of the offence. The intention-based approach suggests that an act must reflect intent, which, in most cases, is determined with aid of circumstantial evidence. Scholars and jurists have proposed different interpretations to refine this classification. For example, in a New Zealand case, an objective assessment of physical actions was considered the sole determinant of proximity. These differing perspectives make it difficult to establish a universal interpretation. Complexity of Mens Rea of Attempt to Rape In Koppula Venkat Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh, it was held that indecent assaults can amount to an attempt to commit rape if the accused intended to perform all the necessary acts leading to the offence but failed. Therefore, determining whether mere disrobing qualifies as an attempt to commit rape hinges on the presence of mens rea. The basic challenge is to distinguish between the specific intent to outrage modesty and the intent to commit rape. In terms of outraging the modesty, mens rea involves an intent to outrage modesty
THE EVOLUTION OF PAPARAZZI: FROM LA DOLCE VITA TO SOCIAL MEDIA FRENZY
Written by Dipanshu Raj & Harsh Gupta students at Maharashtra National Law University, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar. The assertive photographers and journalists, called “Paparazzi”, play a paramount role in clicking interesting photos of celebrities. This fad started with the Italian film La Dolce Vita and has now spread to all corners of the world. This period started with the beginning of the ravenous public desire for a peek into famous individuals’ lives. In India, this growth of paparazzi following the moves of Bollywood stars, cricketers, and politicians is part of a larger change in which privacy boundaries are increasingly being probed. With the advent of social media, this effect has only been heightened, with the dispersal of paparazzi material far and wide. Paparazzi are freelance photographers who click pictures of famous people like celebrities, cricketers, and politicians. Paparazzi are well known for their persistent following of celebrities in their private space, such as the gym, vehicle, restaurant, and home, to capture exclusive or private moments. They usually click pictures of their daily routine. Earlier, to make a living, paparazzi used to sell their photographs to media agencies and earn money from them. But clicking photos of the celebrity’s day-to-day affairs acts as a double-edged sword, it acts as money-making for the paparazzi on one side, while on the other hand, it also violates the celebrities’ privacy. INTEREST OF THE PAPARAZZI AND CELEBRITIES This feeds the paparazzi industry, which records unguarded moments of celebrities to heighten consumption for the public, which is greatly fascinated with the celebrity lifestyle. With the social media that have gained momentum of late, their addiction has risen further into demanding uncensored access to the lives of public personas. In contrast to the well-manicured postings online, the seeming authenticity of the paparazzi photos raises demand for exclusive content. The media outlets exploit this demand and sell subscription services to fans to get a close-up look at their favourite celebrities. This has influenced the function of the celebrities themselves within the paparazzi economy. Gone are the days when celebrities used to be simple passive subjects to uninvited photography; instead, today most of them carefully cultivate the industry to extend their visibility and bolster brand strength. They nourish parasocial interactions, that is, one-sided emotional relationships that feel close, with their fans by inclusions of paparazzi photos in their public selves. In a time when attention has to be brief on digital platforms, these exchanges are relevant. Celebrities also exploit paparazzi photos by promoting lifestyle, fashion, and/or accessory products to reinforce their status as marketable “brands.” For this reason, the paparazzi have two jobs: one of knowingly violating privacy and one of providing celebrities with a strategic means of self-marketing. It is in this sense that the mutually reinforcing relationship underlines the way that celebrity culture, in its mergers of fashion, fame, and business, has commodified itself. For the money-shot-grabbing paparazzi and the celebrities who either want or believe in some sort of enduring cultural the more iconic a star becomes, the more resilient their unpoliced moments in time. IMPORTANT REGULATION AND GUIDELINES FOR THE PAPARAZZI While coming to the legislation and regulation regarding the paparazzi in India, there is no such regulation for the same, but recent legal developments have sought to address the privacy issues resulting from the actions of paparazzi. Section 78(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, makes it punishable to invade privacy by surveillance or recording. This Act gives more strength to privacy rights and remedies. The Press Council of India has issued guidelines that establish ethical media practices and privacy. However, these guidelines are not legally binding in due time, but they are generally anticipated to be complied with by the media and the paparazzi. It is often that the paparazzi would use Article 19(1)(a) as well as Article (1)(g), which covers freedom of speech, trade, and occupation respectively, to defend the invasive actions, which is a legal weakness in terms of privacy. The concept, although, has no direct protection from the Constitution, may find a place in the apex jurisdiction vide Article 21, which speaks about the ‘right to life and thereby connotes liberty. In “Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, the Supreme Court defined privacy to be associated with personal liberty. Likewise, in the R. Malkani v. State of Maharashtra. In Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu, the Supreme Court upheld people’s rights to privacy over personal information and held that the media cannot publish or broadcast such information without consent. Thus, the right to privacy shields and protects the celebrities from the constant stalking