Mains Ready By December. Smash Mains & Smash PYQ Admissions Open
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

GS Paper: GS2-01.Indian Constitution-Historical underpinnings & evolution; Features, amendments, significant provisions, basic structure of Constitution

  • History and Evolution of the Office of Governor

    Why in the News?

    The recent Supreme Court verdict on the powers of the President and Governors regarding assent to Bills under Articles 201 and 200 highlights the evolution of the office of the Governor and its changing role in India’s federal structure.

    Evolution of the Office of Governor:

    • Formal Establishment (1858): The office of the Governor was established under the Government of India Act of 1858, which transitioned administration from the East India Company to the British Crown. Governors acted as agents of the Crown and had significant powers in provincial administration.
    • Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms (1919): The GoI Act of 1919, under the Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms, aimed to increase Indian participation but kept the Governor central to governance, including vetoing Bills passed by legislative councils.
    • GoI Act of 1935: The GoI Act of 1935 gave provincial autonomy but retained the Governor’s discretionary powers, including vetoing Bills and withholding assent, signalling a transition toward more autonomy while maintaining significant Governor authority.
    • Post-Independence Transition (1947): As India moved toward independence, the India (Provisional Constitution) Order of 1947 modified the 1935 Act. It removed the phrase “in his discretion,” reducing the Governor’s discretionary powers and signalling a shift to a more symbolic and constitutional role.
    • Constituent Assembly Debates: It debated whether Governors should be elected or nominated. Concerns over separatism led to the decision that Governors would be nominated by the President to maintain unity and strengthen ties with the Centre, especially after the partition.
    • Post-Independence Framework: Before Independence, various documents and political proposals, including the Commonwealth India Bill (1925) and the Nehru Report (1928), supported retaining the office of the Governor, inspired by the Westminster model of governance.

    Constitutional Role of the Governor:

    • Article 163: The Governor acts on the advice of the Council of Ministers headed by the Chief Minister, except in certain discretionary situations.
    • Ambedkar’s Views: Dr. B.R. Ambedkar advocated for limited use of discretionary powers, ensuring the Governor’s actions align with the advice of the ministers.
    • Article 200: The Governor must grant assent to Bills, but may withhold assent, reserve the Bill for the President, or return it for reconsideration. Ambedkar amended this in 1949 to ensure the Governor acts in alignment with the elected government.
    • Symbolic and Impartial Role: The Governor is expected to represent the Union, support democratic functioning, and remain non-interfering in day-to-day state affairs.
    • Discretionary Powers: The Governor’s discretion is limited to constitutional guidelines and should be used sparingly, ensuring the Governor’s role remains constitutional, not political.
    [UPSC 2017] In the context of Indian history, the-principle of ‘Dyarchy (diarchy)’ refers to:

    (a) Division of the central legislature into two houses.

    (b) Introduction of double government i.e., Central and State governments.

    (c) Having two sets of rulers; one in London and another in Delhi.

    (d) Division of the subjects delegated to the provinces into two categories. *

     

  • Unnecessary amendment: On the RTI Act

    Why in the News?

    The Right to Information (RTI) Act has clearly helped make those in power more accountable in India. However, in recent years, there have been efforts to weaken some of its important provisions, even though the Act — a major reform — was passed 20 years ago.

    What is the role of Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act in promoting transparency?

    • Balances Privacy and Public Interest: Section 8(1)(j) permits denial of personal information only if it has no relationship to public activity or interest or causes an unwarranted invasion of privacy. Eg: An officer’s medical records may be withheld, but details of their salary or qualifications can be disclosed if it serves public interest.
    • Includes a Public Interest Override: Even if information is personal, it must be disclosed if larger public interest is involved. Eg: A bureaucrat’s caste certificate was disclosed in public interest when he was accused of using a fake caste certificate to secure a reserved post.
    • Enhances Accountability of Public Officials: Prevents misuse of power by allowing scrutiny of officials’ actions, qualifications, and benefits. Eg: RTI queries have uncovered cases of bogus educational degrees among elected representatives and civil servants.
    • Empowers Citizens to Seek Information: It strengthens democratic participation by giving citizens access to relevant information on public functionaries. Eg: Citizens have used RTI to access asset declarations of elected representatives and government officers.
    • Prevents Blanket Denial of Information: Ensures that authorities cannot reject RTI requests merely by labeling the information as ‘personal’; they must justify how it affects privacy and weigh it against public interest. Eg: Information about government employees’ attendance records or transfers can be accessed to detect nepotism or irregularities.

