Daily Current Affairs

1)Gender Typecasting in Courts

What is the News:
· Supreme Court has released guidelines "handbook on combating
gender stereotyping" to take down gender stereotyping words in
Court proceedings, by correcting language/words that imparts
"incorrect ideas" about women. The handbook is a guide for
Judges and Lawyers.
· How will it be useful: - use of gender-neutral language ie.
Language which is conscious about words and depiction of
women, will provide for gender perspective and inclusivity.
o The choice of words or a lack thereof is integral to everyday
language and judgements.
o So, gender neutral language is necessary for gender
inclusiveness and gender sensitization.
Changes Introduced
· Changes are mainly regarding terminologies used for women in
judicial proceedings and in final verdict by court.
· E.g., Instead of "Affair” term "relationship outside marriage" is
used
· For "adulteress" term "women who has engaged in sexual
relation outside marriage" is used
· Instead of "chaste women", "dutiful wife", "housewife" simple
terms as Women, Wife, Homemaker to be used in judiciary
· Court said that it is wrong to assume that women are "overly
emotional, illogical and cannot take decision"
Gender Representation in Judiciary:
 Women are highly underrepresented higher in judiciary with only
6 percent of women judges in Supreme Court and about 11
percent in High Courts.
 At subordinate court level women constitute about 30 percent of
judicial officers.
 Out of all the registered advocates in India women are only about
15 percent.
 Government has set a goal of having 33 percent of women at all
judicial positions.
 There has never been a female Chief Justice in India.
Causes of Underrepresentation:
 No significant attempt has been made to address the situation,
either by the judiciary or by legislation, except for the setting up
of targets that don’t have any legislative backing. E.g., no
reservation policy for women in the High Court and Supreme
Court.
 Lack of judicial infrastructure, some subordinate courts lack even
clean toilets and tap water facility. Even the security of court
premises is not ensured in subordinate courts.
 Triple burden of Profession, Childcare and Household faced by
women place them at a disadvantage in terms of their career.
 To appear in district judge entrance exam lawyers need to have
seven years of continuous legal practice and be in brackets of 35-
45 years of age. This is a major disadvantage for women as many
will have career gaps due to childbirth.
 Significantly small number of women litigants and women
advocates.
 Historically legal profession was not considered suitable for
women.
  Opaqueness of Collegium system and most of the times collegium
system is dominated by men.
Importance of Women in Judiciary
 “When judges interpret law with their reason and opinion, that is
a reflection of their perceptions, that perception should not be
devoid of women’s perceptions and should be representative of
both men and women." - Justice Ayesha Malik (justice in Pakistan
Supreme Court)
 For integrating gender perspective and giving equal visibility to
women. It will make judiciary more Transparent, Inclusive, and
representative.
 Women in judiciary will bring gender perspective, because of
distinct set of life experiences and circumstances will reflect in
their reasoning.
 Bringing different perspectives and diverse reasoning on bench
will gain greater trust of public and society as a whole. Women
presence will enhance legitimacy of courts and quality of decision
making.
 Women judges can have more balanced and empathetic approach
in cases involving sexual violence and child abuse.
Conclusion
 Not only in judiciary but in parliament, police forces, paramilitary
forces also women are underrepresented which indicates a
patriarchal and a gendered nature of society as a whole.
 Paradigm must change as in process of administration of justice as
judicial decisions have a wide and deep impact on social
constructs, social order and systematic inequalities that prevail in
system.
  Former CJI have mooted that women must have 50% reservation
in judiciary as their right, so legislation should take adequate steps
in this regard.
 Institutional, social, and behavioral changes are required which
will be a long and tedious process.

