The decision in the recent case of Kahler v. Kansas before the SCOTUS involves important issues in criminal jurisprudence. In this paper, an attempt has been made to trace the nuances of the different forms of defence the insanity plea can take and the practical implications of the same against the background of the Kahler [...]
In the forty years since Bachan Singh upheld the constitutional validity of the death penalty in May 1980, there have been numerous concerns about the fate of the death penalty sentencing framework laid down by the majority. Inconsistent application, interpretational errors, and judge-centric decision making have dominated these concerns [...]
Many state legislatures in the United States have passed restrictions on abortion for purposes of selecting the sex of the child. Advocates for these bans are using the widespread crises of sex-selective abortion in India to push for the prohibitions in the U.S. They argue that immigrants from India abort female fetuses [...]
Crimes by Children in Conflict with the Law – Heinousness, Acceptability, and Age of Adulthood: A Comprehensive Critique of the Present Juvenile Justice System
The underlying nature of the Juvenile Justice system has undergone a substantial change with the adoption of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The new Act has widespread implications on the manner in which children in conflict with the law are understood and treated [...]
The Right to Information Act, 2005 (‘RTI Act’) is frequently used in civil and criminal litigation to obtain government documents. However, the RTI Act is silent about the admissibility and proof of such documents in a trial. High Courts across the country have interpreted the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and handed down conflicting decisions in this regard [...]
With an analysis of data spanning over seventy-two years, we have highlighted how the collegium has altered the composition of the Supreme Court. While the regional diversity of the court has improved in a relative sense, professional diversity in the court has deteriorated alarmingly [...]
The General Executive Power of the Union of India and the Commonwealth of Australia: A Comparative Analysis
The substantive content and ambit of the general executive power of “the Union” of India and of “the Commonwealth” of Australia, provided for in Article 53 and section 61 respectively of their constitutions, is a most significant issue confronting constitutional law in both India and Australia. Reference is made to “general” executive [...]
This paper explores the possibility of an alternative take on the current understanding of the GATT national treatment obligation, especially in the assessment of the possible discriminatory impact of a carbon tax [...]
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (‘SEBI’) is under constant pressure to secure the integrity of the securities market while also ensuring that development of the securities market is not deterred by its overreach [...]
Recently, a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court sought a reply from the State authorities on the allegation that a game application called Ludo Supreme was engaged in gambling activities. The author posits an argument that there must be an objective measure to analyse whether the outcome of a game depends predominantly on chance or skill.
As delineated in the recent case of In Re Prachi Agarwal & Ors. v Swiggy (“Swiggy case”), Food Service Aggregators (‘FSAs’) like Swiggy and Zomato operate in the “App based food delivery platform” market with India being the relevant geographic market.But lately, these FSAs have branched out to become market participants by registering self-owned ‘cloud kitchens’ on their own platforms. A cloud kitchen or ‘ghost kitchen’ is a restaurant that cuts down on all the overhead costs, eliminates the typical brick and mortar structure and only offers delivery or takeout services. This article highlights the anti-competitive ramifications that follow the neutral FSAs’ (in this case, Swiggy) decision to become a market participant.
In NLSIRO’s latest piece, Stella James and Nayana Udayashankar argue that fishworkers have been systematically excluded from rightful access to, and governance of commons, on the justification of economic development. They look at this issue of loss of access in reference to the tourism industry. The piece briefly looks at the historical governance of coastal commons and traces the changes to the governance systems that accompanied the Coastal Regulation Zone notifications. It concludes that laws and policies have been framed to support massive industrialization of the Indian coast, while violating fundamental rights.
Almost as if it was foreshadowing the COVID-19 pandemic, the New Drugs and Clinical Trial Rules, 2019 (‘NDCTR’/ ‘Rules’) brought about significant developments by consolidating and streamlining the framework for regulating clinical trials and approvals thereof. However, the circumstances in the recent past have raised questions as to whether these new Rules, in their attempt to promote robust clinical research in India, have compromised on the safety and efficacy of trials, making them more sponsor-friendly. This piece explores such issues in the context of striking the right balance between the two.
The article first highlights the concerns with bonus distribution in India which is constrained heavily due to the determination of bonus payments being based on profits generated by the businesses. The article then proceeds to explore the problems with the set-off and set-on rule prescribed in Section 36 of the Code which carries forward the bonus payments to the succeeding year, thereby withholding the employee’s rightful payment for that year.
Concept Note – XIV NLSIR-Samvad Partners Symposium: Strategising A Healthcare Framework for India: Headways, Dilemmas, and the Way Forward
The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the gaping vulnerabilities in the country’s public healthcare system. States struggled to ramp up their healthcare facilities, hospitals were quick to run out of beds, the costs of medical facilities and drugs rose steeply, and many individuals belonging to socio- economically vulnerable communities were unable to access healthcare facilities. Apart from these structural issues, a few specific issues stood out. These very issues are the focus of the XIV NLSIR-Samvad: Partners Symposium. Through this Symposium, we hope to address some of the pressing concerns relating to India's public healthcare system and hope to reconceptualize the country's healthcare framework in a holistic manner.
Courts have favoured a restricted interpretation of section 10 and have limited its application to things said or done during the pendency of the conspiracy. Such interpretation is based on the presumption that section 10 embodies a rule of common responsibility that is based on the theory of agency.
In NLSIR Online’s latest piece, Professor James Jaffe sheds light on the ‘real’ last jury trial in India, which he argues came thirteen years after Commander K. M. Nanavati’s murder trial in September 1959. He states that film, television, and the print media has retained for Bombay’s Nanavati trial, a unique but unwarranted position in legal, historical, and popular lore. Professor Jaffe traces the “real” last jury trial in India to the less glamorous and more dangerous streets of Calcutta to the case of communist activists Prakash Chandra De and his brother Rabindranath, who were tried for the murder of Dipak Sarkar in 1967.
The author argues that ‘ARCs can be resolution applicants within both IBC and SARFAESI frameworks, provided they act within their permitted realm of activities’. In doing so, the piece examines the merits of RBI’s objection by analysing the position of ARCs as resolution applicants under the IBC and SARFAESI framework and concludes that the public discourse is heading in the wrong direction. The question, she says, is not whether an ARC can submit a resolution plan, but what restructuring measures can be resorted to in an ARC’s resolution plan?