and harassment by paparazzi and the use of photos and videos without their consent, and provides a proper balance between freedom of expression with human dignity and privacy. However, the changes brought by the law and judgments are a step toward remedying the challenges to privacy in India. FIRST-HAND EXPERIENCES The recent cases in India have pointed out the increasing tension between paparazzi practices and celebrities’ private rights. In R. Rajagopal Alias R.R Gopal and Another v. State of Tamil Nadu and Others, the Supreme Court ordered that snapping pictures without consent inside a celebrity’s house is an invasion of privacy and prohibited the magazine from republishing or hosting the photos online. Similarly, in the Shilpa Shetty Kundra case, the Bombay High Court granted an injunction against a photographer who shot unauthorized pictures of Shilpa Shetty Kundra and her family while on tour. The court, though conscious of the right to free expression of the defendant, weighed that such freedom had to be balanced against private rights and held the activities of the photographer illegal. The privacy of celebrities and their families has also been an issue. Recently, Virat Kohli and Anushka Sharma expressed their discontent over illegal pictures of their daughter, while Saif Ali Khan and Kareena Kapoor requested the media not to photograph their son, Taimur Ali Khan, excessively, which set off debates regarding the privacy of children. In other cases, there have been companies
AN ANALYSIS OF LEGAL, POLICY, AND SOCIETAL BARRIERS TO ADOLESCENT SEX EDUCATION IN INDIA: NEED FOR STRONGER LAWS
Written by Akhil Kumar K.S. & Gowri Prakash students at The National University of Advanced Legal Studies, Kochi. “In India, the misconceptions about sex education are widespread and contribute to its limited implementation and effectiveness. Many people, including parents and educators, hold conservative views that discussing sex is inappropriate, immoral, or embarrassing. This societal stigma creates a reluctance to talk openly about sexual health, leading to a significant knowledge gap among adolescents.” — Former CJI D.Y. Chandrachud. The above statement of Justice Chandrachud in a 2024 judgment highlights the imperative need for sex education in India. Despite a few attempts to include it in the curriculum, it faced significant opposition from the citizens and several state governments. Why 21st-century India does not want to develop its mindset is a crucial question. Implementation of sex education, especially during adolescence, will not only impart knowledge but also play a critical role in addressing issues like sexual harassment, especially in a country like India where every day 86 rapes are reported and the number of unreported cases can’t be imagined, childhood marriages, teenage pregnancies, unsafe abortions, lack of contraceptive awareness, gender-based violence, porn addiction, and medical issues like HIV and AIDS in which India ranks third. Ironically, sex education still remains a taboo in countries with the highest population. When the ‘s’ word is attached to education, the stigma becomes greater as these taboos are passed down to children. As India lacks a comprehensive law, policy, or guideline that talks about sex education among adolescents, the scope and area remain ambiguous, and calling it a non-existent thing would be much more appropriate. The most comprehensive guideline that provides a conceptual framework for sex education is the International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education (ITGSE). The concept of sex education was comprehensively published by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the United Nations Population Fund (UNPF) in 2018. It provides a basic evidence-based framework for designing school curriculum-based Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) programs for countries and institutions based on specific needs. As per ITGSE, CSE includes teaching sexuality and covering cognitive, emotional, physical, and social aspects as per the children’s age and cognitive abilities. Hence, sex education includes, majorly eight components, which are relationships, values, rights, culture, and sexuality; understanding gender; violence and safe environment; skills for health and wellbeing; the human body and development; sexuality and sexual behaviour. The right to sex education is an interlink between the two fundamental rights of the right to health and the right to education. Furthermore, the existing international legal framework substantiates the existence of sex education as a basic right of adolescents. The ICESCR and the CEDAW recognize comprehensive sex education as a human right. Furthermore, it is prioritized in the Sustainable Development Goals under the goal of health and well-being. The Committee on the Rights of the Child recognizes that the right to education requires providing information necessary to develop a healthy lifestyle. It develops a safe and positive attitude toward sexuality, builds healthy relationships, and makes adolescents informed about safe choices about their sexual health. Youth deserve a strong foundation of developmentally appropriate information about gender and sexuality and how these relate to their bodies, community, culture, society, mental health, and relationships. In the Indian scenario, the right to sex education can exist in interjunction with the fundamental right to health and education. India is also obligated to enforce sex education under the above-mentioned international instruments. India introduced sex education in the 1980s. However, earlier interventions lacked details on contraception, sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), and illustrations. One of the first comprehensive sex education programs in India was the School AIDS Education Program of 2002. This was a collaborative effort of the National AIDS Control Organization and the Ministry for Human Rights Development. The program’s primary aim was the prevention of Aids and other STDs by spreading awareness. This program, however, failed due to poor implementation. In 2005, the same