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

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS1-06.Salient features of Indian Society

 

  • The legal hoodwinking of adivasis

    Introduction

    The cancellation of Ghatbarra (Chhattisgarh) Gram Sabha’s community forest rights (CFRs), despite earlier recognition under the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006, has triggered concerns about legal fairness, administrative overreach and the future of Adivasi forest governance. The High Court ruling, which upheld the revocation of CFRs based on procedural grounds, marks a sharp break from the FRA’s constitutional promise of recognising customary forest rights and ensuring Gram Sabha consent for diversion decisions. The episode highlights the broader developmental logic that prioritises mining over community rights, creating a precedent with wide implications for forest governance in India.

    Why in the News 

    The Chhattisgarh High Court upheld the cancellation of Ghatbarra’s community forest rights, a rare instance where formally recognised CFRs were later withdrawn. This marks a significant departure from the FRA’s legal protection of settled rights and reveals how administrative technicalities can override Gram Sabha authority. The case is significant because lakhs of trees were felled after diversion was cleared, villagers’ objections were repeatedly sidelined, and legal rights were dismissed as “mistakes”, revealing systemic weakening of Adivasi rights in mineral-rich regions.

    How did the legal contest over Ghatbarra’s forest rights evolve?

    • Long history of disputes: The proposal to divert forests for mining dates back to 2011; reports noted ecological richness and unresolved rights.
    • Procedural irregularities: The Environment Minister allowed diversion despite technical objections; clearances were repeatedly granted and withdrawn.
    • Supreme Court intervention: The Court allowed mining to resume earlier without interfering with reconsideration of clearances.
    • Administrative fast-tracking: Mining proceeded while rights recognition lagged, leading to large-scale felling of forests.

    Why was Ghatbarra’s CFR status revoked?

    • DLC unilateral action: The District Level Committee cancelled CFRs in 2016 while villagers were preparing to litigate.
    • Claim dismissed as ‘mistake’: Authorities argued earlier recognition of rights was erroneous, contradicting FRA’s foundational principle.
    • Failure to meet legal standards: Court held that land had already been diverted and thus claims did not meet FRA criteria.
    • Judicial reliance on technicalities: Court questioned whether legal procedures for settling rights and obtaining Gram Sabha consent were fulfilled, placing burden on petitioners.

    What were the major shortcomings in the High Court’s reasoning?

    1. Misinterpretation of FRA Section 4(7): Court stated rights must be “free of encumbrances,” treating mining as an encumbrance rather than a violation of rights.
    2. Ignoring NGT findings: Earlier National Green Tribunal orders questioning the diversion process were not considered.
    3. Burden shifted to villagers: Petitioners were asked to prove procedural lapses by authorities, contrary to FRA’s mandate.
    4. Judicial shrinkage of community rights: The ruling prioritised administrative procedure over statutory recognition of customary rights.

    Why does this case matter for Adivasi self-determination?

    1. Erosion of Gram Sabha authority: CFRs, intended as a safeguard against arbitrary diversion, were overridden through administrative orders.
    2. Contradiction with Niyamgiri precedent: Supreme Court’s 2013 verdict upheld the primacy of Gram Sabha decisions; Ghatbarra marks a deviation.
    3. Expansion of extractive model: Mines continue to operate even when rights are unsettled; recognition does not ensure control.
    4. Undermining of democratic forest governance: Decision signals that settlements of rights can be reversed for developmental imperatives.

    What does the case reveal about India’s forest governance architecture?

    1. Development-first logic: Mining clearances were treated as faits accomplis, with rights adjudicated after damage was done.
    2. Weak institutional checks: DLCs, FAC, NGT and courts issued conflicting directions, creating procedural gaps that diluted rights.
    3. Strategic use of ambiguity: Authorities used technical ‘non-existence’ of rights to legitimise diversion.
    4. Administrative ritualism: Presence of procedures did not translate into justice; decision-making replicated colonial governance logic.