2)Kashmir & 370 and Supreme Court

Why in News:
 The Supreme Court is hearing a batch of petitions challenging the
abrogation of article 370 of the constitution.
 A five-judge constitutional bench headed by Chief Justice
D.Y.Chandrachud is conducting a hearing.
 Advocate Kapil Sibal is appearing on behalf of petitioners,
 with primary argument that article 370 was no longer a
‘temporary provision’ and has possessed a permanent character
after dissolution of constituent assembly of Jammu & Kashmir, so
its abrogation should be declared void.
Why was special status to JK.
· Because of circumstances in which Kashmir acceded to India. In
1947 Hari Singh faced military attack from warring tribes of NWFP,
in a hurry he wrote a letter to Mountbatten seeking his help.
· Mountbatten said he cannot help until Hari Singh accedes to
Dominion of India,
· So, Hari Singh attached a conditional Instrument of Accession and
specified matters in which dominion of India can make laws ie.
Defense, Foreign Affair, Communication & all other legislative
powers were to be retained with state.
Status of accession.
· At time of accession India was governed by GOI Act, 1935 while JK
had its own constitution since 1939 it was a princely state.
· Hari Singh added to IOA that " nothing in this instrument shall be
deemed to commit in any way to acceptance of any future
constitution of India or to fetter my discretion to enter into
arrangement with GOI under any such future constitution"

Features of Article 370.

· Three core principles:
o limited power of parliament to legislate on matters
specified in Instrument of Accession.
o On other matters parliament can make laws for state only
with states Concurrence.
o Article 1 ie. India as union of states and article 370 only were
made applicable to state of Jammu and Kashmir as such, and
other parts of constitution would be applicable only through
orders passed by President.
So, at time of August 2019 state was under president’s rule so
Concurrence was managed as parliament was acting on behalf of JK
legislative assembly and president applied order to JK.
Article 35 A
 Grants special privileges to permanent residents of Jammu and
Kashmir as preference in posts to public sector etc.
 Only permanent citizens of Jammu and Kashmir are eligible to buy
land and invest in real estate properties in the state.
  Article 35 A was repealed by “Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization
Act of 2019”
 Article 35 A was the main cause of distinction between
permanent and rest of states citizens.
How was status removed.
· As state was under president rule, concurrence of state
government, was as same as of Governor so order stating that "
all provisions of constitution will be applicable to JK" was passed
with concurrence of state.
· The state was bifurcated and 2 new UT of JK & Ladakh created.
· Another resolution adopted in parliament to declare art. 370 as
inoperative, (governor is not considered but, concept of
parliament acting as state legislative assembly because of
president rule was used, so in all conceivable way government
secured its decision against challenge in SC)
Main questions before the Supreme Court.
· Wether status of JK has not become permanent as constituent
assembly has refrained from any decision on art. 370.
o note but art. 370 was under temporary provisions
· Whether abrogation of 370 was more than a constitutional
amendment ie. Can it be treated as basic structure?

Developments after 370 Abrogation

 Right to Information is accessed to Kashiri population.
 The private sector can invest in Kashmir.
o Fresh foreign and domestic investment will create job
opportunities in the valley. As of now 40% of Kashmiris lack
job.
 o Earlier private investment in healthcare, education, and
tourism was severely constrained. Industrialization of the
state will increase manifold.
 Article 370 and 35 A place restrictions on transfer of land. Now
horticulture and food processing industries will get a big boost.
The handicraft industry will be able to export nationally and
internationally.
 Women marrying outside the state had no rights on land. All
women will now retain full and legal rights on land and all other
rights
 Act for Protection of Women from Domestic Violence was not
applicable.
o All Central Acts and Laws protecting the rights of women
and children to be made fully applicable to the State
 Right to Education, which makes education a Fundamental Right
for Children in the age group of 8- 14 years was not applicable.
o Now Right to Education shall be extended to J&K to ensure
universal education coverage
 Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, Juvenile Justice Act etc. were
also not applicable.
o Now Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005
will now be applicable here and will ensure adequate
protection of women and child rights
 Benefits for Schedule Tribe
o Despite having nearly 12% population, the
Socioeconomically disadvantaged tribal community (ST) had
no political reservation (Gujjars, Bakerwals and others)
Tribal/ST Communities residing in forests since generations
had no rights or protection
 o STs will now get political representation through
reservation in Regional Parliament seats like in the rest of
the country
o The Scheduled Tribes & other Traditional Forest Dwellers
(Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 has now been
made applicable.
o Rights of Tribal/ST Communities residing in forests of will
now be protected
 Benefits to schedule casts
o The most disadvantaged castes (SC) employees were not
getting full benefits of reservation especially in promotion
like their colleagues in the rest of the country
o Sanitation workers in the state were being denied
citizenship rights
o As a result, they could not get other jobs forcing them to
remain sanitation workers
o All sanitation workers will now get full citizenship and other
rights and benefits
o Manual scavenging will stop
o National Commission for Sanitation Workers Act, 1993 will
now apply
o This will improve working conditions of sanitation workers
and provide for redressal of grievances
 Other Backward Castes in J&K to get full benefits of reservation
in employment and education- now like in the rest of the country