collaboration developed a novel initiative: the Adolescent Education Programme. The initiative (AEP) encountered significant opposition from six states, which promptly banned it, citing reasons such as objectionable content and the perceived lack of necessity for sex education in India, given the country’s rich cultural heritage. However, India has also witnessed success in sex education policies, a significant example of the Udaan initiative in Jharkhand. In 2020, the School Health Programme was launched under Ayushman Bharat; it focused on adolescent health, including topics like puberty, reproductive health, and gender sensitivity. The Compulsory Teaching of Sex Education in Educational Institutions Bill, 2021 is the most recent and progressive initiative mandating sex education in schools. It proposes the establishment of an Advisory Council for sex education, including experts. The bill defines sex education, includes the LGBTQIA+++ community, and ensures the appointment of qualified teachers. The bill also requires the Union to fund its implementation. However, the bill met the same fate as common sense in a debate with conservatism; it never passed. And so, the guardians of ignorance triumphed again, valiantly shielding society from the horrors of informed decision-making. Unlike state governments, the Supreme Court has favored sex education for adolescents. The Apex Court, in its recent 2024 judgment, ruled that sex education is not a Western concept but an essential for adolescents. It further criticized states’ ban, stating it hinders sexual health programs and leaves youth uninformed, pushing them toward misleading online content. The Court emphasized that age-appropriate sex education would prevent harmful behavior, including exposure to child sexual abuse material. In another 2024 judgment, the court emphasized the right to sex education, referring to various international conferences, such as the International Conference on Population and Development. Additionally, The UN Commission on Population and Development urged states to provide evidence-based sex education covering sexual health, human rights, and gender equality to help youth engage with their sexuality responsibly. The Court also relied on the European Court of Human Rights judgment, which upheld young people’s right to sex education in schools. The Himachal Pradesh High
Balancing Mind and Law: A Forensic Psychological Inquiry into Juvenile Justice
Written by Ananya Sharma & Anubhuti Singh students at Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow. The Confluence of Mind and Law: Introducing Juvenile Justice and Forensic Psychology At the very nexus of behavioural science and the notion of jurisprudence lies an extremely convoluted field of juvenile forensic psychology. This discipline interrogates what a young offender has done and explains the motive behind the act. Juvenile forensic psychology exceeds traditional disciplinary boundaries by addressing the neurodevelopmental immaturity along with psychosocial vulnerabilities that separate adolescents from adults. Adolescents are less culpable than adults because immaturity diminishes their ability to appreciate risk and consequence, exercise self-restraint, and resist peer pressure. According to the research conducted by the American Psychological Association, we have seen that adolescents exhibit reduced impulse control, underdeveloped executive functioning, and a heightened susceptibility to peer influence. This neurological immaturity has a significant impact upon courts as seen in a landmark judgement of the U.S. Supreme Court, Roper v. Simmons (2005), which held the execution of juvenile offenders to be unconstitutional. Shedding light upon the Indian legal framework, the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, considers a highly child-centric, rehabilitative philosophy, recognising children in conflict with law as individuals who require extensive care and psychological support. India’s juvenile justice, by section 15 of the said act, now emphasises a rehabilitative approach, taking into account a child’s psychological and social background, like trauma, cognition, family, peers, and environment, during preliminary assessments for heinous offences, therefore directly invoking the principles of forensic psychology within statutory procedures. Internationally, it can be perceived that this legal-psychological symbiosis is validated by instruments such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). International human rights law obligates states to adopt legal procedures for children that prioritise their dignity and facilitate reintegration, underscoring the rehabilitative, not punitive ethos, as laid down in Article 40 of the UNCRC. Young Minds, Troubled Paths: Exploring the Psychology of Youth Offenders Psychological assessment plays a substantial role within the juvenile system because it assists in informing prevention of culpability, treatment, and rehabilitative potential decisions. Forensic psychologists employ an array of assessment instruments designed specifically to consider the unique developmental characteristics of adolescents. Of most significant importance among these are risk evaluations, which measure the likelihood of recidivism; competency evaluations, which determine whether a juvenile can assist in their legal proceeding; and mental health evaluations, which detect psychiatric illness that could impact behaviour or legal competence. Standard instruments used by forensic psychologists include structured clinical interviews, psychological state testing (e.g., the MMPI-A with adolescents), and clinical or custodial behavioural observations. An example of a commonly used assessment is the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY), which assesses future violence risk in adolescents. However, juvenile measurement is not without challenge. Developmental variation—differences in cognitive maturity, impulse-controlling ability, and knowledge of society, can affect both the validity and interpretation of test scores. Between Gavel and Growth: A Jurisprudential Odyssey of India’s Juvenile Justice