    Conclusion

    The Ghatbarra judgment illustrates how forest governance mechanisms can be used to dilute, rather than protect, Adivasi rights. Although the FRA envisions community autonomy and ecological stewardship, the ruling demonstrates how institutional language and procedural manoeuvres can sideline these safeguards. The case underscores the urgent need to re-establish statutory primacy of Gram Sabha consent and ensure that rights, once settled, cannot be reversed to accommodate extractive interests.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2016] Why are the tribals in India referred to as the Scheduled Tribes? Indicate the major constitutional provisions for their upliftment.

    Linkage: This PYQ examines constitutional safeguards and identity recognition of STs. It links with the article as it exposes how policy practice fails ST protections, leading to exploitation despite constitutional guarantees.

  • Tribes in news: Siddi 

    Why in the News?

    President Droupadi Murmu met members of Gujarat’s Siddi Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PVTGs) community and praised their 72% literacy rate as a sign of social progress.

    President Droupadi Murmu met members of Gujarat’s Siddi Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PVTGs) community and praised their 72% literacy rate as a sign of social progress.

    About the Siddi Community:

    • Overview: An Afro-Indian tribal group descended from Bantu-speaking peoples of Southeast Africa, brought to India via the Indian Ocean slave trade (7th–19th centuries).
    • Arrival in India: First arrived at Bharuch port (628 CE) with Arab traders; major influxes during Muhammad bin Qasim’s conquest (712 CE) and later under Portuguese and British.
    • Migration & Settlement: Brought as soldiers, sailors, slaves, and servants; some escaped bondage to form independent forest settlements.
    • Genealogy: Studies show 60–75 % African admixture mixed with Indian and Portuguese ancestry accumulated over two centuries.
    • Geographic Distribution: Concentrated in Karnataka (Uttara Kannada, Belgaum, Dharwad) and Gujarat (Junagadh, Gir-Somnath, Saurashtra); smaller groups in Maharashtra, Goa, Telangana, Andhra Pradesh; total population 40 k–2.5 lakh.
    • Historical Role: Served in Deccan Sultanate and Nizam armies; most famous figure, Malik Ambar (1600–1626), Ethiopian-origin prime minister of Ahmadnagar (now Ahilyanagar).

    Cultural and Demographic Features:

    • Social Status: Recognised as Scheduled Tribe (ST) in five regions and as a Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group (PVTG).
    • Language & Culture: Speak regional languages, Gujarati, Konkani, Marathi, Kannada, but retain African musical and spiritual traditions, notably the Goma/Dhamaal dance rooted in Ngoma drumming and ancestral worship.
    • Religion: Predominantly Muslim (≈ 99 % in Gujarat) with Hindu and Christian minorities; practices blend Sufi, African, and Indian folk elements.
    • Livelihoods & Economy: Depend on agriculture, forest labour, crafts, and daily wage work; socio-economic deprivation and limited access to education, health, housing persist.
    • Cultural Continuity: Maintain African-Indian fusion in music, attire, and cuisine; Marfa music in Hyderabad and Dhamaal dance near Sasan Gir remain iconic.
    • Sports & Identity: Active in boxing and football, using sport for youth empowerment and social mobility.

  • Property rights, tribals, and the gender parity gap

    Introduction

    Property ownership is not merely an economic question; it is fundamentally about power, dignity, and equality. For tribal women in India, exclusion from statutory inheritance rights has been one of the deepest forms of gender injustice. The Supreme Court’s July 2025 judgment striking down customary exclusions in tribal property rights represents both a historic corrective and a challenge: how to reconcile tribal customs with constitutional equality. The debate is timely, following International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples (August 9) and growing recognition of indigenous rights worldwide.