    Why does Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act, 2023 worry transparency advocates?

    • Removes Public Interest Safeguard: Section 44(3) amends Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act by eliminating the provision that allowed disclosure of personal information in public interest. Eg: A fake caste certificate case could now be shielded from scrutiny as the information might be denied without evaluating public interest.
    • Enables Blanket Denial Through Vague Definition: The term “personal information” is broad and undefined, enabling authorities to classify many types of public-relevant data as private. Eg: Details like educational qualifications or property disclosures of public servants could be denied under the label of “personal”.
    • Undermines RTI as a Transparency Tool: It weakens the RTI Act’s core intent by restricting access to information that previously helped expose corruption and misconduct. Eg: RTI requests that once revealed official misconduct or nepotism in postings may now be rejected citing privacy under the DPDP Act.

    How does the DPDP amendment deviate from the intent of the K.S. Puttaswamy judgment?

    • Ignores the Balancing Principle of Privacy and Transparency: The K.S. Puttaswamy judgment (2017) upheld the right to privacy but emphasized that it must be balanced with other fundamental rights, including the right to information and public interest. Eg: The DPDP amendment removes the RTI Act’s public interest test, allowing personal information to be withheld even when it reveals corruption or fraud.
    • Undermines Democratic Accountability: The judgment did not suggest overriding transparency laws like RTI but stressed minimum and necessary restrictions on information access. Eg: Instead of proportionate safeguards, the DPDP Act allows authorities to blanket-deny RTI requests without assessing public relevance.
    • Distorts the Spirit of “Informed Citizenry”: Puttaswamy emphasized that transparency is essential for democracy, and privacy cannot be used to shield public officials from scrutiny. Eg: Information such as public officials’ property details or caste certificates may now be refused, limiting citizens’ ability to hold them accountable.

    What information could now be denied under the amended RTI provisions as ‘personal’?

    • Educational Qualifications and Certificates: Details about the academic background or degrees of public servants could be withheld as “personal information” under the amended provision. Eg: RTI queries that previously revealed fake degrees of elected representatives may now be denied.
    • Caste and Community Certificates: Information related to caste status, often crucial in verifying eligibility for reservation benefits, may be deemed private. Eg: In cases where a public official allegedly used a fake caste certificate, such details could be denied under the privacy shield.
    • Property, Assets, and Financial Disclosures: Disclosures regarding property holdings, assets, and liabilities of government employees might be refused by classifying them as personal. Eg: RTI applications that earlier exposed disproportionate assets could now be blocked.

    Way forward: 

    • Restore Public Interest Safeguard: Amend the DPDP Act to reinstate the public interest clause from Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, ensuring transparency is not overridden by vague privacy claims.
    • Define ‘Personal Information’ Clearly: Provide a narrow and precise definition of “personal information” to prevent misuse and ensure critical public accountability data remains accessible.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2020] “Recent amendments to the Right to Information Act will have profound impact on the autonomy and independence of the Information Commission”. Discuss.

    Linkage: The discussion from 2020 highlights the ongoing attention on potential changes to the RTI Act. It shows that the issue of amending the RTI Act and its effects has been a concern for some time.

  • Telangana becomes first State to notify Sub- categorization of SCs

    Why in the News?

    The Telangana government has officially implemented the sub-categorization of Scheduled Castes (SCs) into three groups, following a Supreme Court judgment in August 2024 that upheld the constitutionality of sub-classifying SCs and Scheduled Tribes (STs) to grant separate quotas for the most marginalized groups.

    Telangana becomes first State to notify Sub- categorization of SCs

    About Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Their Subcategorization:

    • SCs are a historically marginalized group identified in India’s Constitution to receive preferential treatment in education, employment, and political representation.
    • Constitutional Provisions:
      • Article 341: Empowers the President to specify castes as SCs within states or UTs.
      • Article 342: Allows Parliament to include/exclude castes from the SC list.
    • While grouped for reservations, disparities exist within SCs, with some groups being more disadvantaged than others.
    • Subcategorization involves dividing SCs into smaller groups based on social, economic, and educational backwardness, ensuring the most marginalized receive targeted benefits.
    • Sub-classification of SCs and STs for reservations is subject to judicial review to prevent misuse.