3) Poverty Estimation in India

Poverty
 · Poverty is a state or condition in which a person or community
lacks the financial resources and essentials for a minimum
standard of living, which includes food, shelter, clothing,
healthcare, education.
· As per World Bank, poverty is deprivation of well-being and is
comprised of various dimensions such as low income, lack of basic
amenities and services required to live a dignified life.
· Poverty is intersectional. It is deeply linked with- racism, mass
incarceration, housing crisis, domestic violence, gun violence,
social isolation, welfare cuts, opioid epidemic,
· Poverty is Traumatic and Humiliating

Statistics on poverty
· As per 2021 MPI report of NITI Aayog 25% of Indian population is
multidimensionally poor.
· According to a recent report by United Nation’s
Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) India has a 10% reduction
in poverty over 5 years. Reduction is mostly on account of
improvement in nutrition, years of schooling, and sanitation.
· MPI is based on 12 indicators as education, malnutrition,
sanitation etc.
· As per the MPI report of UN, rural areas experienced the most
substantial decline in poverty levels.
· Poverty predominantly affects rural areas with 84% of all poor
people living in rural areas.
· NFHS 5 (2019-21) has estimated a decline in percentage of
population living under poverty from 25 percent in 2015-16
(NFHS-4) to 15 percent in NFHS-5.
 · Extreme poverty is as low as 0.8% (of population) in India as of
2019.Extreme poverty is defined by the World Bank as living
below 1.9$ or less per day in Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) terms.
· As per IMF Extreme Poverty is almost eradicated in India mostly
on account of governments Public Distribution System (PDS)
· In India, 21.9% of the population lives below the National Poverty
Line which was estimated in 2011 as 816 Rs. per capita per month
for rural areas and 1000 per capita per month for urban areas.
· As of now India lacks official poverty figures. The National
Statistical Office is carrying out a Consumption Expenditure
survey, which is to measure poverty level. By the end of 2023
India is projected to have its official poverty figures.
· International Scenario: -In 2018, almost 8% of the world’s
workers and their families lived on less than US$1.90 per person
per day (international poverty line).
· Poor as percentage of India: -
o Constitute almost 30 percent of the population as per
C.Rangrajan methodology which was spending less than 47
Rs a day in urban area and 27rs a day in urban area.
o Constitute almost 22 percent of the population as per
Suresh Tendulkar methodology which was expenditure of Rs
33 a day in urban areas and Rs 27 a day in rural areas
o Constitute almost 21 percent of population as per World
Bank estimations which considers expenditure of less than $
1.90 per day as poor. When adjusted to purchasing power
parity (PPP) this figure is Rs 28.5

Quotes
 · Overcoming hunger is not a gesture of charity, it is an act of
justice. It is an act of fundamental human rights, the right to
dignity and a decent life. -Nelson Mandela
· Poverty is not just lack of money; it is not having the capability to
realize one's full potential as a human being. -Amartya Sen
· Poverty anywhere is a threat to prosperity everywhere. -
Jawaharlal Nehru
· The opposite of poverty is not wealth, the opposite of poverty is
justice. -Bryan Stevenson
· Poverty is the worst form of violence. -Mahatma Gandhi

Poverty Estimation
· The incidence of poverty is measured by the poverty ratio, which
is the ratio of the number of poor to the total population
expressed as a percentage. It is also known as head-count ratio.
· In India, two commonly used method to estimate poverty are
through the measurement of income and consumption levels.
· Official Poverty line calculations and estimation in India is done
by NITI Aayog and is based on the Consumption Expenditure and
NOT on Income Levels, because of factors such as Variation in
Income, additional and side incomes are difficult to account for,
while consumption pattern broadly remain stable.
· Poverty estimation in India is based on household Consumption
Expenditure Survey (CES) of consumer expenditure is done by
National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) under the Ministry of
Statistics and Program Implementation (MOSPI) once in every 5
years.
· Actual calculation and Poverty estimation figures in India is
carried out by NITI Aayog’s task force through the calculation of
 poverty line based on the data captured by the National Sample
Survey Office (NSSO) under the MOSPI.
· Based on the above estimations and calculations a poverty line is
derived. A poor household is defined as one with an expenditure
level below a specific poverty line, called a BPL household.
· Poverty Line is the minimum expenditure required to purchase
Basket of goods required to satisfy basic needs and is an approach
to measure poverty by consumption basis.
· Actual estimation of poverty is done by NITI Aayog and not by
MOSPI or NSSO, as they only capture data.
· NSSO relies on Mixed Reference Period (MRP) method of data
collection which measures consumption of five-year low
frequency items over a period of 30 days. These items are
clothing, health, education etc.