    Why in the News

    In Ram Charan and Ors. vs Sukhram and Ors. (July 17, 2025), the Supreme Court equated the exclusion of daughters from ancestral property in tribal communities with a violation of their fundamental right to equality. This is a landmark first, since earlier judgments such as Madhu Kishwar vs State of Bihar (1996) had refrained from striking down such customs. The judgment underscores the scale of injustice: as per the Agriculture Census 2015–16, only 16.7% of ST women own land compared to 83.3% of men. This ruling, therefore, marks a dramatic departure from precedent and could fundamentally reshape tribal women’s access to property, inheritance, and dignity.

    Why are tribal women excluded from property rights?

    1. Customary laws: Tribals in Scheduled Areas follow customary laws on marriage, succession, and adoption, which largely exclude women from land inheritance.
    2. Economic contributions ignored: Despite tribal women contributing more to farms than men, they are legally excluded.
    3. Fear of land alienation: Communities argue that women marrying outside the tribe may lead to loss of tribal land to outsiders.
    4. Communitarian land ownership myth: Though land is termed “communitarian,” in practice, compensation from land sales rarely goes to gram sabhas; male members retain control.

    How did the courts address this case?

    1. Trial and appellate courts: Initially dismissed the claim, holding that no Gond custom granted daughters property rights.
    2. High Court intervention: Rejected Hindu Succession Act application but granted equality, noting that denying women rights under “custom” entrenched discrimination.
    3. Supreme Court ruling: Declared exclusion of daughters unconstitutional, setting a precedent for gender justice in tribal inheritance.

    What does the historical judicial background reveal?

    1. Madhu Kishwar (1996): SC upheld customary exclusions, citing possible chaos in existing law.
    2. Prabha Minz vs Martha Ekka (2022, Jharkhand HC): Recognized Oraon women’s inheritance rights, since defendants could not prove a valid exclusionary custom.
    3. Kamala Neti (2022, SC): Affirmed tribal women’s property rights in land acquisition compensation.

    Why is codification or a new law necessary?

    1. Exclusion from Hindu Succession Act: Section 2(2) leaves tribal women outside its ambit.
    2. Proposal for Tribal Succession Act: A separate codified framework could balance equality with respect for indigenous identity.
    3. Precedent in Hindu & Christian laws: Their codification addressed similar issues of gender parity and succession, showing a workable model.

    What makes this issue urgent and significant?

    1. Data on landholding: Only 16.7% ST women own land, highlighting systemic exclusion.
    2. Link to empowerment: Property rights directly determine women’s bargaining power, social security, and protection against violence.
    3. Constitutional mandate: Article 14 (equality), Article 15 (non-discrimination), and Article 21 (dignity) demand urgent correction.
    4. Global context: International Day of Indigenous Peoples (August 9) reaffirms focus on indigenous rights.

    Conclusion

    The Supreme Court’s July 2025 judgment marks a historic turning point in advancing gender justice for tribal women. Yet, lasting reform requires more than judicial intervention, it needs legislative codification, social sensitization, and integration of constitutional values into tribal governance frameworks. Recognizing tribal women as equal stakeholders in ancestral property is not just a matter of law, but of justice, dignity, and true nation-building.

    Value Addition

    Important Data & Reports

    1. Agriculture Census 2015–16: Only 16.7% of ST women own land vs. 83.3% of ST men.
    2. NITI Aayog Report on Women and Land (2020): Land ownership is key to reducing vulnerability and increasing empowerment.
    3. UNDP Gender Inequality Index (2023): India ranked 108/191, reflecting persistent gaps.
    4. FAO Report: Women with secure land rights invest more in family nutrition and education.

