Index

Right to Privacy

Right to Internet access

Triple talaq

National Anthem - No More Mandatory in Cinema Halls

SC on Section 295A

Article 35A

Courts for fast tracking cases against politicians

Probing assets of politicians

Khap Panchayats

Highway liquor ban

Preventive Detention

Need for Anti torture legislation

Distinct offences can’t be boxed into one trial

Abortion of foetus

Induction of women in Territorial Army

SC stays HC verdict on Ganga Status

SC stays cattle sale rules

NGT prohibits dumping of waste near Ganga

SC gives nod to MCI oversight panel

SC imposed ban on chemicals in firecrackers

Monetary compensation in case of custodial death

Misuse of anti-dowry legislations

Sex with minor wife is rape

Passive Euthanasia

SC/ST Act

1 | P a g e

 Right to Privacy

In Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (retd.) vs Union of India, a nine-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court
ruled that right to privacy is an intrinsic part of life and liberty under Article 21.

• Earlier in M.P. Sharma (8-judge Bench) and Kharak Singh (6-judge Bench) cases delivered in 1954 and
1961, respectively, the apex court had held that privacy is not protected under the Constitution.
• It held that privacy is a natural & inherent right available to all humans and the constitutional recognition
is only to make it explicit.
• But the court also clarified that it is not an absolute right.

What are the larger implications?

• Right to life & personal liberty – It explicitly overruled the Emergency era judgment in ADM Jabalpur
case, that had ruled that fundamental right to life & personal liberty could be suspended during
Emergency.
• Homosexuality – The judgment also implicitly overrules the 2013 judgment of the Supreme Court that
upheld the validity of IPC Section 377, which criminalizes homosexuality. The verdict held that the sexual
identity of the LGBT community is inherent in the right to life.
Ø Currently, Section 377 is pending before a Bench of five judges and in this backdrop, its striking down
is the most likely outcome.
• Right to die - As an individual’s rights to refuse life prolonging medical treatment is another aspect that
falls within the zone of the right of privacy, this revives the question of passive-euthanasia. The matter is
now pending before a Bench of five judges and this verdict is bound to influence that case.
• Beef & Alcohol - While Bombay High Court held that consumption of beef is a part of the right to be left
alone, the Patna High Court struck down the total ban on alcohol in Bihar. While both these judgments is
now being challenged before the Supreme Court, the current judgment has held that the right to food of
one’s choice is part of the right to privacy.
• Data Protection - As India has no statute regarding privacy or data protection, concerns were raised by
the court. It expressed hope that the government would undertake this exercise after a careful balancing
of privacy concerns and legitimate state interests.
• Whatsapp & Facebook case - The verdict has recognized the threat of Big Data in private hands and the
need to establish a statuatory framework to safeguard them. It was observed that information, when
shared voluntarily, may be said to be in confidence, and any breach of confidentiality is a breach of trust.
• Future of Aadhar - The immediate trigger for the privacy case being taken up was Aadhar & hence the
judgment’s impact will also be felt the most there.

It is pertinent at this juncture to note that the judges have referred to the reasonable restrictions and
limitations that privacy would be subject to. The verdict also elaborated that such restriction should be based
on compelling state interest and on a fair procedure that is free from arbitrariness, selective targeting or
profiling.

--------------------------------------------------------------

2 | P a g e

 Right to Internet Access

The Supreme Court during hearing of a PIL filed by Sabu Mathew George against search engines (Yahoo,
Google and Microsoft) has said that the right to access Internet comes under fundamental right of expression
and cannot be curtailed at any cost.

• In 2015, UN declared Internet Access as a Human Right.

• However, the Right of Internet Access is permissible, until and unless it doesn’t ‘encroaches into the
boundary of illegality’.
• The bench was hearing arguments related to the on-going case of Pre natal sex determination
advertisements, which appear on search engines in India.
• As per our constitution, sex determination is banned in India, and any online advertisements which
promotes such services are illegal. The right of internet access stops when this right is abused to access
such contents.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Triple Talaq

A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court set aside the practice of instant triple talaq (talaq-e-bid’a) by a 3:2
majority in Shayara Bano case.
• Triple talaq is the practice under which a Muslim man can divorce his wife by simply uttering "talaq"
three times.
• The judges have struck down talaq-e-biddat as it is violative of Articles 14, 15, 21 and 25 of the
Constitution. In other words, the court observed that instant triple talaq is illegal, void and
unconstitutional.

Outcomes of the judgement

• It ensures equality by upholding fundamental rights provided under Article 14 and 21 of the Indian
Constitution. It held that right to equality includes right against arbitrariness, thus, instant irrevocable
triple talaq not preceded by the efforts at reconciliation is unconstitutional.
• It ensures gender justice for muslim women as triple talaq impacted their social status & dignity.
• It eradicates discrimination on the ground of sex as provided under Articles 15 and 16.
• Uphold core constitutional provisions by pronouncing personal laws could not override constitutionally
guaranteed rights of individuals.
• Encourage establishment of mediation centres by legally and theologically informed Muslim intellectuals
to help Muslim couples amicably resolve their marital disputes.
• However, the judgement goes against constitutional protection given under Article 26.

Key features of the ‘Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Marriage Bill’

• As per the draft, tripe talaq or talaq-e-biddat will be a “cognisable and non-bailable” offence punishable
with three years imprisonment and the wife will be entitled to maintenance and the custody of children
if they are minor.
• The proposed law would only be applicable on instant triple talaq and it would give power to the victim

3 | P a g e

 to approach a magistrate seeking “subsistence allowance” for her and minor children.
• The woman can also seek the custody of her minor children from the magistrate who will take a final call
on the issue.
• Under the draft law, triple talaq in any form — spoken, in writing or by electronic means such as email,
SMS and WhatsApp — would be illegal and void.
• The provision of subsistence allowance and custody has been made to ensure that in case the husband
asks the wife to leave the house she should have legal protection.