    Supreme Court Verdict on Sub-categorization: State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh (2020) Case

    • In its August 2024 verdict, the Supreme Court allowed states to sub-classify SCs and STs, enabling separate quotas for the most marginalized groups.
    • Key Points:
      • Empirical Data: Subclassification must be based on data of systemic discrimination, not political motives.
      • Creamy Layer: Excludes the more advanced members of SCs/STs, applying the creamy layer principle.
      • Quota Limits: No sub-categorization can exceed the overall constitutional quota ceiling.
      • First-Generation Benefit: Reservations are restricted to the first generation of a family that has not benefitted from previous reservations.

     

    [UPSC 2005] Which one of the following statements is correct regarding population?

    (a) Bihar has the highest percentage of Scheduled Castes in its population.

    (b) The decadal growth of population of India (1991-2001) has been below 20%.

    (c) Mizoram is the Indian State with the least population.

    (d) Pondicherry has the highest sex ratio among the Union Territories.

     

  • A Governor’s conduct and a judgment of significance

    Why in the News?

     In The State of Tamil Nadu vs. The Governor of Tamil Nadu and Another, a two-judge Bench of the Supreme Court of India, led by Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan, reaffirmed that Governors’ powers are limited and must follow constitutional boundaries.  

    What constitutional issue was addressed in the Tamil Nadu vs the Governor case?

    Aspect Details Example
    Limits of Gubernatorial Discretion (Article 200) The Governor cannot withhold assent to a Bill indefinitely or act independently of the elected State Cabinet, except in constitutionally specified situations. The role is largely ceremonial. Governor of Tamil Nadu withheld assent to 12 Bills, including those on the appointment of Vice-Chancellors to public universities.
    Constitutional Obligations of the Governor and State Executive The Governor is bound by the advice of the State Cabinet and cannot act on personal discretion unless explicitly permitted by the Constitution. This upholds representative democracy. Governor delayed referrals to the President without valid reasons, thereby undermining the democratic function of the State Legislature.
    Judicial Review of Governor’s Actions Article 361 gives personal immunity to the Governor but does not shield official actions from judicial review. Courts can check if actions comply with the Constitution and democratic norms. Supreme Court held that the Governor’s inaction violated the Constitution, and invoked Article 142 to deem the Bills as assented to, resolving the legislative deadlock.

    Why was the Governor’s inaction on Tamil Nadu Bills ruled unconstitutional?

    • Violation of Constitutional Duty under Article 200: The Governor is constitutionally bound to either assent to a Bill, withhold assent (and return it for reconsideration), or reserve it for the President. Indefinitely sitting on Bills without any action violates this mandate. Eg: The Governor kept 10 re-enacted Bills pending without any action or justification, undermining the role of the legislature.
    • Undermining the Principles of Representative Democracy: By not acting on duly passed Bills, the Governor disregarded the advice of the elected Council of Ministers, thereby disrupting the democratic process and the legislative will of the people. Eg: Despite the Tamil Nadu Assembly passing the Bills again in a special session, the Governor forwarded them to the President without consulting the State Cabinet, showing a lack of respect for democratic norms.

    When can a Governor use discretion under Article 200?

    • When a Bill Affects the Powers of the High Court: The second proviso to Article 200 allows the Governor to reserve a Bill that directly affects the powers of the High Court for the President’s consideration. Eg: If a State law tries to curtail the High Court’s jurisdiction or authority, the Governor can use discretion to reserve it.
    • When Presidential Assent is Constitutionally Mandatory: If a Bill falls under categories where presidential assent is specifically required (such as laws under Article 31C that seek immunity from judicial review), the Governor may reserve it. Eg: A Bill claiming protection under Article 31C, linked to Directive Principles, must be reserved for the President.
    • When a Bill Fundamentally Undermines Constitutional Values: The Governor can act without ministerial advice if the Bill threatens the basic structure or core values of the Constitution. Eg: A Bill that violates secularism or federalism in an extreme manner could justify the Governor’s discretionary action.

    How did the Supreme Court invoke Article 142 to resolve the constitutional deadlock in the Tamil Nadu Bills case?