    Judicial Landmarks on Tribal Women’s Property Rights

    1. Madhu Kishwar vs State of Bihar (1996):
      1. Petition challenged customary laws that excluded tribal women from inheritance.
      2. SC majority upheld exclusion, fearing “chaos” if customs were struck down.
      3. Significance: Reflected judicial conservatism, prioritizing customary law over equality.
    2. Prabha Minz vs Martha Ekka (2022, Jharkhand HC):
      1. Inheritance rights of Oraon tribal women upheld.
      2. Court said no proven custom showed continuous exclusion.
      3. Significance: Shift towards demanding evidentiary proof of discriminatory customs.
    3. Kamala Neti vs Special Land Acquisition Officer (2022, SC)
      1. Affirmed tribal women’s rights to compensation in land acquisition.
      2. Significance: Opened the door to gender equality in compensation and land rights.
    4. Ram Charan vs Sukhram (2025, SC):
      1. Landmark ruling equating exclusion of daughters in ancestral property to violation of fundamental right to equality.
      2. First time SC directly struck down discriminatory tribal custom.
      3. Significance: A watershed in gender-justice jurisprudence, aligning tribal customs with constitutional morality.

    Committees & Commissions

    1. Xaxa Committee (2014): Noted that customary laws often disadvantage tribal women; recommended reforms.
    2. Law Commission of India (2008, 205th Report): Stressed codification of tribal customary laws to ensure women’s rights.

    Schemes & Policies

    1. Forest Rights Act, 2006: Joint titles in land given to both spouses, but implementation remains skewed towards men.
    2. National Tribal Policy (Draft, 2006): Proposed codification of tribal laws and ensuring gender parity, but never fully adopted.
    3. Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao: Though focused on education, land inheritance could complement its goals.

    International Conventions

    1. CEDAW (Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, 1979): India is a signatory, obligating reforms against gender-based discrimination.
    2. UNDRIP (United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 2007): Recognizes indigenous women’s equal rights in land and property.

    Analytical Enrichment

    1. Custom vs Constitutional Morality: As per Justice Chandrachud (Navtej Johar, 2018), customs must yield to constitutional morality when in conflict.
    2. Intersectionality: Tribal women face a double disadvantage: gender + tribal identity.
    3. Nation-building dimension: Empowering tribal women in land rights ensures inclusive growth, reduces poverty, and strengthens democratic justice.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2024] Despite comprehensive policies for equity and social justice, underprivileged sections are not yet getting the full benefits of affirmative action envisaged by the Constitution. Comment.

    Linkage: This 2025 Supreme Court judgment on tribal women’s property rights directly illustrates the gap between constitutional promises of equality (Articles 14 & 15) and the reality of customary exclusions. Despite decades of affirmative action, only 16.7% of ST women own land, showing underutilization of protective policies. The case highlights how judicial intervention is now bridging the gap left by incomplete legislative and policy measures

  • In news: Apatani Tribe

    Why in the News?

    The facial tattoos and wooden nose plugs of Apatani women in Arunachal Pradesh, banned in the 1970s, now survive only among older generations, giving them anthropological importance.

    About Apatani Tribe:

    • Overview: A Scheduled Tribe (ST) concentrated in Ziro Valley, Lower Subansiri district, Arunachal Pradesh.
    • Language: Part of the Tani linguistic group, speaking a dialect of the Tibeto-Burman family.
    • Belief System: Paganistic faith worshipping the Sun (Ayo Danyii) and Moon (Atoh Piilo).
    • Festivals: Dree (prayers for harvest and prosperity), Myoko (friendship bonds), along with Yapung and Murung.
    • Global Recognition: Ziro Valley noted for traditional ecological knowledge, proposed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

    Unique Features:

    • Distinct Identity: Women traditionally had facial tattoos and wooden nose plugs; banned since the 1970s, seen only among older women today.
    • Sustainable Farming: Practise integrated rice-fish farming on terraced fields, growing rice varieties like Mipya, Emoh, Emeo along with fish (Ngihi).
    • Weaving Tradition: Women weave on a loin loom (Chichin), producing fabrics with geometric and zig-zag designs, dyed with natural extracts.
    • Bamboo Culture: Bamboo central to daily life, crafts, and rituals, symbolising ecological harmony.
    • Community Systems: Maintain sustainable social forestry and village institutions for conservation and cultural continuity.
    [UPSC 2014] Consider the following pairs:

    Tribe : State

    1. Limboo (Limbu) : Sikkim

    2. Karbi : Himachal Pradesh

    3. Dongaria Kondh : Odisha

    4. Bonda : Tamil Nadu

    Which of the above pairs are correctly matched?