It is hoped that the judgement would open up Islam to modern interpretations within the framework of its
original sources and usher in the process of reforms in the Muslim personal law. The biggest challenge,
however, would be to inform the Muslim masses that the abolition of talaq-e-biddat is not against the
Shariah but has, on the contrary, brought it closer to the original principles of Islam.

---------------------------------------------------------

National Anthem - No More Mandatory in Cinema Halls

• In an order on November 30, 2016 Supreme Court of India said that the National Anthem should be
played or sung in cinema halls across the country before the starting of a feature film. The apex court
said that there should be National Flag on the screen when the National Anthem is played.
• However, in the recent verdict, the Supreme Court bench of Chief Justice replacing the word "shall" with
"may" in direction in the order issued by it, ruled that the playing of the national anthem by movie halls
shall be deemed to be directory and not mandatory.
• Petition by S.N.Chouksey contended that there were several lacunae in the Prevention of Insults to
National Honour Act, 1971 as it does not define what constitutes disrespect to the national anthem. The
Act only says what constitutes disrespect to the national flag and Constitution. In the case of national
anthem, only limited explanations are given.
• The 1971 Act states: “Whoever intentionally prevents the singing of the Jana Gana Mana or causes
disturbances to any assembly engaged in such singing shall be punished with imprisonment for a term,
which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.”
• Section 3 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971 (as amended in 2005) does not
dictate whether a person should sit or stand when the anthem is playing or sung.
• Verdict has been referred to Article 51 (A) of the Indian Constitution which contend that it was the duty
of every person to show respect when the anthem is played.

------------------------------------------------------------------

SC on Section 295A

The Supreme Court quashed the criminal case against MS Dhoni and magazine editor, filed under section
295A of IPC, for his depiction as Lord Vishnu on a magazine cover in 2013.
• Section 295A says that “whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious
feelings of any class of citizens of India (by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible

4 | P a g e

 representations or otherwise), insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of that
class, shall be punished with imprisonment of three years, or with fine, or with both.”
• The judgement would reduce the misuse, owing to the subjectivity, of section 295A, as the judgement
excludes its applicability on casual observations not driven by any bad intention.
• It clarifies the ambit of this section, which would help protecting individuals and public figures from
political activists and overzealous administrative authorities.
• It also warned lower courts to stop taking reflexive cognizance of cases of little importance related to
offending of religious/caste/cultural sentiments of any group.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Article 35A

In response to a petition filed in supreme court, the bench has indicated that the question of constitutionality
of Article 35A is likely to be handled by a 5-judge constitution bench.

Article 35A:
• Article 35A was incorporated into the Constitution in 1954 by a Presidential order issued under Article
370(d) of the Constitution
• Article 35A of the constitution empowers J&K legislature to define state's "permanent residents" and
their special rights and privileges without attracting a challenge on grounds of violating the Right to
Equality of people from other States or any other right under the Constitution.
• Article 35A protects certain provisions of the J&K Constitution which denies property rights to native
women who marry from outside the State. The denial of these rights extend to her children.
• The Article bars non-J&K state subjects to settle and buy property in J&K.

Issues with Article 35A

• An NGO, We the Citizens, challenged 35A in SC in 2014 on grounds that it was not added to the
Constitution through amendment under Article 368. It was never presented before Parliament, and the
parliamentary route of lawmaking was bypassed.
• Article 35 A is against the “very spirit of oneness of India” as it creates a “class within a class of Indian
citizens”.
• Restricting citizens from other States from getting employment or buying property within Jammu and
Kashmir is a violation of fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution.
• In another case in SC, Article 35A restrict the basic right to property if a native woman marries a man not
holding a permanent resident certificate. Her children are denied a permanent resident certificate,
thereby considering them illegitimate.

Arguments in support of Article 35A

• Tinkering with Article 35A would lead to further erosion of J&K's autonomy
• Various Articles in the Constitution provide special rights to states like Nagaland (Article 371A) and
Mizoram (Article 371G) based on historical reasons.
• Article 35 A protects the demographic status of the Jammu and Kashmir in its prescribed constitutional
form.
5 | P a g e

• The major political parties of the Kashmir Valley, NC and PDP support the safeguarding of Article 370 and
Article 35A.

Suggestion:
There is a need to have a larger debate on Article 35A including political parties, intelligentsia and the civil
society at large. Article 35A has not only a constitutional or legal issue, it has larger socioeconomic and
political issue. The Centre needs to take all political parties along for protecting the rights and privileges of the
people of the state.
----------------------------------------------------------------

Courts for fast tracking cases against politicians

The Supreme Court accepted Centre’s scheme to dispose 1581 criminal cases pending against MPs and MLAs
within a year by setting up 12 fast track courts to exclusively prosecute them.
• As per Association of Democratic Reforms:
Ø Around 34% of 16th Lok Sabha MPs have declared criminal cases against themselves.
Ø 21% winners have declared serious criminal cases including cases related to murder, attempt to
murder, communal disharmony, kidnapping, crimes against women etc.
Ø The chances of winning for a candidate with criminal cases in the elections are 13% whereas for a
candidate with a clean record it is 5%.
• The decision of the higher judiciary to establish Special Courts for politicians is one with good intention. It
has the potential of ensuring speedy justice in cases involving influential politicians, which otherwise
takes years to deliver. Also, it would be primarily in their own interest to clear their names quickly, lest
their candidature be tainted.
• The time bound nature of the new scheme will also provide better information to voters about their
representatives.
• However, already multiple experiments with fast track courts have not materially changed the quality of
justice delivery in India.
• Moreover, such special courts are susceptible to having their verdicts overturned on appeal.