Issues in Poverty Estimation:

· In 2019 Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation
(MOSPI) had decided not to release the results of the all-India
Household Consumer Expenditure Survey conducted by the
National Statistical Office (NSO) during 2017-2018.
· In explanation of reasons for withholding the data, government
cited the flawed methodologies of calculation that were being
used and new methodologies were being worked upon.
· A reply from central government in Lok Sabha has revealed that
the last official Datas with central government for poverty
estimations were of 2011.
· The last published sample survey on Household Consumer
Expenditure published by NSSO was of 68th round conducted in
2011.
 · Based on this data the erstwhile Planning Commission has
estimated Poverty Line and Poverty Ratio in 2011 by following
Tendulkar Committee methodology.
· This means that official poverty estimations in country are based
on 12-year-old data.

Committees associated with Poverty Estimation

· Dadabhai Naoroji and National Planning Commission (1938) have
estimated poverty lines based on requirement for minimum
standard of living.
· V.M. Dandekar and N.Rath committee: -
o Made first systematic assessment of poverty based on
National Sample Survey data
o Basic minimum need is not the criteria but
o Adequate calories are considered for rural and urban
· Alagh Committee (1979): -
o determined a poverty line based on a based on dietary
needs in terms of calories for an adult in Rural and Urban
terms.
o Inflation adjusted prices are considered
· Lakdawala Committee (1993)
· Tendulkar Committee (2009): -
o It recommended a shift from calorie consumption-based
calculation of poverty line to consumption of a basket of
items
o The basket includes both goods and services such as: -
pulses, milk, nonveg, intoxicants, entertainment, toilet
goods etc.
o The committee includes private expenditure also.
 o The committee calculated new poverty lines for rural and
urban areas of each state.
· Rangarajan committee report (2014): -
o The poverty line is estimated as Monthly Per Capita
Expenditure of Rs. 1407 in urban areas and Rs. 972 in rural
areas.
o It also broadly revised Expenditure based poverty
estimations and ignored multidimensional aspects of
poverty
Consumption based vs. Multidimensional poverty estimation:
· Consumption level-based poverty measures do not directly
measure other dimensions of deprivation.
· In absolute terms ie. Consumption based poverty ratios calculated
by Tendulkar and Rengarajan methodologies are lower than
estimated by MPI.
· Consumption based poverty estimation is linear and is mostly in
terms of income while MPI includes depth and severity of
deprivation.

Criticism:
· Committees associated with poverty estimation in India have
focused on expenditure or consumption based and have not
focused much on multidimensional aspects of poverty estimation.
· Lack of consensus among states on acceptance of Tendulkar and
Rangarajan committee.
· Consumption patterns, nutritional needs, prices, food preferences
etc. depend upon geographical and cultural factors, so one size
fits all approach for poverty estimation should be avoided.
 · Poverty line estimates are based on the 2011 consumer
expenditure survey of NSSO because of government withholding
latest data of surveys.