    • Used Article 142 to Ensure Complete Justice: The Court exercised its special power under Article 142 to deliver complete justice by deeming the 10 re-enacted Bills as having received the Governor’s assent. Eg: Instead of waiting for further assent or action from the Governor, the Court directly validated the Bills to avoid further delays in governance.
    • Bypassed Unworkable Remedies Like Mandamus: Issuing a writ of mandamus (to compel the Governor to act) was seen as ineffective since the Governor is protected from personal liability under Article 361. Eg: Since the Governor cannot be punished for contempt, the Court chose Article 142 as a more enforceable solution.
    • Restored the Legislative Authority of the State: By invoking Article 142, the Court reinforced the principle that the Governor cannot override the will of an elected legislature through inaction Eg: This prevented indefinite delays in implementing laws passed by the Tamil Nadu Assembly, thus preserving democratic functioning.

    Why was issuing a writ of mandamus deemed inadequate?

    • Governor is Immune Under Article 361: The Constitution grants the Governor personal immunity from legal proceedings while in office, making it difficult to enforce any court directive. Eg: Even if the Court issued a mandamus to compel assent or action, the Governor could not be held legally accountable for ignoring it.
    • Mandamus Cannot Be Enforced Practically: Courts cannot force a Governor to exercise discretion in a particular way, only to consider doing so—making the remedy ineffective when deliberate inaction is involved. Eg: If the Governor simply delays action without giving reasons, courts have limited tools to compel a timely decision.
    • Could Cause a Constitutional Standoff: Forcing the Governor through judicial direction risks undermining the separation of powers and could lead to a deadlock between constitutional authorities. Eg: If the Governor resists the court order, it could trigger a conflict between the judiciary and the executive, weakening the constitutional balance.

    Way forward: 

    • Codify Time Limit for Assent: Amend the Constitution or enact a statutory framework to prescribe a reasonable time limit (eg: 30 days) within which the Governor must act on Bills to prevent indefinite delays.
    • Enhance Legislative Oversight: Establish a mechanism for State Legislatures to seek judicial clarification or initiate review when the Governor delays action, reinforcing accountability and upholding democratic norms.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2022] Discuss the essential conditions for exercise of the legislative powers by the Governor. Discuss the legality of re-promulgation of ordinances by the Governor without placing them before the Legislature.

    Linkage: This question directly addresses the legislative powers of the Governor, a key aspect of their conduct. The second part specifically asks about the legality of re-promulgation of ordinances, which can be a contentious issue and often involves judicial scrutiny. This relates to the constitutional limits on the Governor’s powers, similar to the issues raised in the article.

  • Parliament passes Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2025 as Rajya Sabha grants approval

    Why in the News?

    After over 12 hours of debate and late-night voting, tensions rose over ministers taking a break and Congress faced criticism from INDI allies over supporting a government-backed Bill.

    What are the key provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill?

    • Inclusion of Non-Muslim Members: The Bill makes it mandatory to have at least two non-Muslim members in both the Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards. Eg: A State Waqf Board in Uttar Pradesh will now include two non-Muslim members to ensure diversity and broader oversight.
    • Enhanced Transparency and Accountability: The bill mandates the digitization of all Waqf records on a centralized portal, ensuring real-time monitoring and preventing unauthorized transactions. Eg: Waqf institutions earning over ₹1 lakh annually must undergo audits by state-sponsored auditors.
    • Women Must Receive Inheritance Before Waqf: Before any property is dedicated as Waqf, women must receive their rightful share of inheritance under Islamic law. Eg: A man cannot donate ancestral property to a mosque as Waqf unless his daughters have first received their inheritance portion.
    • Waqf Boards Cannot Arbitrarily Declare: The amendment removes the Waqf Board’s earlier power to unilaterally declare any property as Waqf without due process. Eg: If there’s a dispute about a piece of land, the Waqf Board must now legally verify ownership instead of directly labeling it as Waqf land.
    • Restructuring of Waqf Tribunals: The structure of Waqf Tribunals is changed to include a district judge, a joint secretary-level government officer, and an expert in Muslim law. Appeals can go to the High Court within 90 days. Eg: A property dispute handled by the Waqf Tribunal in Delhi can now be appealed in the Delhi High Court within three months.

    Why did the Opposition criticize the Bill? 