SC’s role in decriminalization of Politics

• 2002- SC directs all candidates to file affidavit detailing their criminal antecedents, educational
qualification and details of their assets. It upholds voters' right to know about a candidate's antecedent
to make an informed choice.
• July 2013- SC quashes provision in Representation of the People Act that allowed MPs and MLAs to
continue their membership in a House by merely filing appeal against their conviction and sentence of
more than two years in a higher court. This meant MPs and MLAs would be disqualified immediately on
conviction and sentence of more than 2 years. (Lily Thomas and Lok Prahari Case)
• September 2013- SC asks EC to provide 'none of the above' choice to voters to exercise their right to
express no confidence against all candidates in fray.
• March 2014- SC orders trial courts to hold day to day trial in criminal cases pending against sitting MPs
and MLAs and complete it within one year from framing of charges.
• August 2014- SC recommends to PM/CMs not to include persons against whome charges have been

6 | P a g e

 framed in serious offences, in their Council of Ministers.
• March 2016- SC refers to 5 judge Constitution bench whether framing of charge in heinous crimes (which
entails imprisonment of five years or more) against an MP or MLA would disqualify him. This also meant
whether a person against whom charges framed in serious offences be debarred from contesting
elections.

------------------------------------------------------------

Probing assets of politicians

The Supreme Court criticised the government for not investigating the huge increase in assets, by up to 500%,
of politicians from what they show at the time of nomination.

• The court was hearing a petition filed by an NGO, Lok Prahari, for the inclusion of a column in the
nomination form seeking details of the sources of income.
• As of now, candidates file affidavits on their assets but not the source of their assets at the time of filing
nomination papers.
• The SC ruled that politicians, their spouses and associates to declare their sources of income, along with
their assets, in order to qualify for contesting elections.
• The apex court further directed the government to set up a permanent mechanism to monitor the
accrual of wealth of sitting Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assemblies, their spouses
and associates.
• The obligation of a candidate to disclose both his assets and the source of income is a part of the
fundamental right of citizen to know under Article 19 (1)(a) of the Constitution. Enforcement of a citizen's
fundamental right needs no statutory sanction from the government or the Parliament.
• A candidate's constitutional right to contest an election to the legislature should be subservient to the
voter’s fundamental right to know the relevant information regarding the candidate.
• “Undue accretion of assets” is an independent ground for disqualifying an MP or an MLA. Amassing
wealth is a “culpable offence” by itself and a law maker can be prosecuted even without charging him for
offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The MPs assets and sources of income are required to be continuously monitored to maintain the purity of the
electoral process and integrity of the democratic structure of this country.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Khap Panchayat

The Supreme Court recently said any attack against an adult man and woman opting for an inter-caste
marriage by khap panchayats or associations is “absolutely illegal”.
• Khap Panchayats functions as extra-constitutional authorities, often delivering pronouncements
amounting to violation of human rights fundamental rights like right to life and liberty, right to privacy ,
freedom of expression, right of association, movement and bodily integrity among others.

7 | P a g e

• They have been linked to honour killings, forced marriages, female foeticide, excommunication of
individuals and families and whimsical ways of delivering justice. They promote a Culture of Silence by
inculcating fear among people.
• The inherent weakness of Panchayati Raj System gives them more strength. The Khaps operate in the
vacuum created by the Panchayati Raj Institutions, thus, it is the need of the hour to fill those gaps.

Some of the controversies involving Khap panchayats include:

• Honour Killing: In the infamous Manoj and Babli honour killing, the killing was ordered by a khap
panchayat in Karora Village in Kaithal district, Haryana. Both were given police protection, however the
policemen slipped away after leaving them at Peepli village. That is when Babli’s family members
kidnapped them and killed the couple.
• In 2015, a woman named Mamta Bai from Rajasthan got served with an order, by the Khap of Notara
Bhopat village, to live with a man whose wife eloped with her husband or pay a compensation of Rs 3
lakhs.
• Stripping and beating: In Kolar village, Sarda Tehsil of Udaipur, a married woman and the 28 year old
man with whom she had eloped got brutally punished by the villagers after forcibly making them return.
Villagers tied them to trees and stripped the woman in full view and snipped her hair.
• Banning of cell phones: In the year 2012 a khap panchayat in Uttar Pradesh gave a dictum of minimal use
of cell phones for women under 40 years of age, banned their going out with a male and all love
marriages.
• Ordering rape as revenge: In August 2015, a Khap in Meerut issued a diktat to the villagers to rape two
Dalit sisters and parade them naked all around the village. Their only crime being the alleged elopement
of their brother with a woman of the jat community.
• Khap Panchayat's organised as 'Sarvjatiya Sarvkhap Charitar Nirman Sangthan' had also passed a
resolution to end the legal right of a married daughter on her father's property. The Panchayat was of
the opinion that one of the reasons behind the atrocities on the married women is their right on
ancestral property.

The Khaps have deep roots, it is not easy to undermine Khap institution which is much older than our
democracy and constitution. Thus it is high time for the Khaps themselves to change and reform themselves
with the changing times lest the court stamps them out.
The government / judiciary also can make a way so as to formalise the Khaps such that these may work as
alternative dispute redressal bodies in accordance with the law of the land.

----------------------------------------------------------

Highway liquor ban

The Supreme Court banned the sale of liquor within 500 meters of National and State Highways.
• The order states that no liquor stores should be even visible from highways, or located within a distance
of 500 metres of the highways, or be directly accessible from a national or state highway.
• The order has been subsequently modified to exempt establishments within 220 metres of the highways
for smaller towns and municipalities with a population of less than 20,000 people.