    Options: (a) 1 and 3 only* (b) 2 and 4 only (c) 1, 3 and 4 only (d) 1, 2, 3 and 4

     

  • In news: Kerala’s Muthuvan Tribe

    Why in the News?

    The Muthuvan Adivasi Samudaya Sangam organised a convention on the International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples.

    In news: Kerala’s Muthuvan Tribe

    About Muthuvan Tribe:

    • Location: Indigenous tribe recognized as STs of the Anaimalai Hills (Kerala & Tamil Nadu); concentrated in Idukki, Ernakulam, Thrissur districts.
    • Etymology: Name means “one who carries weight on the back”, linked to migration from Madurai carrying children and the king.
    • Origins: Traced to the Pandya Kingdom; divided into Malayalam Muthuvan and Pandi Muthuvan dialect groups.
    • Settlements: “Kudis” deep in hill forests; houses made from reeds, leaves, mud.
    • Population: Around 15,000–25,000; among Kerala’s least educated tribes.
    • Governance: Kani System (village headman) and Chavadis (dormitory for unmarried youth).

    Distinct Features:

    • Language: Tamil-related dialect; endangered; preservation efforts underway.
    • Livelihood: Traditionally shifting cultivation (“Virippukrishi”); now grow cardamom, ginger, pepper, lemongrass.
    • Religion: Animism & spirit worship; reverence for Subramanya, Hindu deities, and Kannagi tradition.
    • Customs: Matrilineal descent, tribe endogamy & clan exogamy; collective eating (“koodithinnuthu”); herbal medicine knowledge kept within tribe.
    • Culture: Distinct attire; strong ecological ethics, harmonious forest–wildlife coexistence.
    • Festivals: Thai Pongal is main religious & harvest festival.
    [UPSC 2014] Which one of the following statements is not correct about Scheduled Tribes in India?

    (a) There is no definition of the Scheduled Tribe in the Constitution of India. (b) North-East India accounts for a little over half of the country’s tribal population. (c) The people known as Todas live in the Nilgiri area. (d) Lotha is a language spoken in Nagaland

     

  • Age Cap for Surrogacy in India

    Why in the News?

    The Supreme Court of India has reserved its judgment (i.e. final decision is pending) in a set of petitions challenging the age-related eligibility criteria under the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021.

    These cases involve couples who had initiated the surrogacy process prior to the enactment of the law on January 25, 2022, but are now disqualified due to the new age limits.

    About the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021

    • Objective: To regulate surrogacy in India, prohibit commercial surrogacy, and promote ethical, altruistic surrogacy based on medical necessity.
    • Scope:

    Key Provisions:

    • Type Permitted: Only altruistic surrogacy (unpaid surrogate mother) is allowed; commercial surrogacy is banned.
    • Eligibility Criteria for Intending Couples:
      • Legally married for at least 5 years.
      • Woman must be 23–50 years of age; man must be 26–55 years.
      • Must not have any living biological, adopted, or surrogate child.
    • Eligibility for Single Women:
      • Only widows or divorcees between 35–45 years are eligible.
      • Unmarried women are not eligible (currently under challenge).
    • Surrogate Mother Criteria:
      • Must be a close relative, married, and have at least one biological child.
      • Age: 25–35 years.
    • Certification Requirement: A Certificate of Essentiality is required, including:
      • Proof of infertility
      • Court order for parentage and custody
      • Insurance for the surrogate mother
    • Penalties: Commercial surrogacy invites imprisonment (up to 10 years) and fines (up to ₹10 lakh).
    • Regulatory Structure:
      • National Surrogacy Board at the central level.
      • State Surrogacy Boards at the state level.