    • Violation of Religious Freedom and Philanthropy Rights: The Opposition argued that banning non-Muslims from creating Waqf violates their freedom to donate or support causes of other religions. Eg: If a Hindu philanthropist wishes to donate land to a mosque for educational purposes, the law now prohibits it from being treated as Waqf.
    • Interference in Personal and Religious Affairs: Critics said the Bill marks excessive state interference in the religious practices of Muslims, especially by restructuring Waqf Tribunals and mandating non-Muslim representation in Waqf Boards. Eg: The inclusion of non-Muslims in bodies managing Islamic religious endowments is seen by some as an imposition on community autonomy.
    • Lack of Consultation and Political Targeting: Opposition parties claimed the Bill was introduced without adequate consultation with stakeholders, including Muslim scholars, religious leaders, or civil society groups. It was viewed as part of a broader political narrative targeting minorities. Eg: The sudden change in who can create Waqf (only Muslims with 5+ years of practice) was criticized as being done without meaningful dialogue with the affected community.

    How much property is currently recorded under Waqf in India?

    • Registered properties: As of March 2025, Waqf boards in India manage approximately 8.72 lakh (872,000) registered properties, encompassing over 38 lakh (3.8 million) acres of land. Eg: Uttar Pradesh: Approximately 2.1 lakh Waqf properties,  West Bengal: Around 78,000 properties and Kerala: About 55,000 properties.
    • Spread Across Prime Urban and Rural Areas: Waqf land is spread across prime locations in cities and fertile lands in villages, often facing issues of encroachment and poor management. Eg: In Delhi and Mumbai, many Waqf lands are located in commercial hubs, but are underutilized or illegally occupied.

    Who can donate to Waqf under the new law?

    Under the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, only practicing Muslims who have been adhering to their faith for at least five years are eligible to donate property as Waqf. This provision aims to ensure that donations are genuine and voluntary, reinstating a pre-2013 rule

    How has this changed from the 2013 Waqf Act?

    Aspect Waqf Act, 2013 Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025
    Who can create Waqf Any person (including non-Muslims) could create a Waqf Only practicing Muslims (for at least 5 years) can create Waqf
    Inclusion of non-Muslims in Waqf Boards Only Muslims were members of Waqf Boards and the Central Waqf Council At least 2 non-Muslim members must be included in both Boards and Council
    Waqf Board’s power to declare property Waqf Boards could unilaterally declare any property as Waqf (Section 40) This power is removed; Boards cannot declare any property Waqf without due process
    Women’s inheritance rights in family Waqf Not clearly defined or enforced Ensures women receive inheritance before family property is converted into Waqf
    Composition of Waqf Tribunals Tribunals had members appointed by the state, often lacking legal or religious expertise Must include a district judge, joint secretary-level officer, and Muslim law expert
    Appeal Mechanism Appeals were limited and unclear in some cases Clear provision for appeal to the High Court within 90 days

    Way forward:

    • Promote Inclusive Dialogue and Trust-building: Establish structured consultations with religious leaders, civil society, and legal experts to address concerns and foster transparency.
    • Strengthen Implementation with Oversight: Ensure effective digitization, fair dispute resolution, and regular audits through independent oversight bodies to prevent misuse and encroachment.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2019] What are the challenges to our cultural practices in the name of secularism.

    Linkage: Potential conflicts between secular principles and the freedom to practice cultural and religious traditions in India.

  • Supreme Court relief to Pratapgarhi: Can’t be so shaky on our basics over a poem or stand-up comedy

    Why in the News?

    The Supreme Court quashed the FIR against Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi, stating that even if many people dislike someone’s views, their right to express them must be respected and protected.

    What was the Supreme Court’s rationale for quashing Imran Pratapgarhi’s FIR?

    • Poem Did Not Incite Violence or Enmity: The court ruled that the poem “Ae khoon ke pyase baat suno” did not promote violence or hatred but instead advocated facing injustice with love. Example: The court compared this to other forms of artistic expression, such as satire and stand-up comedy, which may provoke strong reactions but should still be protected under freedom of speech.
    • Freedom of Expression is Fundamental to Democracy: The judgment emphasized that even if many people dislike or oppose certain views, an individual’s right to express them must be protected. Example: The ruling cited how literature, poetry, and films enrich public discourse, and restricting them would lead to a stifled society.
    • Failure of Police to Conduct Preliminary Inquiry: The court noted that under Section 173(3) of the BNSS, the police must conduct a preliminary inquiry before registering an FIR for offenses punishable with 3 to 7 years of imprisonment. Example: If the police had followed this procedure, they would have found no prima facie case against Pratapgarhi, preventing an unjust criminal prosecution.

    Why did Justices Oka and Bhuyan stress the importance of protecting free speech in their ruling?