8 | P a g e

Why the ban?
• The order is aimed at tackling the rising menace of drunk driving as well as improving road safety
conditions in India. The court cited “alarming” statistics showing drunk driving-related accidents and
deaths, and said the order is in “overwhelming public interest.”
• Citing data from the Union Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, the Supreme Court noted that in
2015, intake of alcohol or drugs by drivers resulted in 16,298 road accidents (4.2% of total accidents) and
6,755 fatalities (6.4% of total accidents) where drivers were at fault.
• The court also said data showing low incidence of drunk driving often tends to be skewed and “under
reported” as a cause of accidents, as that can affect the claims of victims or their heirs to accident
compensation.

Significance of the ban:

The order reaffirms a policy decision of the union government that goes back more than 10 years. In 2004,
the National Road Safety Council agreed that licences for liquor shops should not to be given along the
national highways, and the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways has “consistently” advised state
governments not to issue fresh licences and remove liquor shops from national highways.

Implication of this move:

• Needless to say such closures will lead to enormous losses to business and tourism, which will translate
into jobs lost as well as huge revenue losses for state governments which could have been spent on
people’s welfare.
• The uncertainty of India’s business climate will deter investment from coming to India. And given the
number of livelihoods at stake it’s more than likely that illegal liquor vends will proliferate along
highways, leading to bigger risks to public safety.
• According to early estimates, states and hospitality companies could see a loss of Rs 65,000 crores, and
as many as 1 million jobs could go as a result of the ban.

The Supreme Court order banning establishments selling alcohol along all state and national highways is a
classic case of good intentions missing the mark. A blanket ban on all liquor outlets is a sweeping and radical
measure, throwing out the baby with the bath water. The apex court must reconsider its decision.

---------------------------------------------------------

Preventive Detention

Supreme Court held that Preventive detention of a person by a State merely because the normal legal process
is ineffective and time-consuming is illegal.
• Preventive detention is detaining without trial to prevent possible commitment of crime on suspicion
that some wrong actions may be done by the person concerned.
• The grounds for Preventive detention are— security of state, maintenance of public order, maintenance
of supplies and essential services and defence
• A detainee under preventive detention can have no right of personal liberty guaranteed by Article 19 or
Article 21. The Article 22 (3) also provides that the protection against arrest and detention under Article

9 | P a g e

 22 (1) and 22 (2) shall not be available, if a person is arrested or detained under a law providing for
preventive detention.

SC’s view:
• Detention of a person was a serious matter affecting the liberty of the citizen. Hence, preventive
detention cannot be resorted to when sufficient remedies are available under the general laws of the
land for any omission or commission under such laws.
• The order of preventive detention, though based on the subjective satisfaction of the detaining
authority, is nonetheless a serious matter, affecting the life and liberty of the citizen under Articles 14,
19, 21 and 22 of the Constitution. The power being statutory in nature, its exercise has to be within the
limitations of the statute, and must be exercised for the purpose the power is conferred.
• If the power is misused, or abused for collateral purposes, and is based on grounds beyond the statute,
takes into consideration extraneous or irrelevant materials, it will stand vitiated as being in colourable
exercise of power.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Need for Anti torture Legislation

Supreme court recently told government to consider passing a comprehensive law which defines and punishes
for “torture”.
Convention Against Torture (CAT)
• The United Nations Convention Against Torture (CAT) came into force in 1987 and India signed it in 1997.
• India is repeatedly promising and failing to ratify the Convention Against Torture. Many countries have
recommended that India must ratify the CAT.
• 273rd Report of the Law Commission has also recommended ratification and drafting a comprehensive
legislation.
• National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has strongly urged the government to recognize torture as a
separate crime and codify the punishment in a separate penal law.

Need for Anti Torture law

• Constitutional protections under Article 21 (right to life and liberty) and Article 20 (3) (right against self-
incrimination).
• Need for Anti-torture law for extradition of offenders from other countries. Recently United Kingdom
refused to send a person to India to face trial, on the ground that there was “no effective system of
protection from torture”.
• Conditions in India’s prisons, especially the chronic problem of over-crowding, are a reason for the
country’s extradition requests failing.
• To reduce custodial violence.

Suggestions:
• India must expeditiously ratify the CAT and enact a Prevention Against Torture Act.
• The ratification demonstrates goodwill and political intention to comply with international norms and
standards.
10 | P a g e

• Enacting a law prohibiting torture is both a moral imperative and a pragmatic necessity.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Distinct offences can’t be boxed into one trial

SC recently gave a judgement that separate trials should be conducted in all cases related to multi-crore
fodder scam saying “joint trial is an exception and the norm is separate trials for distinct offences.”
• The court observed that a general conspiracy which gives birth to a cascade of distinct offences
committed in various places spread over several years and involving different accused persons cannot be
boxed into one trial.

The accused persons were discharged by the Jharkhand High Court, which held that since they have been
convicted in one of the cases linked to the fodder scam, they need not stand trial for the others.
All the cases had their genesis in the same “general conspiracy” and a person cannot stand trial again for the
same offence for which he has already been convicted. This, the High Court had said, would attract ‘double
jeopardy’.

• SC noted that “there may be larger conspiracy and smaller conspiracy which may develop in successive
stages involving different accused persons. In the instant case, defalcations have been made in various
years by combination of different accused persons”
• Although there was “one general conspiracy”, the “offences are distinct for different periods”, i.e.,
misappropriation of funds are from different treasuries for different financial years.
• The Constitution bars double punishment for the same offence but conviction for such offence does not
bar for subsequent trial and conviction for another offence even if the modus operandi is same.
• Only one trial for one conspiracy for separate offences would enable the accused person to go
undamaged and commit number of offences.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Abortion of foetus

Recently Supreme Court of India has relaxed the 20-week legal ceiling on abortion to allow a woman to abort
her 24-week baby with anencephaly, a life-threatening congenital defect where a baby is born without some
important parts of body.