4)Sedition and Section 150 BNS

Why in News: - Home Minister said in Lok Sabha that new bill on
Indian Penal Code, 1860 ie. Bhartiya Nyaya Samhita is to repeal offence
of sedition under 124A of IPC.
Quote: -
· “The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is that
it is robbing the human race, those who dissent from the opinion,
still more than those who hold it.” -John Stuart Mill
· “If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, mankind would be
no more justified in silencing that one person that he, if he had the
power, would be justified in silencing mankind.” --J.S.Mill
What is it: -
· section 124 A of IPC dealt with sedition and it defined sedition as
“whosoever makes attempts to bring hatred, contempt or excites
disaffection or contempt towards government established by law
in India either through written, spoken or visible representation or
otherwise”.
· Under 124 A it was a non bailable offence punishable by 3 years to
life imprisonment.
· Constitution of India does not mention sedition.
 · It was introduced by Britishers in India primarily to curb dissent
against exploitative administrative and economic policies of
Britishers by religious preachers and politicians.
· Section 124 A was not mentioned in the original IPC of 1860as
adopted by British but was added later in 1870 by an amendment.
Stand of Constituent Assembly: -
· The constituent assembly was apprehensive about 124A but
decided to keep it because of the circumstances in which country
got independence.
· As per Jawahar Lal Nehru, it is better to repeal it as soon as
possible.
Article 19(2) vs. Sedition 124 A of IPC: -
· This issue can be understood as a debate between the liberty of
Freedom of Speech and Expression and state control.
· Article 19 provides that all Indian citizens have the right to express
their opinions and views freely either by word of mouth or by
expressions through writings, banners, movies, and symbols.
· Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression (FoSE) under article
19 of constitution comes with Reasonable Restrictions provided in
article itself as-Contempt of Court, Defamation, Hate Speech,
Decency or Morality, Public Order, Relation with foreign Countries,
Sovereignty and Integrity of India, Security.
· Sedition ie. Article 124(A) of IPC was considered as a direct
impingement on Freedom of Speech and Expression (FoSE) of
article 19 because it indirectly adds up a list of actions (124A of
IPC) which are termed as “Sedition” (as Bringing Hatred against
Government; Exciting Disaffection towards Government) to the list
of 8 reasonable restrictions to which FoSE/ article 19(1) is already
subjected.
· Romesh Thapar vs. State of Madras (1950): supreme court held
that a law curbing speech on ground of disturbing public order
was unconstitutional.
o It was a judgement regarding curbing press freedom, when
a well-known communist leader of that time Romesh Thapar
published articles about Nehru's policies in 1950, the
government imposed a ban on these articles.
o Thapar approached the supreme court with contention of
this being an impingement on his fundamental right of
Speech and Expression ie. Article 19(1)
o Court has to determine whether:
 Government order was a violation of article 19(1) of
constitution
 Did the order of government falls under reasonable
restrictions mentioned under article 19(1)
o The court held that:
 The government's order curbing the circulation of
magazines carrying the ideas of Mr. Thapar was an
impingement on his fundamental right under 19(1).
 The government's order was not considered within
premise of any reasonable restrictions mentioned for
article 19(1), hence order was void.
o Governments Action: - government brought first
constitutional amendment act. It added three new grounds
of restriction on article 19(1) to overturn the court's
judgement and revalidate its order.
 Public order
 Friendly relations with foreign states
 Incitement to an offence
Section 124A of IPC vs. Section 150 of Bhartiya Nyaya Samhita:
-
· A new bill on IPC has repealed the offence of sedition under 124A
of IPC.
· However, it has been replaced by another section targeting
“speech, writing or any other form of communication that incites
separatist and subversive activities, either by using word written
by mouth or by visible representations or financial or electronic
means shall be punishable by life imprisonment or with
imprisonment which may extend to 7 years”.
· Sectio 150 also seek to penalize aiding “subversive activities or
those encouraging feeling of separatist activities through Financial
Means”
· Main difference:
o between previous Sedition and new section 150 of BNS is
now there is no reference to “disaffection against the
government” or bring it under hatred or contempt”
o While imprisonment for life remains common to both in
earlier section 124A and present section 150, the new
section has increased the alternative punishment from 3
years under 124A to 7 years under section 150.