Framework The structure of juvenile justice in India refers to a Judeo-social symphony, i.e. the law oscillates between the principles of penal accountability and the imperatives of child protection and rehabilitation. In an increasingly developing conscience of adolescence’s cognitive, emotional, and developmental peculiarities, India’s legal framework has evolved from a punitive orientation to a much more reformative and rehabilitative jurisprudence embodying the essence of constitutional morality and international human rights doctrine. The very foundation of juvenile justice in India is the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which replaced the 2000 Act in response to the public outrage following the 2012 Delhi gang rape case. This incident involved a juvenile accused of that act and triggered a nationwide debate on the adequacy of existing laws. The Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, signifies a paradigm shift from punitive to rehabilitative justice, emphasising the reintegration of juveniles into society through tailored interventions. This 2015 Act introduced major pivotal reforms, particularly the Section 15 that empowers the Juvenile Justice Board, JJB, to conduct a form of preliminary assessment of the child aged between 16 to 18 years who is accused of heinous offences, to determine whether they possess the mental and the physical capacity to be tried as an adult. The key provisions and amendments include section 3 of the act, which enshrines 16 foundation principles that include the presumption of innocence, the best interest of the child, and a fresh start, guiding the administration of justice in juvenile cases. Section 18 of the act ensures that the juveniles are not sentenced to death or life imprisonment without the possibility of release, which aligns with Article 37A of the UNCRC. The Juvenile Justice Model Rules of 2016 further operationalise the statutory framework that mandates the presence of a psychologist and a social worker during the assessments and stipulates timelines for the inquiries. In addition, India’s juvenile jurisprudence draws upon constitutional mandates under Article 39E and 39F, which direct the states to ensure children are not abused. The Indian judiciary has played a transformative and a key adjudicatory role, as we can see clearly in the case of Sheela Barse v. Union of India, in which the Supreme Court has emphasised upon the need for accepted juvenile detention, homes, and proper legal aid. The Indian Supreme Court has repeatedly reaffirmed the need for a child-friendly justice system. Further, in another case of Salil Bali v. Union of India, the Apex Court upheld the constitutionality of the age threshold, i.e. of 18 years, affirming India’s commitment towards international obligations. This aligns with research showing that those under 18 lack full emotional and cognitive maturity. Verdicts and Variables: The Legal Impact of Psychological Insight Psychological evaluations are also routinely presented to juvenile court proceedings to guide judicial decision-making on many issues, including competency to proceed, criminal responsibility, disposition (sentence), and suitability for diversion. Psychological reports are balanced by judges in determining whether a youth is competent to assist in their defence, a standard grounded
Bridging the gap: The need for urgent reforms to deal with income inequality
Written by Aditya Raj student at Chanakya National Law University, Patna. Introduction “Big achievement! India to become 4th largest economy in 2025 overtaking Japan; will be 3rd largest by 2028.” This was reported by the popular news outlet Times of India on May 5, 2025. They weren’t the only ones. As India’s nominal GDP is expected to grow by leaps and bounds, several Indian media outlets and a significant part of its population are jubilant about it. The credit for it, to an extent, goes to the huge workforce of the country, which itself is a result of the humongous population of the country. For those in the country who belong to somewhat financially empowered and socially influential classes of the country, which may also include the middle-class segment, such headlines are a pleasant sight, and rightfully so. They cannot be reprimanded for celebrating an achievement of the country. However, the underlying problem that has persisted for decades in our country is that beneath the façade of such picturesque headlines lies the grotesque reality to which many in the country remain oblivious, despite the issue being absolutely ubiquitous. The menace of income inequality is something that has haunted the country for decades and might continue to do so unless and until we take concrete steps to mitigate this massively unequal condition. The absence of those steps is only going to exacerbate the condition. One of the biggest problems when tackling income inequality is how the issue ends up being suppressed under the sensational headlines of rapid economic growth and an increase in “average” statistics of the country. The core problem with such “average” statistics is that they consider the owner of a multiplex in Mumbai and a ragpicker on the streets beside the building as one monolithic unit, which is deeply disturbing. The state of inequality in India The first question that may arise in our minds is: what exactly do we mean when we are referring to “income inequality”? Income inequality, also called economic inequality, can be defined as the significant disparity in income between groups of individuals, countries, and even social classes. To assess this income inequality among nations, the Gini Coefficient has come into existence, in which different countries, classes, or groups are ranked in an index. A perfect score of 0 describes a utopian society where “perfect equality” is present. A score of 1 translates to a society where there is a state of perfect inequality. In short, the lower the number, the better it is for the downtrodden section of that country. As far as India’s case is concerned, the condition is anything but pleasant. “India stands out as a poor and very unequal country, with an