Provisions of abortion in India-

India’s Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act legalises abortions up to 20 weeks if there is threat to
the mother’s life or her physical or mental health, or if the unborn baby has abnormalities.

Issue:
In India many women opts for unsafe abortions methods because they don’t know where or who to go
because there are not enough legal providers. Many don’t even know it’s legal to abort up to 20 weeks.

Impact

11 | P a g e

• Unsafe abortions kill 10 women each day in India, where an estimated 6.8 million women choose
methods each year to terminate pregnancies that threaten their health and life.
• Unsafe abortion is responsible for 8% of all maternal deaths, which makes it the third biggest cause of
women dying of childbirth-related causes in India.

Suggestions:
• Awareness of about legal abortion very dismissal in India, hence there is an urgent need to spread
awareness specifically in rural areas.
• We need to strengthen availability of data on abortion to make the services even more robust and
responsive to women.
• The Union health ministry has proposed to increase the number of skilled providers and relax the cut-off
limit for legal abortions. These proposals are aimed at giving woman control over decision-making
related to her life and body. Hence these must be adopted very soon.

The issues related to abortion and lack of awareness about legal abortion has taken huge toll, now time has
came to address this issue. Governments and NGO’s should come together to spread awareness about this
aspect. Similarly government should bring amendments in MTP act to give women more control over
decision-making related to her life and body.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Induction of women in Territorial Army

Delhi High court has paved way for induction of women into Territorial Army units by quashing Centre’s
notification barring induction of women.
• A PIL under article 226 of constitution (power of HCs to issue writs) was filed in Delhi High Court claiming
that not allowing women to join amounted to “institutionalized discrimination” and went against the
Constitution’s spirit.
• The Territorial Army is a voluntary force of civilians donning the uniform for a few months every year
without joining the regular Army. One of the eligibility criteria is that an individual must be well settled
and employed.
• As per the rules, TA recruited only gainfully employed men and thus barring women’s entry in infantry
units in army.
• The two judge High Court bench held that policy of restriction on enrolment of women is ultra vires of
Articles 14, 15, 16 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.
• It also held that “any person” in Section 6 shall include both men and women. Section 6 of the Territorial
Army Act,1948 lays down rules on who is eligible for enrolment in the Territorial Army, which is also
known as the second line of defense after the regular Army.

Status of women in Defence forces:

• The Indian Army, the Indian Navy and the IAF allow women in various courses but till recently restricted
their entry into combat roles.
• Indian Air Force and Indian Navy in 2015 and Indian Army in 2017 allowed women in combat roles taking
cue from various western countries and further instil gender parity in Defence forces in India.

12 | P a g e

 ----------------------------------------------------------

SC stays HC verdict on Ganga Status

The Supreme Court froze the status of “legal persons” accorded to rivers Ganga and Yamuna by the
Uttarakhand High Court in March 2017.
• High Court verdict held that the rights of the two major rivers “shall be equivalent to the rights of human
beings and the injury/harm caused to these bodies shall be treated as harm/injury caused to the human
beings.”
• The HC made the Director of the Namami Gange programme, the Uttarakhand Chief Secretary, and the
Advocate-General of Uttarakhand as the “parents” for the rivers.

Earlier precedents
Earlier New Zealand has recognised the Whanganui River a ecosystem as living being after relentless effort by
the Iwi indigenous peoples who live along the bank of river by passing Te Awa Tapua bill.

Significance of HC verdict:
• Recognition of the rivers’ rights is based on its value for socio-political-scientific development and the
spiritual significance as they serve us but it should be due to their innate qualities and being a part of
overall ecosystem.
• It has potential ramification of legal litigations if a situation arises when private and public property are
damaged by river and other streams as they are considered legal living person now.

---------------------------------------------------------------

SC stays cattle sale rules

The Supreme Court stayed the Centre notification banning cattle sale in livestock markets for slaughter and
religious sacrifices.

• The Union government has earlier notified

Prevention of cruelty to animals (Regulation
of Livestock Markets) Rules, 2017 under
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960
for restricting trade in cattle.
• The order came after the government
acquiesced that public outcry and
objections from the States about the law's
impact on livelihoods made it realise that
the rules need “tweaking”.

Key provisions of the formulated rules were:

• Ban on sale of cattle for slaughter at animal markets across the country. The cattle can now be
purchased only for “agricultural purposes”.

13 | P a g e

• Specifying the term “Cattle” - “Cattle” in the notification includes bulls, bullocks, cows, buffaloes, steers,
heifers and calves, as well as camels.
• Introducing lot of paperwork – for both seller and buyer
• Regulating the animal market – Approval of District Animal Market Monitoring Committee (DAMMC) is
required to run the market. Other provisions such as no sale of young and unfit animals, certification of
veterinary inspector and separate facilities for sick animals in these markets are also included.
• Regulating Inter-state and Inter-national Constitutional position
movements - No animal market can now be • This dispute has a history starting with founding of
organised within 50 km of an international the Republic where the subject of cow slaughter
border and 25 km of a state border. Taking was one of the most fraught and contentious
animals outside the state will require special topics of debate. On the call of prohibition of cow
approval of the state government nominee. slaughter to be made part of the fundamental
• Prohibiting cruel practices – like slaughter, rights, the Constitution’s Drafting Committee
painting of horns and cutting the ears of agreed upon a compromise.
buffaloes. Also DAMMC is duty-bound to • It was included as a DPSP under Article 48 which
ensure that no animal is kept in a pen or cage says the state shall “organise agriculture and
unsuitable for its size. animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines
and shall, in particular, take steps for preserving
Effects of these rules
and improving the breeds, and prohibiting the
Although prohibitions on the cruelty inflicted in
slaughter, of cows and calves and other milch and
the transport and treatment of animals are
draught cattle.”
welcome, but these new rules are going to affect
• Even Supreme Court also has given various
various stakeholders associated with cattle trade.
contradictory judgements (see box) over the years
• Cattle owner/farmer – Almost 30% of a farmer
on the attempts of government to impose a total
income comes from animal wealth, now he will
ban.
be burdened to maintain old ones. Also, they
act as natural insurance for farmers. For instance, the carcass of an animal dying of “natural causes” also
can’t be sold in the market as rules prescribe that the carcass will be incinerated and not be sold or
flayed for leather.
• Slaughter houses – These rules are likely to make sourcing of meat difficult for slaughter houses.
• Leather & meat industry – These industries will be crippled as 90% of slaughtered buffaloes are bought
and sold in animal markets which has been banned now. Their supply chain is choked. It may also lead to
unemployment.
• Consumer – It takes away a cheap source of nutritious food for the poor.
• Exports – India could lose on 30000 crores worth of exports.
• Environment – In India 80 million cattles are unproductive. Government and private cow shelters will be
able to take care of only 5-10% of it. Thus, rest of them is going to cause environmental and sanitation
concerns as owners would not be able to afford their upkeep.