Misgivings in Sedition Law: -

· It hampers the right to Freedom of Speech and Expression by
further adding restrictions on it.
· It curbs the scope for Dissent against the Government by
criminalizing acts as “to bring hatred or disaffection against the
government,” this goes directly against democratic principles as
public debate, accountability, and democratic dissent.
 · Use of open-ended and broad worded terms as “to bring
disaffection towards government” in absence of clear definition
provides scope for ambiguity and misuse by governments in
targeting individuals and groups critical of government.
· It conflicts with core constitutional principles of free speech and
expression as it criminalizes disaffection towards government.
· Weakens democracy by hampering its core principles of
democracy – free flow of opinions; public discourses. It creates a
chilling effect on Free Speech and may result in dictatorial
tendencies in government.
· Since its inception constitutionality of law has been in question.
Judicial Approach about Sedition: -
The Judiciary did not declare section 124 A of IPC as void, but it has
issued guidelines for courts to determine sedition in various
judgements.
· Kedarnath Singh Case (1962):
o Sedition charges can be only applied
 When these speeches or actions result in incitement
to offence (ie. Actions provoking unlawful behavior or
urging someone to behave unlawfully)
 When intention is to create public disorder and disturb
public peace.
o “Speech or writings to which subverting the government by
violent means, including notion of Revolution” is considered
as seditious.
o It is seditious to create public disorder.
· Balwant Singh vs. State of Punjab (1962):
o Balwant Singh has shouted pro Khalistani slogans on
assassination day of Indira Gandhi.
 o The supreme court held that merely raising anti-India
slogans like Hindustan Murdabad, Khalistan Zindabad will
not result into sedition offence, until and unless it actually
results into somebody committing offence.
o SC said that unless there is actual PUBLIC DISORDER merely
SLOGANEEARING cannot attract punishment under Section
124A.

Conclusion:
· “The struggle between Liberty and Authority is the most
conspicuous feature in portions of history with which we are
earliest familiar, particularly in Greece and Rome”- J.S.Mill
· Striking an ideal balance between individual liberty and social
control, mandates for removal of laws as Sedition.
· Lokmanya Tilak and Mahatma Gandhi were also tried and
convicted under sedition offence by Britishers for raising
dissenting voices. These facts themselves provide for the need to
remove sedition laws.
· Tilak has mentioned a difference between “Rashtradroh” and
“Rajdroh.” Means there exists a difference between crime against
Nation as a whole and dissent against Government established
by law, this should be demarcated well in the trial of such cases.
One can be tried with sedition and the other with defamation.

5) Overhaul in Criminal Justice System

Why in news:
The Center has introduced three new bills in Lok Sabha targeting
overhaul of Criminal Justice system.
· Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 to be replaced by Bhartiya Nyaya
Sanhita (BNS),2023
· Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973 to be replaced by
Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
· Indian Evidence Act,1872 to be replaced by Bhartiya Sakshya
Bill,2023.

Mandate of Committee for Criminal Reforms:

· The Ministry of Home Affairs constituted a committee headed by
professor Dr. Ranbir Singh to review three codes of criminal law.
· The mandate of the committee was to “recommend reforms in
criminal laws of country in effective manner”

Section 124A of IPC vs. Section 150 of Bhartiya Nyaya Samhita:

-
· The new bill on IPC has repealed the offence of sedition under
124A of IPC.
· However, it has been replaced by another section targeting
“speech, writing or any other form of communication that incites
separatist and subversive activities, either by using word written
by mouth or by visible representations or financial or electronic
means shall be punishable by life imprisonment or with
imprisonment which may extend to 7 years”.
· Sectio 150 also seek to penalize aiding “subversive activities or
those encouraging feeling of separatist activities through Financial
Means”
· Main difference:
 o between previous Sedition and new section 150 of BNS is
now there is no reference to “disaffection against the
government” or bring it under hatred or contempt”
o While imprisonment for life remains common to both in
earlier section 124A and present section 150, the new
section has increased the alternative punishment from 3
years under 124A to 7 years under section 150.

Why Need for Reform:

· The Parliamentary Standing Committee in its 111th and 128th
report has highlighted the need for reform in the criminal justice
system through enactment of comprehensive legislation instead
of piecemeal amendments in existing acts.
· To overhaul colonial era criminal laws as these laws were passed
by British Parliament. Lord Thomas Macauly is said to be chief
architect of criminal law in India.
· To bring change in criminal justice system
· To remove “Mentality of Servitude”
· Cleary stated a definition of Terrorism. India will now be able to
designate and conduct trials of terrorists with clear definition of
terrorist defined in law. India will be able to gain international
cooperation as there lacks a mutually agreeable definition of
Terrorism in international forums.
· Bhartiya Shakshya Bill highlights that Indian Evidence Act has been
repealed because
o it fails to address technological advancement happened
since its implementation
o New bill permits admissibility of digital records and will have
legal validity as documentary evidence
o The ambit of secondary evidence has also been expanded.
 · BNSS states it aim to ensure “accessible and speedy justice”
· The charge sheet will have to be filed within 90days (about 3
months) and the probe must be completed in 180 days.
· Judgement should be given in30 days after completion of trial.
· Inclusion of technologically intensive methods such as Forensic
Science.
· Aim to take conviction rate to 90 percent.
· Digital records will have legal validity