    Issues Highlighted by the Supreme Court:

    • No Transitional Provision: The Act lacks a grandfather clause to protect couples who began the surrogacy process (e.g., embryo freezing) before the law came into effect in January 2022.
    • Rigid Age Limits: The court questioned the fairness of disqualifying couples solely on age grounds, especially when natural pregnancies at older ages are not prohibited.
    • Violation of Fundamental Rights: Petitioners argued the age restrictions violate Article 14 (equality before law) and Article 21 (right to reproductive autonomy and personal liberty).
    • Exclusion of Unmarried Women: The law permits only widows or divorcees (35–45 years) to pursue surrogacy, which the court noted may be arbitrary and discriminatory.
    • Law’s Intent vs. Impact: The court stressed that while the law aims to prevent commercial surrogacy, it should not unreasonably prevent genuine intending parents from having children.
    [UPSC 2020] In the context of recent advances in human reproductive technology, “Pronuclear Transfer” is used for:

    Options: (a) fertilization of egg in vitro by the donor sperm (b) genetic modification of sperm producing cells (c) development of stem cells into functional embryos (d) prevention of mitochondrial diseases in offspring*

     

  • Tribes in news: Khasi

    Why in the News?

    The Meghalaya High Court heard a PIL against the Khasi Lineage Act (preserves Khasi matrilineal traditions) for allegedly denying ST certificates to those with paternal surnames.

    Tribes in news: Khasi

    About Khasi Tribe:

    • Region: Indigenous to Meghalaya, Northeast India.
    • Linguistic Family: Belong to the Austroasiatic language group.
    • Language: Speak Khasi language, written in the Roman script, with several dialects.
    • Religion: Follow Niam Khasi (traditional animist faith); many are also Christians.
    • Mythical Origin: Believe in Ki Hynniew Trep – the seven ancestral clans who descended from heaven.
    • Cultural Identity: Strong emphasis on nature worship, oral traditions, and clan-based social structure.

    Special Customs and Traditions:

    • Inheritance System: Follows matrilineal inheritance – property and surname pass from mother to daughter.
    • Post-Marital Residence: Follow matrilocality, where the husband lives in the wife’s household.
    • Heir Designation: The Ka Khadduh (youngest daughter) is the custodian of family property and ancestral duties.
    • Marriage Rules: Practice clan exogamy – marriage within the same clan is prohibited to avoid incest.
    • Village Governance: Administered through Dorbar Shnong (village councils) and led by Syiem (traditional chiefs).
    • Major Festivals:
      • Shad Suk Mynsiem – A thanksgiving and harvest dance.
      • Shad Nongkrem – A royal ritual dance for communal prosperity.
    • Traditional Attire:
      • Women wear the Jainsem (a draped dress with silver jewelry).
      • Men wear tunic-style garments and ceremonial headgear.
    • Spiritual Practices: Emphasize ancestor veneration and worship of natural elements like stones, rivers, and groves.
    [UPSC 2014] With reference to ‘Changpa’ community of India, consider the following statements:

    1. They live mainly in the State of Uttarakhand. 2. They rear the Pashmina goats that yield a fine wool. 3. They are kept in the category of Scheduled Tribes.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    Options: (a) 1 only (b) 2 and 3 only* (c) 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 3

     

  • Hatti Tradition of Polyandry

    Why in the news?

    The recent polyandrous marriage in Himachal Pradesh has brought the spotlight back on the customary practices of the Hatti tribe.

    About Hatti Tribe:

    • Location: Indigenous to the Trans-Giri region (Himachal Pradesh) and Jaunsar Bawar region (Uttarakhand).
    • Rivers: Settled around the Giri and Tons rivers, tributaries of the Yamuna.
    • Etymology: “Hatti” derives from “haat” (traditional village markets).
    • Population: Around 2.5 lakh in 2011; now estimated at 3 lakh.
    • Traditional Governance: Khumbli (tribal council) handles disputes and key decisions.
    • Social Structure: Divided into upper castes (Bhat, Khash) and lower castes (Badhois).
    • Livelihood: Depend mainly on agriculture; eco-tourism also provides seasonal income.
    • Backwardness: Social and educational deprivation due to geographical isolation.
    • Scheduled Tribe Status:
      • Jaunsar Bawar (Uttarakhand) recognized in 1967.
      • Trans-Giri region (Himachal Pradesh) granted status in 2023–24.