----------------------------------------------------------

NGT prohibits dumping of waste near Ganga

14 | P a g e

An area of 100 metres from the edge of the Ganga between Haridwar and Unnao has been declared a ‘No
Development Zone,’ with the National Green Tribunal (NGT) prohibiting dumping of waste within 500 metres
of the river.
• An environment compensation of Rs. 50,000 will be imposed on anyone dumping waste in the river.
• The NGT also directed the Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand governments to formulate guidelines for
religious activities on the ghats of the Ganga and its tributaries.
• The bench headed by NGT Chairperson Justice Swatanter Kumar said the authorities concerned should
complete projects, including a sewage treatment plant and cleaning of drains, within two years.
• The Uttar Pradesh government is duty-bound to shift tanneries, within six weeks, from Jajmau in Kanpur
to leather parks in Unnao or any other place it considers appropriate.
• The court also appointed a supervisory committee, headed by the Secretary of the Water Resources
Ministry and comprising IIT professors and officials of the Uttar Pradesh government, to oversee
implementation of the directions passed in its verdict.
• The Bench further noted that all industrial units in the catchment areas of the Ganga should be stopped
from indiscriminate groundwater extraction.
• The green court reiterated its earlier order of a ban on mechanical mining and disallowed in-stream
mechanical mining. Even the mining on the floodplain should be semi-mechanical and preferably more
manual.

Major factors of Ganga pollution and steps to solve them

• Treating Urban Sewage:
Ø Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand and West Bengal together generate over 7,300 million
litres of sewage per day that flows directly or indirectly into the river.
Ø Creating sewage treatment plants (STPs) is one major task to be completed to solve the problem of
sewage.
Ø The government has now decided to rope incorporates to do this work in all the 118 urban centres
along the river.
• Rural Sewage:
Ø About 1,650 gram panchayats lie directly on the banks of the Ganga. About half the population in
these villages defecates in the open.
Ø The government plans to use biological means to deal with this waste. It wants to experiment with
Seechwal model (inculcated the practice of segregation of solid and liquid waste, treatment of waste
water through oxidation ponds, use of treated water for irrigation, and composting of solid waste
with a sense of community participation and ownership of the river.)
• Industrial Effluents:
Ø There are 764 polluting industries on the banks of the Ganga, mostly in Uttar Pradesh.
Ø These include tanneries, paper and pulp industries, sugar mills, dyeing factories, distilleries, and
cement plants. Effluents from all these flow untreated into the river.
Ø Industries must install Common effluent treatment plants (CETPs), install new technologies, and
ensure zero liquid discharge into the river.
• Surface Cleaning:
Ø Solid waste, clothes, polythene, and all kinds of religious offerings are dumped into the river, and

15 | P a g e

 float on its surface.
Ø Machines called trash skimmers have been ordered from abroad to clean the river surface.
• Burning the Dead:
Ø Cremation along rivers and immersion of remains is a unique reason for pollution in Indian rivers,
and especially the Ganga. Burning of wood leads to air pollution as well.
Ø Need to build gas or electric crematoriums, especially in religious centres like Varanasi and
Allahabad.

-----------------------------------------------------------

SC gives nod to MCI oversight panel

The Supreme Court agreed with the government’s proposal of five eminent medical practitioners to oversee
the functioning and decisions of the Medical Council of India.

Medical Council of India (MCI)

• It is a statutory body, established under Indian Medical Council Act 1956.
• It regulates-
Ø standards of medical education.
Ø permission to start colleges, courses or increase the number of seats.
Ø standards of professional conduct of medical practitioners such as registration of doctors etc.

Issues with MCI

As identified by Parliamentary Standing Committee for Health and Family Welfare in 2016.
• It failed to produce sufficient number of doctors, for instance, there is one doctor for every 1,674 people
against WHO norm of one doctor for every 1000 people.
• Shortage of teachers in medical colleges and poor regulation of undergraduate and postgraduate
courses.
• Lack of accountability, alleged corruptions and failure to discharge mandated responsibilities.

Background:
• Prof. Ranjit Roy Chaudhury committee (2015) recommended structurally reconfiguring the MCI’s
functions and suggested the formation of a National Medical Commission.
• Lodha Panel, constituted in 2016 by Supreme Court to oversee the functioning of MCI and its policy
decision making. However, its recommendations were not implemented.
• Committee headed by Dr. Arvind Panagariya formed to address concerns over quality of medical
education, proposed to repeal Indian Medical Council Act, 1956.