    • Essential for a Healthy Democracy: The court emphasized that freedom of expression is crucial for a vibrant democracy, where diverse opinions must be debated rather than suppressed. Example: The judges stated that even if many people dislike a view, it must still be protected, reinforcing that countering speech with speech, not suppression, is the right approach.
    • Integral to Human Dignity and Fundamental Rights: The ruling linked free speech to Article 21 (Right to Life with Dignity), arguing that without the ability to express ideas, individuals cannot live a dignified life. Example: The court cited the Preamble of the Constitution, which guarantees liberty of thought and expression as a core constitutional ideal.
    • Judiciary’s Duty to Protect Fundamental Rights: The judges stressed that if the police or executive fail to uphold free speech, the courts must step in to protect citizens’ rights under Article 19(1)(a). Example: The court stated that even judges may not always like certain spoken or written words, but they are bound by their duty to uphold the Constitution and free speech rights.

    Which Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) sections did Gujarat Police invoke against Pratapgarhi, and what do they address?

    • Section 196 – Promoting Enmity Between Groups: It Covers acts that promote enmity between different groups based on religion, race, place of birth, residence, or language and disturb harmony. Example: If a speech or post incites hostility between communities, it could fall under this section. However, the court found no such intent in Pratapgarhi’s poem.
    • Section 299 – Outraging Religious Feelings: It Covers deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings by insulting a religion or religious beliefs. Example: If someone defames a religious text or practice with intent to offend, they may be booked under this section. The court ruled that Pratapgarhi’s poem had no such intent.
    • Section 173(3) of BNSS – Preliminary Inquiry Requirement: Mandates a preliminary inquiry before registering an FIR for offenses punishable by 3 to 7 years of imprisonment. Example: The court noted that the police should have conducted an inquiry first to see if a prima facie case existed, preventing unnecessary criminal charges.

    What role did the Supreme Court assign to police and judiciary in upholding Article 19(1)(a)?

    • Police Must Conduct a Preliminary Inquiry Before Filing an FIR: The court held that police must verify if a case genuinely falls under restrictions on free speech before registering an FIR. Unwarranted criminal proceedings can have a chilling effect on expression.
      • Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015): The Supreme Court struck down Section 66A of the IT Act, ruling that arbitrary arrests for online speech violate free expression.
    • Judiciary Must Act as the Guardian of Fundamental Rights: Courts must intervene when executive actions violate fundamental rights, ensuring that speech is not suppressed under vague or excessive laws.
      • S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjivan Ram (1989): The Supreme Court ruled that mere disagreement or offense cannot be grounds for restricting free speech.
    • Both Institutions Must Uphold Constitutional Ideals: Police and courts must ensure that freedom of expression is safeguarded in a democracy, as it is crucial for a vibrant public discourse.
      • Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962): The Supreme Court clarified that only speech inciting violence or public disorder can be restricted.

    Way forward: 

    • Strengthen Safeguards Against Misuse of Laws: Implement clear guidelines for law enforcement to distinguish between genuine hate speech and protected expression to prevent arbitrary FIRs. Example: Mandatory legal training for police on free speech rights and BNSS provisions.
    • Judicial Oversight and Quick Disposal of Cases: Establish fast-track mechanisms for courts to quash frivolous cases that violate Article 19(1)(a). Example: Special benches to review cases involving free speech violations to ensure timely justice.

    Mains PYQ:

    Q  Question: What do you understand by the concept “freedom of speech and expression”? Does it cover hate speech also? Why do the films in India stand on a slightly different plane from other forms of expression? Discuss. [UPSC 2014]

    Linkage: The scope of freedom of speech and expression, a central issue in the Pratapgarhi case. 

  • Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act

    Why in the News?

    Opposition parties have raised concerns over the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023, demanding the repeal of Section 44(3), claiming it could undermine the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005.

    About DPDP Act and Section 44(3)

    • Recognizing the right to privacy as fundamental in India, the Supreme Court in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs. Union of India (2017) led to the introduction of the DPDP Act in 2023.
    • The Act regulates the processing of personal data, balancing individual privacy rights and lawful processing needs.
    • Key Provisions: It mandates informed consent, establishes a Data Protection Board of India (DPBI), and outlines the responsibilities of data fiduciaries in ensuring data protection.
    • Section 44(3) modifies Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, which previously exempted personal information from disclosure unless public interest justified it.
    • The amendment broadens this exemption, stating that all personal information should be exempt from disclosure, without requiring a public interest justification.