affluent elite.” That’s what the World Inequality Report 2022 states about India. For a country with such a large population, the aggressive pursuit of economic growth without catering to the needs of the poor majority will surely exacerbate the inequalities already present. But how did we come to this? What circumstances over time ultimately led to the creation of such an unequal structure in our country? The problem, at least in recorded history, dates back to the British colonial period, since 1922 at least, which saw the enactment of the Income Tax Act, allowing the study of how the share of income evolved over an entire century. Unsurprisingly, economic inequality was rampant during colonial rule, as the colonial elite amassed wealth at the expense of poor Indians. The wealthiest 1 percent segment of India’s population held approximately 13 percent share of the country’s total income in 1922, and this share increased at a rapid pace to 20 percent during the inter-war period, only to fall back again to 13 percent by the time India gained independence. The post-independence period has witnessed certain fluctuations vis-à-vis economic inequality, though there was still a general trend of income inequality being mitigated and the share of the ultra-rich declining. India, after independence, ended up being a country having a centrally directed economy, which was also statist and highly regulated in nature. Key revenue-generating sectors, such as transport, construction, agriculture, railways, banking, oil, and sundries, were entirely controlled by the Government of India. The prices were highly regulated, and several trade barriers were in place. Until the opening of the economy, this era was referred to as the “License Raj.” The policies enacted, mostly socialist in nature, did their part to reduce inequality, as state control over crucial sectors ensured a reduced role for private players in such fields, thus ensuring that billionaires had little scope for benefiting in an unjust manner. All of this did show results with regard to economic inequality. After experiencing a brief uptick during the 1950s, the share of income of India’s wealthiest 1 percent declined significantly, and by 1982, reached just 6.1 percent. However, while it can be said that the socialist haven India had reduced income inequalities, it certainly wasn’t a la-la land. The nominal GDP of India was growing at a glacial pace, with the real growth rate having an average of 1.6 percent per year from 1960 to 1990. Poverty was also rampant in the country during those times. Then India hit the road to a heightened state of economic inequality in 1991, when the Indian economy was liberalized and the Indian market was opened to foreign investors. It was followed by the Indian economy growing at a decent pace. While it certainly benefited the Indian economy, and the end of the “License Raj” did bring relief to the Indian masses, the moves had unforeseen repercussions. It ended up ensuring an increase in the share of income of the wealthy lot. In 2022, the share of income of the wealthiest 1 percent augmented to an unprecedented 22.6 percent, surpassing the inequality that existed during the British colonial era. The wealth held by the top 1 percent saw a similar pattern, with them now holding a share of 40.1 percent of the total wealth
Reciprocity and Regulation: Analyzing the 2025 Amendments to BCI Rules on Foreign Legal Practice in India
Written by Jagatpal Choudhary, a student at Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar. Introduction The Bar Council of India [hereinafter “BCI”] has notified Amendment Rules for Registration and Regulations of Foreign Lawyers and Foreign Law Firms in India [hereinafter “Rules”] (such power is conferred by Section 7(1)(d), (e), (ic), (l) and (m) and Section 49(1)(ah), (ag), (c), (e), and (h) read together with Section 24, 29, and 47 of the Advocates Act, 1961), allowing foreign lawyers and law firms [hereinafter “Foreign Lawyers and Firms”] to practice foreign law in India on a reciprocity basis, which means “Indian advocates and law firms may register as foreign lawyers or foreign law firms, allowing them to expand their practice to foreign law and international law consultancy without relinquishing their rights to practice Indian law in domestic forums. This dual registration provides Indian lawyers with an opportunity to broaden their professional horizons while maintaining their status as advocates under Indian law.” Objective of the Amendment Bought Here, answering succinctly to the above questions this, there is a dissenting judgment with the AK Balaji, regarding the expression “fly in and fly out”, it was put forth that it will only cover a casual visit not amounting to “practice” and nothing else, and in case of any doubt, then the interpretation of BCI will have an upper hand as and when decided. Secondly, it was held that there is no absolute right of the foreign lawyer to conduct arbitration proceedings in respect of disputes arising out of a contract relating to international commercial arbitration. Thirdly, the expression mentioned in the Para 63(iv) of the 2012 judgement, B.P.O. Companies providing wide range of customized and integrated services and functions to its customers like word processing, secretarial support, transcription services, proof reading services, travel desk support services, etc. do not come within the purview of the Advocates Act, 1961 or the Bar Council of India Rules. Definition Clause:- Scope and eligibility of Practice for Foreign Lawyers and Law Firms Registration and Regulatory Requirements Validity and Renewal of Registration The Nature of Restrictions and Ethical Obligations on Foreign Lawyers and Firms: Impact on Indian Legal Professionals and Law Firms Implications and Repercussions on the Indian Legal Practice System In conclusion, while the amendments offer substantial opportunities for growth, learning, and internationalization, they also demand vigilance from regulators and adaptability from practitioners. For Indian lawyers and law firms, the move prompts new pathways, competitive benchmarks, and partnership prospects.