Key Highlight of Bill: -

· Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita is to replace IPC by repealing 22 of its
provisions, proposing change to 175 of its existing provisions and
introduce 8 new sections.
· Rape of a minor will impose death penalty.
· Marrying after suppressing one's identity will impose a sentence
maximum of 10 years.
· For the first time capital punishment provision on mob lynching is
added, also to be punished by 7year sentence or life
imprisonment
· Provision for offence of adultery has been omitted in line with the
supreme court's judgement of Joseph Shine vs. UOI, 2018 where
section 497 of IPC criminalizing adultery was held
unconstitutional.
· New legislation does not include any punishment for “unnatural
sexual offences against men” in line with Supreme Court reading
down section 377 of IPC in Navtej Singh Johar case 2018
· Definition of Sedition is expended
· Community service and solitary confinement are to be introduced
as new forms of punishment.
· Trial in absence of accused
 · Speedy justice through e-filing of FIR, video trials etc. Facilities for
an accused person to be examined through electronic means like
video conferencing.
· Summary Trials have been made mandatory for petty and less
serious crimes. Magisterial system has also been streamlined.
· Sexual exploitation of women on pretext of marriage, job,
promotion is punishable with 20years of imprisonment.
· For the first time terrorism has been defined by a law in India. A
terrorist has been defined as one “who commits any act in India
or a foreign country with the intention to threaten the unity,
integrity and security of India, to intimidate the public or a
segment thereof, or to disturb public order.”
· Sedition has not been named explicitly as the term is dropped off,
but BNS contains provisions that penalizes “endangering
sovereignty, unity and integrity of India”

Why reform in criminal justice system requires:

· Delay in disposal of cases
· Very less police reforms
· Enormous number of undertrials
· Huge pendency at all levels in the hierarchy of judicial system.

Earlier recommendations:
· Malimath Committee Report 2003made recommendations on
crime investigation
· Mahadev Menon Committee 2007 on Criminal Justice Reforms
· Currently the Ministry of Home Affairs has constituted a
committee for Criminal Law reform under Ranbir Singh. This
committee of Ranbir Singh has recommended these laws.
Criticism: -
 · Lack of diversity in committee both in terms of social identity and
as well as professional background and experience, along with all
male members in committee became point of contention.
· Marital rape is still not recognized as an offence, as case
pertaining to non-consensual matrimonial sex is pending before
Supreme Court.
· Most of the structure of laws pertaining to criminal justice system
still remains same, it is just Rewording names of previous
legislations with Hindi names.
· Laws are just one component of the criminal justice system,
problems pertaining to infrastructural and judicial lacunas, such as
judicial pendency, technological gaps, overfilled jails. still remain
the same.

5)MANIPUR VOILENCE
WHY IN NEWS
· In May 2023, ethnic violence erupted in North-Eastern state of
Manipur between Meitei people and Kuki people.
Happenings
· In April 2023 Manipur High Court directed state government to
start proceeding to implement a 10-year-old recommendation to
grant Schedule Tribe status to non-tribal Meitei community.
(Decision was later criticized by the Supreme Court)
CAUSES OF CONFLICT
Nontribal Meitei community and native tribal Kuki communities were
main parties to violence.
1. LONG TERM CAUSE: - Discontent was simmering is in population
Manipur for long because of:
 Developmental divide that exists in state between valley
dominating nontribal Meitei community and hill dominating
Kuki community, in terms of educational divide, connectivity
problems, skewed resource allocation towards valley.
 Ethnic tensions exist between politically dominating
nontribal Meites and hill dominating tribes like Kuki's, Nagas
etc.
 The Manipur government has cited Manipur Forest Rules,
2021 which empowers the state to evict any encroachment.
on forest land.
i. The eviction drive is being feared by tribals as an
attempt to deprive them of their ancestral lands.
ii. This has created a disaffection among tribal Kuki
people.
 Because almost 90 percent of state land is declared tribal
land, non-tribal Meite population automatically disqualifies
owning land in tribal dominated hilly areas.
i. Including Meites in ST will allow them to own land,
ii. this instilled fear in hilly tribals Kuki's that they would
face a change in their demography, language, culture.
 Meitei community is already well-off agriculturally,
educationally, financially
i. so, apprehension that including them in ST will take
away already limited opportunities in government jobs
and educational institutions form Kuki's
ii. as the government is largest employer in Manipur was
a longstanding fear.
 Huge number of Myanmar refuges have entered the state of
Manipur following the coup.
 i. They are illegally associated with drugs cultivation as
poppy, opium and marijuana.
ii. These illegal migrants have settled in hills of Manipur
and targeted by government of Manipur and India.
iii. Kuki's are afraid that governments crackdown on
illegal migrants and their property would affect them
also.