--------------------------------------------------------

SC imposed ban on chemicals in firecrackers

Supreme Court imposed a ban on the use of antimony, lithium, mercury, arsenic and lead in the
manufacture of firecrackers to prevent air pollution.

16 | P a g e

• The order came on a petition filed by three Delhi children who requested the court to intervene to
regulate the use of crackers and fireworks during festivals like Diwali.
• Central Pollution Control Board[CPCB] labeled above five chemicals as toxic in the manufacturing of
firecrackers.
• SC entrusted the Petroleum and Explosive Safety Organisation (PESO) with the responsibility of ensuring
compliance
• At present, there are no standards on air pollution caused by the bursting of firecrackers.
• SC asked the CPCB to clarify on the use of strontium, another chemical branded toxic by the pollution
body, in firecrackers.
• SC asked CPCB and PESO to make collaborative efforts for standardization of firework industry and
provide details of its impact on environment.

---------------------------------------------------------

Monetary compensation in case of Custodial death

The Supreme Court directed the Chief Justices of all High Courts to register petitions suo motu to identify the
kin of prisoners who died unnatural deaths from 2012 and order the States to award them compensation.

• Normally, the National and State Human Rights Commissions award compensations in cases of custodial
torture and deaths. However, compliance by State governments is low as these commissions do not
exercise any power of contempt.
• The High Court will now directly award compensation and ensure compliance by the States.
• Though laws had been made for payment of compensation to victims of crime, the government has
turned its back on the families of prisoners who had died unnatural deaths in custody.
• Human rights in a welfare state is not dependent on the status of the person – whether he is a criminal
or a victim.
• The payment from the year 2012 was chosen because National Crime Records Bureau has records of
unnatural deaths only from that year.

It is important for the Centre and the State governments to realise that persons who suffer an unnatural
death in a prison are also victims — sometimes of a crime and sometimes of negligence and apathy or both.
There is no reason at all to exclude their kin from receiving compensation only because the victim is a
criminal.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Misuse of anti-dowry legislations

Supreme Court has ordered a number of safeguards to prohibit the misuse of the anti-dowry provisions, under
section 498A of IPC.

Section 498A- Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman
to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be
liable to fine. It is separate from the Anti Dowry Act.

17 | P a g e

Anti Dowry Act 1961
• It is an Act to prohibit the giving and taking of dowry. It had consolidated the anti dowry laws which had
been passed in certain states.
• This legislation provides for a penalty if any person gives, takes or abets giving or receiving of dowry.
• It defined dowry as any property or valuable security given or agreed to be given in connection with the
marriage.
• It does not apply for the presents given at the time of wedding.
Issues:
• While charge-sheets were filed in 96% of the cases regarding dowry only 14.4% resulted in convictions.
• After various judgements witnessing misuse of the anti-dowry provisions by people, in 2015, the
government sought to introduce the bill to amend Section 498a of IPC based on the suggestions of Law
commission and Justice Malimath Committee on Reforms of criminal Justice.
Changes by Supreme Court
• The Supreme Court acknowledged the need to ensure a “rigorous” mechanism to file complaints so that
“frivolous complaints” can be weeded out.
• It also called for involvement of civil society and sensitisation of investigation officers.
• The court ordered setting up of Family Welfare Committees in every district to look into complaints of
dowry harassment set up by District Legal Services Authorities. The committee may comprise of three
members.
• The committee may be reviewed from time to time and at least once in a year by the District and
Sessions Judge of the district who is also the Chairman of the District Legal Services Authority.
• The Committees may be constituted out of para legal volunteers/social workers/retired persons/wives of
working officers/other citizens who may be found suitable and willing.
• Complaints police or magistrates receive under 498A must be referred to the panel, which will consider
them and submit reports. Until the report of the committee is received, no arrest should normally be
effected.
• There must be a designated officer to investigate such complaints who should be cautious in matters of
bail.
• Personal appearance of all the family members should not be a norm unless required. Appearance by a
video can be permitted by a trail court.
• After observing the case for six months the National Legal Service Authority may give a report on change
if deemed necessary.
• The court also made it clear that these directions will not apply in offenses in where there is tangible
physical injury or death.

Suggestions:
• The judgment sounds good on paper but not so much in terms of ground realities because already there
is a delay and harassment involved in delivering justice even in genuine cases.
• The constitution of the Family Welfare Committee is vaguely described. Dowry harassment cases are
sensitive and thus may be given over only to trained legal personnel or a judicial officer.
• By the way of these guidelines a law much needed to fight a big evil of Indian society is being diluted.

18 | P a g e

 ----------------------------------------------------------

Sex with minor wife is rape

The Supreme Court held that sexual intercourse by a man with his wife, who is below 18 years of age, is rape.
• Section 375 which defines rape provides for an exception which says that sexual intercourse by a man
with his own wife, the wife not being under fifteen years of age, is not rape.
• The age of consent to marry, since 1978, had been set at 18 years.
• The Supreme Court in Independent Thought v. Union of India, analysed the various laws prescribing the
age of a female in that regard, and pronounced that the age of consent being 15 years for a married
female, was inconsistent with existing laws as well as violative of the right to life of the minor under
Article 21 of the Constitution.
• However, the government had urged the court not to tinker with the exception clause as it was
introduced keeping in view the age old traditions and evolving social norms. Also, according to the
government, a concern for the misuse of such law for threatening the husband remains a possibility.

Important points of the Judgement

• The court read down Exception to Section 375 of the IPC, which allowed the husband of a girl child —
between 15 and 18 years of age — blanket liberty to have non-consensual sexual intercourse with her. It
creates an artificial distinction between a married girl child and an unmarried girl child.
• The exception had remained an anomaly because Section 375 itself mandated that sex with a girl below
18 years of age, with or without her consent, was statutory rape.
• The court, however, clarified that Section 198(6) of the CrPC will apply to cases of rape of wives below 18
years, and cognizance can be taken only in accordance with this provision.
• It is also clarified that nothing said in this judgment shall be taken to be an observation one way or the
other with regard to the issue of “marital rape”.