Federalism and Centre-State Relations: Balancing Harmony and Autonomy in India’s Constitutional Framework
Written by Shri Ganarchit.B India’s constitutional framework establishes a unique federal system that seeks to harmonize a strong central authority with regional autonomy, creating a delicate balance between national unity and state diversity. Described as a “Union of States” under Article 1, India’s quasi-federal structure grants states their own governments and legislatures while embedding them within a unified polity. This note explores the constitutional design, division of powers, fiscal federalism, executive and emergency provisions, cooperative mechanisms, and contemporary tensions, providing a comprehensive analysis of Centre-State relations as of July 2025. Constitutional Design and Federal Identity Article 1 of the Constitution declares, “India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States,” emphasizing an indestructible union rather than a federation allowing secession. This reflects a quasi-federal system where states have significant autonomy but are subject to central oversight. For example, Article 3 empowers Parliament to alter state boundaries or create new states, as seen in the 2014 formation of Telangana, typically after consulting the affected state legislature. This provision underscores the Centre’s pivotal role in shaping the federal landscape while fostering cooperation to maintain national unity. The Preamble further reinforces this balance, protecting states’ existence as integral to India’s federal identity. Division of Legislative Powers The Constitution meticulously divides legislative powers through the Seventh Schedule, which categorizes subjects into three lists under Article 246: Article 248 grants the Centre residuary powers to legislate on unenumerated subjects, which can lead to jurisdictional disputes. Courts resolve these using the “pith and substance” doctrine, assessing a law’s core intent to determine its validity. For instance, a state law on agriculture that incidentally affects banking (a Union subject) is upheld if its primary purpose falls within the State List. Constitutional amendments, such as those under Article 3, allow flexibility for national priorities, but the basic structure doctrine, as affirmed in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973), prevents the dissolution of states, safeguarding federalism. Articles 249–252 further enable central intervention in state domains under specific conditions, such as a Rajya Sabha resolution or state consent, exemplifying cooperative federalism. This structure ensures clear responsibilities while allowing adaptability for shared concerns. Fiscal Federalism and Financial Dynamics Financial interdependence is a cornerstone of India’s federal system, governed by Article 280, which mandates the Finance Commission to recommend tax-sharing formulas every five years. The 14th Finance Commission (2015–2020) increased the states’ share of central taxes from 32% to 42%, and the 15th Finance Commission (2021–2026) adjusted this to 41% following Jammu & Kashmir’s reorganization into Union Territories. According to the Union Budget 2025-26, tax devolution to states is estimated at ₹14,22,444 crore, reflecting a 10.5% increase from 2024-25 revised estimates. However, challenges persist. Cesses and surcharges, excluded from the divisible pool, reduce actual devolution, with their share in gross tax revenue rising in recent years, prompting state criticism. The GST regime, introduced under Article 279A, compensates states for revenue losses, with ₹1,15,662 crore released in 2022–23 to address cess shortfalls. Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS), funded under Article 282, provide critical support in sectors like health and education but often come with central guidelines, limiting state discretion. Critics argue these schemes create vertical fiscal imbalances, as states bear significant expenditure responsibilities with constrained revenue autonomy. Table: Key Financial Devolution Figures (2025-26 Budget Estimates) Item Amount (₹ crore) % Change from 2024-25 RE Total Transfer to States 25,59,764 12.5% Tax Devolution 14,22,444 10.5% Grants (including FC Grants) 11,37,320 – Capital Expenditure Loans 1,50,000 20.0% Source: PRS Legislative Research, Union Budget 2025-26 Analysis, https://prsindia.org/budgets/parliament/union-budget-2025-26-analysis Executive Authority and Emergency Provisions Administratively, the Centre exercises oversight through Articles 256 and 257, mandating state compliance with Union laws and allowing central directives. Governors, appointed by the President, serve as Union agents, with powers to reserve state bills or recommend President’s Rule under Article 356. This provision, used over 100 times by 1994, has been controversial, often perceived as central overreach to dismiss opposition-led state governments. The landmark S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) case addressed this misuse, ruling that President’s Rule proclamations must be based on objective material, are subject to judicial review, and require a floor test to verify a state government’s majority. The Supreme Court emphasized that states are “not mere appendages” of the Centre, reinforcing federalism as a basic structure of the Constitution. Emergency provisions, such as Article 352 (National Emergency) and Article 360 (Financial Emergency), further amplify central authority, allowing Parliament to legislate on state subjects or control state finances. Article 131 enables states to challenge central actions in the Supreme Court, as seen in West Bengal’s 2024 suit over CBI jurisdiction, ensuring judicial checks on federal overreach. Institutional Mechanisms for Cooperation India employs several institutions to promote cooperative federalism. The GST Council, established under Article 279A, unites Union and state finance ministers to set GST policies through weighted voting (75% majority, with states holding two-thirds votes). NITI Aayog, replacing the Planning Commission in 2015, facilitates policy dialogue through its Governing Council, comprising the Prime Minister and all Chief Ministers. The Inter-State Council, under Article 263, aims to enhance policy coordination but remains underutilized due to infrequent meetings. Other mechanisms, like tribunals under Article 262 for inter-state river disputes, provide platforms for resolving conflicts without immediate judicial intervention, embedding state voices in national governance. Contemporary Tensions and Trends India’s federalism faces ongoing challenges, particularly from policies perceived as centralizing. The 2016 demonetization, which invalidated 86% of currency notes, disrupted state economies without prior consultation, drawing sharp criticism from states like West Bengal. Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee called it a “financial chaos and disaster,” highlighting its impact on cash-dependent sectors like agriculture. Similarly, the 2020 labor codes, consolidating 29 central laws into four, faced opposition from states like Tamil Nadu and Kerala, who argued they undermine worker protections, particularly for informal workers. Trade unions and opposition-ruled states criticized the codes for favoring employers and lacking tripartite consultation, violating International Labour Organization principles. Despite these tensions, cooperative federalism endures. The GST framework emerged from extensive Centre-State negotiations, and regional parties have