    Concerns Related to Section 44(3)  

    • Reduced Transparency: Activists and critics argue that this section undermines the RTI Act, which has been a cornerstone of transparency and accountability in governance.
    • Limited Access to Public Information: The broad exemption allows government officials to shield information like asset disclosures, which are critical for public accountability.
    • Potential for Misuse: There are concerns that personal data protection could be used as an excuse to block vital information about government activities, weakening the public’s right to know.
    • Conflict Between Public Interest and Privacy: Critics argue that privacy protection should not override the principle of transparency.

    Back2Basics: Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005

    • The RTI Act, 2005 empowers Indian citizens to seek information from public authorities, ensuring transparency and accountability in governance.
    • RTI is considered a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and expression,
    • Key Features:
      • Applicability: Covers all government bodies, including central, state, and local authorities.
      • Public Information Officers (PIOs): Designated officials who are responsible for providing requested information within 30 days.
      • Exemptions: Some categories of information are exempted, such as national security matters and personal privacy.
      • Penalty: Officials can face fines for failing to provide information without valid reasons.

     

    [UPSC 2018] Right to Privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of Right to Life and Personal Liberty. Which of the following in the Constitution of India correctly and appropriately imply the above statement?

    (a) Article 14 and the provisions under the 42ndAmendment to the Constitution.

    (b) Article 17 and the Directive Principles of State Policy in Part IV.

    (c) Article 21 and the freedoms guaranteed in Part III.

    (d) Article 24 and the provisions under the 44thAmendment to the Constitution.

     

  • What is Finance Bill?

    Why in the News?

    Initiating the debate on the Finance Bill in the Lok Sabha, Shashi Tharoor said south Indian States have been the engines of growth and revenue but don’t get their due share from the Central pool of revenue.

    About Financial Bills:

    • Article 117 of the Constitution governs financial bills. It stipulates special provisions for the introduction of financial bills, outlining their requirements and procedures.
    • According to Rule 219 of the Rules of Procedure of the Lok Sabha, a Finance Bill is typically introduced to give effect to the financial proposals for the next financial year or to address supplementary financial proposals.
    • A Finance Bill is introduced in the Lok Sabha after the annual budget has been presented.
    • The Bill does not include provisions as per Article 110 but still involves expenditure from the Consolidated Fund of India.
    • It follows the same legislative process as an ordinary bill, where:
      • Rajya Sabha can reject or amend it.
      • In case of a deadlock, a joint sitting of both Houses may be convened.
    • The President can either assent to the Bill or return it for reconsideration.
    • All money bills are financial bills, but not all financial bills are money bills.
    • Only bills that exclusively deal with matters listed in Article 110 (such as taxes, borrowing, or the management of Consolidated Fund of India ) qualify as money bills.

    Types of Financial Bills:

    • Type-I: Financial Bills under Article 110
      • These bills contain provisions related to matters specified in Article 110(1)(a) to (f), which include taxation, borrowing, and the expenditure of funds from the Consolidated Fund of India (CFI).
      • These bills are a combination of both money bills and ordinary bills. They are treated like money bills but also include non-financial matters that do not strictly fit into Article 110.
    • Type-II: Financial Bills under Article 117(3)
      • These bills involve expenditure from the Consolidated Fund of India but do not fall under the money bill category.
      • They follow the same legislative procedure as an ordinary bill and may be amended or rejected by the Rajya Sabha. In the case of disagreement between the two Houses, the President can call a joint sitting to resolve the deadlock.
    [UPSC 2022] With reference to Finance Bill and Money Bill in the Indian Parliament, consider the following statements:

    1. When the Lok Sabha transmits Finance Bill to the Rajya Sabha, it can amend or reject the Bill.

    2. When the Lok Sabha transmits Money Bill to the Rajya Sabha, it cannot amend or reject the Bill, it can only make recommendations.

    3. In the case of disagreement between the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, there is no joint sitting for Money Bill, but a joint sitting becomes necessary for Finance Bill.

    How many of the above statements are correct?

    (a) Only one (b) Only two (c) All three (d) None

     

  • PAC flags Failure of Swadesh Darshan Scheme

    Why in the News?

    The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has criticized the Ministry of Tourism for the poor execution of the Swadesh Darshan Scheme and highlighted lapses in planning, approvals, and project execution.