2. IMMEDIATE CAUSE: - Causes that lead the situations to flashpoint

are
 On 27 March 2023 Manipur High Court ordered to add
politically and demographically dominant Meitei community
to be included in Schedule Tribe list, this has triggered the
violence.

Who are Kuki and Meite

· Geographically Manipur state is like a football stadium with a
valley region around Imphal surrounded by mountains.
· Valley regions constitute around 10% of the geographical area of
the state and have almost 57% of Manipur's population,
nontribal Meitei. While the hill area constitutes 90% of land area
houses only 10% population, mainly tribals as Kuki's, Nagas etc.
· Naga and Kuki are tribal population constitutes almost 42% of the
population of state, while Meitei are non-tribal and constitutes
almost 52% of the population of state.
· Majority of tribal population is Christian while majority of Meitei
population is Vaishnavite Hindus. Almost 8% of states population
is Muslim which migrated during East Pakistan formation and
Bangladesh Revolution.
 · Meites has a political advantage in Manipur as political majority
and majority if seats in state assembly are Meity dominated.

HISTORY OF CONFLICT IN MANIPUR

Manipur has a long history of conflicts among tribal ethnicities and
against establishment, during British period and post-independence
also.
· 1891 Britishers annexed Manipur and made it a dominion state.
· 1947 Manipur joined India. Naga community was displeased and
demanded an independent Greater Nagalim
o comprising of some parts is Manipur, Assam, and some
portions of Myanmar.
o Voice of Nagas was led by NSCN-IM, headed their demand.
· Meites also demanded an independent state,
o and to resist the NSCN and Nagas, they also formed an
armed group.
o This led to the emergence of insurgency between Nagas
and Meites.
· In 1993 in a conflict between Kuki's and Nagas, almost 350
Kuki villages were destroyed by Nagas,
o So, Kuki Revolutionary Army formed to resist Nagas, also
has a history of violence.
· Ethnic tensions between tribals and non-tribal Meites is also
longstanding.

Steps Taken
 Assam Rifle and Indian Army were deployed along with other
CAPF’s
  The Home Ministry appointed a security advisor to Manipur
Chief Minister and an overall commander for the law-and-order
situation.
 A panel led by retired chief justice is to probe violence
 CBI will probe six cases related to conspiracy in violence and
uncover the root cause of violence.
 The Supreme Court called Attorney General and Advocate
General and directed the central government to act immediately.
 On 7 August 2023, the Supreme Court took Suo moto cognisance
and formed a committee consisting of retired Jammu and Kashmir
High Court Chief Justice Gita Mittal (who will lead the committee)
 Government of India used section 69A of IT Act to direct all
internet intermediaries to take down the graphic content related
to violence and assault against women and minors.
 National Commission of Women is also enquiring the incidents of
assault on women and minor.
 The Chief Minister of Manipur, N. Biren Singh, stated that the
riots were instigated by “prevailing misunderstanding between
two communities” and appealed for restoration of normality

Conclusion
 Weaponization of identities should be avoided.
o Developmental divide should be addressed. Connectivity
issues should be resolved.
o Employment opportunities should be created to keep youth
away from violence and ethnicism.
 Trust building exercises among communities should start, ensured
with publicly written assurance from both communities.