INDIAN FEDERALISM: SCENARIOS OF POWER SHARING
Written By Arshdeep Kaur student at National University of Study and Research in Law, Ranchi. INTRODUCTION– We Indians have evolved from the times of Kings to the present-day Democratic Government while we still see countries like Britain with Queen as the apex authority. One of the essential features of monarchs is that the power to make decisions, however sovereign, is concentrated in the hands of a single individual at the ruling position. Contrary to this, we see a division or sharing of power in India between Centre and State where States are also provided with a significant amount of autonomy of their own. This article aims to provide gainful insights into the kind of Federalism India possesses, the changing dynamics or the problems surfacing, and key policy suggestions for improvement. IS INDIA FEDERAL? The term Federalism is a dual type of Governance where powers are equally divided between the UNION and the STATES with none being superior to each other, each deriving their respective powers from the same source that is ‘The Law of the Land’. This leads us to the fact that India is not a federal country. The word ‘FEDERAL’ doesn’t appear even once in constitution but ARTICLE 1 describes India as a union of 28 states. The term was coined by Modern Manu-Dr. B.R. Ambedkar because the word ‘UNION’ is indestructible. India as a Federation is not a result of an agreement among States. Thus, are not allowed to secede or separate from the Indian Union. The Constitutional analysts also term India as ‘QUASI FEDRAL’ i.e.; Federal in Structure and Unitary in Spirit or highly Centralized towards the Union (Central Bias). India has basically 6 Federal features: Parliament can make laws for the whole or any part of territory of India under Article 245. The Three lists is however only concerned with powers to legislate whereas Government in India functions through its three organs: – Legislature, Executive and Judiciary within their specific designated areas. In relation to Executive, Union is empowered under Article 73 to exclusively implement the laws made on subjects on which only it has the authority to legislate. State implements under Article 162 respectively the State’s exclusive matters and acts for concurrent subjects unless authority was kept by Union with itself only. Union can transfer its implementing powers to Sates by itself under Article 258. The term ‘Executive Federalism’ comes from Canadian Constitution which doesn’t follow British or American form of Government but a mixture of both. Other inspiration is Government of India Act of 1935 celebrating diversity by giving limited provincial autonomy with a strong Centre. Similarly, Indian Constitution also gives unequal powers to Centre and State. Thus, with this allocation of disproportionate powers between Centre and States makes States to certain degree subordinate to Centre. But this is often justified in the name of national unity but gives birth to Confusion, clashes, disputes as to jurisdiction. However, despite all these efforts being made, disputes are destined to arise regarding Power Dynamics. PRESENT DAY POWER DISPUTES:- Supreme Court, under Article 131, plays a critical role in resolving Centre-State disputes. However, inconsistent rulings on whether states can challenge central laws under this article have created ambiguity, necessitating clearer judicial guidelines. IMPROVING THE RELATION: POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS: – NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL: formed on 6 August 1952 comprising of PM, CMs and Planning Commission members to strengthen relations besides fostering National Development plans and Common Economic Policies. NITI AAYOG (National Institute for Transforming India): It is the think tank of government replacing Planning Commission set up in 2016 with PM Modi as its chairman and BVR Subramaniyam as current CEO enabling states to form economic policy, promote cooperative federalism, Plan and design long term policies for inclusive development. COOPERATIVE FEDERALISM UNDER INTER-STATE COUNCIL: established under Article 263 by President in 1990 to discuss common areas of interest between Centre and State, Inter-State disputes and present policy recommendations under Article 263(b) and (c) on Sarkaria Commission recommendation. A conference was held at Srinagar in 1983 organised by non-communist CMs to bring together Left Parties, Akali Dal, National Conference and Telegu Desam where demand for greater autonomy was put forward by Shri Jyoti Basu, CMO West Bengal that led Central Government to appoint Sarkaria Commission headed by Ranjit Singh Sarkaria (290+ recommendations) over 6 years. But it met only 10 times till 2012 and last in 2006. It recommended on non-financial issues like: -Role of Governors- to be appointed by president out of 3 suggested non-political faces by CM (violated) -Misuse of Article 356 (104 times), time-limit imposition to curb delay in state legislations getting presidential assent. Parliamentary debates talk about States receiving only 32% of Central Tax revenues under CMP despite contributing 60% of development expenditure. So, demand was made for 50% share. Lack of funds in Centrally sponsored schemes, lack of State’s consent in International Treaties and Centre unfair market domination was pointed out. Most cited case is that of 1994 Bommai Judgement that clarified that Indian Constitution is not truly federal with people as legal sovereign and Political Sovereign to be divided into Centre and States, also purposed under GOI Act of 1935. To access situation, Government has time to time appointed commissions like Administrative Reforms Commission chaired by Morarji Desai first on 5 January 1966 under Indira Gandhi due to rise of non-congress state governments in 1967 and 2nd in 2005 to improve public administration by ensuring efficiency, transparency, and accountability. Later, Punchhi Commission came on 27 April 2007 under Justice Madan Mohan Punchhi. CONCLUSION: Indian federalism thus balances a Strong Centre with state autonomy, shaped by historic constitutional debates and frameworks like the GOI Act, 1935 and 1994 Bommai Judgment. While institutions like the Inter-State Council and NITI Aayog aim to foster cooperative federalism, challenges such as fiscal disparities, limited state consultation, and centralization still exist. Strengthening Centre-State collaboration and enhancing autonomy, are crucial for a vigourous, inclusive federal structure.