    About Public Accounts Committee (PAC):

    • The PAC was established in 1921 under the Government of India Act, 1919.
    • It consists of 22 members, with 15 from the Lok Sabha and 7 from the Rajya Sabha, who are elected annually.
    • The Chairman of the committee is traditionally selected from the Opposition since 1967.
    • The PAC plays a crucial role in examining the audit reports of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), focusing on public expenditure.
    • It ensures that funds are utilized efficiently, and it checks for irregularities, corruption, waste, and inefficiencies in government spending.

    About Swadesh Darshan Scheme (SDS):

    • The Swadesh Darshan Scheme was launched in 2015 by the Ministry of Tourism.
      • Objective: Developing theme-based tourist circuits such as Buddhist, Coastal, Heritage, and Eco-tourism circuits in India, emphasising sustainable tourism.
    • The scheme is 100% centrally funded, and it provides financial assistance to state governments, Union Territory administrations, and central agencies for the development of tourism infrastructure.
    • Swadesh Darshan 2.0 scheme (which began from January 2023) adopts a more holistic approach, shifting from circuit-based tourism to a destination-centric model.
      • This new version aims to encourage private sector investment in tourism and hospitality, aligning with India’s ‘Vocal for Local’ and Aatmanirbhar Bharat vision.
      • It prioritizes long-term growth and the development of sustainable tourism destinations.
      • The Challenge-Based Destination Development (CBDD) is a sub-scheme under Swadesh Darshan 2.0, focusing on the competitive development of tourism destinations.
      • This initiative aims to foster sustainability, digitalization, skill development, MSME support, and effective management, ensuring that the tourism sector thrives in a more modern and organized manner.

    PYQ:

    [UPSC 2007] Consider the following statements:

    1. The Chairman of the Committee on Public Accounts is appointed by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha.

    2. The Committee on Public Accounts comprises Members of Lok Sabha, Members of Rajya Sabha, and a few eminent persons of industry and trade.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2

     

  • India ranked 24th out of 33 countries in Free Speech Index

    Why in the News?

    A global survey by The Future of Free Speech, a US -based think tank, has ranked India 24th out of 33 countries in terms of support for free speech.

    The right to freedom of speech and expression is guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution, allowing citizens to express their opinions freely. This right includes various forms of expression like speech, writing, art, and digital media, RTI, and even the right not to speak. However, it is subject to reasonable restrictions as outlined in Article 19(2), including security, public order, and decency.

    About the Free Speech Index

    • The Future of Free Speech, an independent U.S.-based think tank released this report titled ‘Who in the World Supports Free Speech?’.
    • It evaluates public attitudes towards free speech across 33 countries, highlighting trends, regional variations, and challenges to freedom of expression worldwide.
    • It emphasized the decline in support for protecting controversial speech, despite strong abstract support for free speech in many countries.

    India’s Ranking:

    • India is ranked 24th out of 33 countries in the 2024 Global Free Speech Index, with a score of 62.6.
    • While Indians generally consider free speech important, 37% of respondents support restrictions on criticizing government policies, which is the highest percentage among the surveyed countries.
    • India is an exception to the general trend, as public support for free speech does not align with actual protections, pointing to increasing government restrictions on expression.

    Global Highlights:

    • Norway (87.9) and Denmark (87.0) lead the rankings, demonstrating strong commitment to free speech and dissent.
    • Indonesia (56.8), Malaysia (55.4), and Pakistan (57.0) showed the biggest improvements, although they still ranked lower on the scale.
    • Several democratic nations, including the US, Israel, and Japan, have seen a decline in free speech support since 2021.
    • Countries like Hungary (85.5) and Venezuela (81.8) scored high, indicating a disconnect between government-imposed restrictions and public attitudes towards free speech.

    PYQ:

    [UPSC 2014] What do you understand by the concept of “freedom of speech and expression”? Does it cover hate speech also? Why do films in India stand on a slightly different plane from other forms of expression? Discuss.

    [2018] Right to Privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of Right to Life and Personal Liberty. Which of the following in the Constitution of India correctly and appropriately imply the above statement?

    (a) Article 14 and the provisions under the 42nd Amendment to the Constitution.
    (b) Article 17 and the Directive Principles of State Policy in Part IV.
    (c) Article 21 and the freedoms guaranteed in Part III.
    (d) Article 24 and the provisions under the 44th Amendment to the Constitution.