Impact
• This judgement can be seen as trigger to declaring child marriage void ab initio, the court ended the
decades-old disparity between Exception 2 to Section 375 IPC and other child protection laws.
• These include the child marriage Restrain Act, 1929, Prohibition of Child Marriage Act (PCMA) of 2006,
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Juvenile Justice Act, all which define a “child” as
someone who is below 18 years of age.
• It is also likely to have a bearing on the criminality of marital rape, an issue which has been widely
debated both by Parliament and the courts.

------------------------------------------------------

Passive Euthanasia

The Supreme Court has upheld passive euthanasia in a judgement.

• Euthanasia, also known as assisted suicide, and more loosely termed mercy killing, means to take a
deliberate action with the expressed intention of ending a life to relieve intractable (persistent,
unstoppable) suffering.

19 | P a g e

• In active euthanasia a person directly and deliberately causes the patient's death. In passive euthanasia
they don't directly take the patient's life, they just allow them to die. India is witnessing a debate on
whether right to die is a part of right to life under Article 21.
• In the Aruna Shanbaug’s case in (2011), a major milestone, the Supreme Court decided to legalise passive
euthanasia by means of withdrawal of life support to patients in a persistent vegetative state (PVS).
According to the Court, the decision of the patient must be an informed decision.

Highlights of the judgement

• The bench upheld that the fundamental right to life and dignity includes right to refuse treatment and
die with dignity because the fundamental right to a "meaningful existence" includes a person's choice to
die without suffering (including terminally ill).
• The judgment includes specific guidelines to test the validity of a living will, by whom it should be
certified, when and how it should come into effect, etc
• The guidelines also cover a situation where there is no living will and how to approach a plea for passive
euthanasia.
• A person need not give any reasons nor is he answerable to any authority on why he should write an
advanced directive.
• But the judgement held that active euthanasia is unlawful.
Arguments in favour Arguments against
• Some believe that every patient has a right to • Alternative treatments are available, such as
choose when to die similarly as they have right to palliative care and hospices. We do not have to
life enshrined in the constitution. kill the patient to kill the symptoms. Nearly all
• Proponents believe that euthanasia can be safely pain can be relieved.
regulated by government legislation. Passive • There is no ‘right’ to be killed’. Opening the doors
euthanasia has already been practised in various to voluntary euthanasia could lead to non-
cases around the world. voluntary and involuntary euthanasia, by giving
• In case of palliative sedation, widely used across doctors the power to decide when a patient’s life
the world, many of the sedatives used carry a risk is not worth living.
of shortening a person's lifespan. So, it could be • The assumption that patients should have a right
argued that palliative sedation is a type of to die would impose on doctors a duty to kill, thus
euthanasia. restricting the autonomy of the doctor. Also, a
‘right to die’ for some people might well become
a ‘duty to die’ by others, particularly those who
are vulnerable or dependent upon others.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SC/ST Act
Supreme Court has pointed out that the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act is being rampantly misused.
SC/ST prevention of atrocities Act:
• The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) PoA Amendment Act, 1989,
was introduced to protect the vulnerable sections of the society.
• The Act was amended in 2015 to cover newer forms of discrimination and crimes against Dalits and
tribals.
20 | P a g e

• The act provides the following provisions
Ø Establishment of Exclusive Special Courts and specification of Exclusive Special Public Prosecutors to
enable speedy and expeditious disposal of cases.
Ø Completion of trial of the case filed under POA within two months, from the date of filing of the
charge sheet.
Ø Defining clearly the term wilful negligence of public servants at all levels, starting from the
registration of complaint, and covering aspects of dereliction of duty under this Act.
Ø Addition of presumption to the offences if the accused was acquainted with the victim, the court will
presume that the accused was aware of the caste or tribal identity of the victim unless proved
otherwise.

Verdict of Supreme Court

• SC has ruled that Section 18, which bars grant of anticipatory bail to anyone accused of violating its
provisions, is not an absolute bar on giving advance bail to those against whom, prima facie, there is no
case.
• In addition, the Bench has prohibited the arrest of anyone merely because of a complaint that they had
committed an atrocity against a Dalit or a tribal person.
• In respect of public servants, no arrest should be made without the written permission of the official’s
appointing authority and for private citizens, the Senior Superintendent of Police in the district should
approve the arrest.
• Supreme Court in its judgement had made it clear that the SC/ST Atrocities Act should not perpetuate
casteism.
• It said 15-16% of the total number of complaints filed in 2015 under the Act were false and many cases
were filed to settle personal scores and harass adversaries.
• SC made this statement in the view that any harassment of an innocent citizen, irrespective of caste or
religion, is against the guarantee of the Constitution. Through this verdict, it has sought to strike a
balance between protecting individual liberty and preserving the spirit of a law in favour of oppressed
sections.

Way forward:
• In an ideal system, as long as every charge is judicially scrutinised and every investigation or prosecution
is fair and honest, one need not worry about misuse and its adverse effects. However, social realities are
far from being ideal which ought to concern the civil society including courts.
• The conviction rates under the Act remain low which proves the lackadaisical approach of investigators
and prosecutors to bring home charges against perpetrators of such crimes.
• Even if courts are right in taking note of the tendency to misuse this law, society and lawmakers are
justifiably worried about the sort of messaging contained in their rulings and observations.
• The strong demands from political parties are that words of caution and rules against misuse may be
needed to grant relief to the innocent, but nothing should be done to de-fang the law itself.
-------------------------------------------------------

21 | P a g e