Iska Ram, Kiska Ram: Party-Bound Speakers & Their Enduring Impact On The Legislative Process
Written by Sakshi Vimal student at National Law Institute University, Bhopal. INTRODUCTION “…the Speaker upholds the dignity and freedom of the House, symbolizing liberty and democracy, and must be held by individuals of exceptional ability and impartiality.” ~ Former Prime Minister Nehru The Constitution of India provides for a bicameral system of Parliament, consisting of the Lok Sabha (‘House of the People’) and the Rajya Sabha (‘Council of States’). The office of the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker is an important checkpost in the federal constitution scheme. The convention of Speakers resigning from their party membership has not been developed in India. The current procedure for the election of the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker through election by the majority, therefore, needs to be called into question, especially in light of various instances of misuse of power, the most prominent being bias towards the ruling party. POWERS OF THE SPEAKER AND THE DEPUTY SPEAKER Articles 93-96 of the Constitution deal with the office of the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker of the Lok Sabha and Articles 178-181 deal with the office of the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker of the Legislative Assembly. Moreover, each house has its own rules governing the Procedures and Conduct of Business in the Legislative Assembly, which outline processes such as the election of the Speakers & Deputy Speakers. The Speaker plays a crucial role in ensuring the smooth functioning of the House. The Speaker regulates debates, maintains order, and exercises control over questions, motions, and amendments. The Deputy Speaker performs the Speaker’s duties in their absence. While not vested with the same level of discretion, the Deputy Speaker ensures the continuity of proceedings and upholds the decorum of the House. One of the most important powers vested in the Speaker is under Paragraph 6 of the Tenth Schedule which empowers the Speaker to carry out the disqualification of members of the house. The Speaker/Chairman of the House gives the final decision regarding any disqualifications made under the provisions of the Schedule. However, the biggest loophole is that there exists no procedure or a time bar for the disqualification process. The lack of framework and transparency, more often than not, empowers the Speakers to act arbitrarily and in a partisan manner. SITUATIONS INVOLVING MISUSE The key challenge is that the political affiliations of the Speakers with their parties are a fundamental issue that contributes to the misuse of power in the form of partisanship. Neutrality and non-partisanship are the key requirements for the position of the Speaker. However, there have been instances of delayed decisions by the Speakers to benefit the ruling party, which compromises the impartiality and public trust in the Office. To elaborate, in the case of Nabam Rebia and Bamang Felix v. Deputy Speaker, Arunachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly & Others (2016), the Court openly expressed doubts about the ability of Speakers to remain impartial and neutral in the instances of deciding disqualification petitions. Notably, in Dr. Wilfred A. De Souza v. Tomazinho Cardozo (1999), the Court ruled that the Impartiality of a Speaker is an indispensable requirement for the successful functioning of a democratic system. The office of the Speaker has always been surrounded by controversy in multiple states. For example, in the 2011 case of Balachandra L. Jarkhioli v. B.S. Yeddyurappa, 13 MLAs affiliated with BJP wrote a letter to the Governor stating that they had lost all hope in the leadership of their party after the elections. This action led the Speaker to determine they had voluntarily given up party membership under Paragraph 2(1)(a), leading to their disqualification. Further, the Speaker was seen to have favored a member of the parliament unabashedly. This tendency of the Speaker to act contrary to the constitutional mandate of neutrality was also most evident in the case of Shrimanth Balasaheb Patil v. Hon’ble Speaker, Karnataka Legislative Assembly, the case of 2019. Justice J.S. Verma and Justice Lalit Mohan Sharma, in their dissent in Kihoto v. Zachillhu, were of the opinion that the Speaker’s tenure is dependent upon the continuous support of the majority party and therefore, such a person cannot be considered an impartial adjudicating authority, adding that such an impartial authority is an attribute of the democratic system which is a basic feature of our constitution. This poses a serious constitutional question in relation to the powers of the Speaker & the Deputy Speaker. On paper, the post of the Speaker is a creation of the Constitution and hence, requires the powers of the Speaker to be exercised in accordance with the Constitution. However, the Speaker’s powers to carry out the disqualification of House members lead to Speakers often taking advantage of these legislative loopholes to stray away from their constitutional duty. Further, the Court in Kuldip Nayar v. Union of India has upheld that the role of the upper house, as an institution of federal bicameralism, constitutes a part of the basic structure of the Constitution. But the Party-bound Speakers add to creating a crisis of democracy. CONTEMPORARY RELEVANCE Today, the position has succumbed to being a reward for politicians affiliated with various political parties. The role of the Speaker was meant to be upheld by individuals of exceptional ability and impartiality. However, it has become a comfortable job for politicians nearing retirement who further favor their political parties in key matters and affairs. In light of this, although the Speaker’s role is that of the representative of the House, they simultaneously represent their constituency and often rely on the political party’s leadership for approval to contest future elections from the same constituency. This dual role of the Speaker is obsolete and compromises the independence and impartiality required for the Speaker’s position leading to biasness in decisions thereby undermining the constitutional principle of fairness in legislative proceedings and infringing on the sanctity of parliamentary democracy. At the heart of the issue lies the health of India’s constitutional democracy. If the current approach continues, where Speakers remain closely aligned with their political parties,