    Legal Status of Polygamy and Polyandry:

    • Prohibition: Banned under Hindu Marriage Act (1955), Special Marriage Act, and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
    • Exemption for Scheduled Tribes: These laws do not automatically apply to Scheduled Tribes unless notified by the Central Government.
    • Constitutional Provision: Article 342 gives Scheduled Tribes distinct legal recognition.
    • Legal Exemption Clause: Section 2(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act exempts Scheduled Tribes unless otherwise notified.
    • Definition of Custom: Recognised if the practice is long-standing, reasonable, and not against public policy.
    • Judicial Requirement: Courts need clear evidence to validate customary laws.
    • Uniform Civil Code (Uttarakhand, 2024): Explicitly excludes Scheduled Tribes.
    • UCC Rules (2025): Confirms UCC does not apply to groups protected under Part XXI of the Constitution.

    Related Judicial Pronouncements:

    • Customs vs Fundamental Rights: The Supreme Court strikes down customs that violate equality, dignity, or liberty.
    • Triple Talaq Case: Declared unconstitutional as it violated Articles 14 and 21.
    • Ram Charan v. Sukhram (2024): Tribal women cannot be denied inheritance based on customary male preference.
    • Judicial Outlook: Customs must adapt and cannot override fundamental rights.
    [UPSC 2019] Which Article of the Constitution of India safeguards one’s right to marry the person of one’s choice?

    Options: (a) Article 19 (b) Article 21* (c) Article 25 (d) Article 29

     

  • [11th July 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Aiding India’s progress with choice, control and capital

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2019] Empowering women is the key to control population growth”. Discuss

    Linkage: The PYQ’s focus on “Empowering women” directly reflects this crucial aspect of granting individuals, particularly young women, the choice and control over their bodies and lives. The article further elaborates that true empowerment means equipping adolescents, especially girls, with the skills, education, and opportunities.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  The World Population Day 2025 has reignited global and national discussions on youth empowerment, reproductive rights, and falling fertility rates. With the theme “Empowering young people to create the families they want in a fair and hopeful world”, the UN highlights the need for informed reproductive choices and access to health, education, and economic opportunities, especially for India’s large youth population. The day also coincides with the release of the UNFPA’s State of World Population Report 2025, which warns that the real fertility crisis lies not in declining birth rates, but in the unmet reproductive goals due to financial, social, and infrastructural constraints. 

    Today’s editorial analyses the youth empowerment, reproductive rights, and falling fertility rates. This topic is important for  GS Paper I (Indian Society) in the UPSC mains exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    Recently, World Population Day 2025 has brought renewed attention to global and national debates on empowering youth, ensuring reproductive rights, and addressing the challenges of declining fertility rates.

    Why is youth empowerment essential for harnessing India’s demographic dividend?

    • India’s youth population is a major economic asset: With over 371 million people aged 15–29, India has the world’s largest youth population. If equipped with quality education, skills, health, and family planning services, this segment can become a powerful engine of economic growth and innovation.
    • Youth empowerment boosts national productivity and employment: Empowered youth can significantly reduce unemployment and enhance social outcomes. According to the World Bank and NITI Aayog, unlocking youth potential could increase India’s GDP by up to $1 trillion by 2030.
    • Empowerment ensures participation in nation-building: By promoting reproductive autonomy, gender equality, and economic independence, youth, especially young women, can participate in decision-making and shape their futures, contributing meaningfully to sustainable development.

    What barriers hinder reproductive autonomy and fertility choices in India?

    • Limited access to family planning services and information: A significant share of the population lacks access to modern contraceptives, comprehensive sexual and reproductive health education, and counselling. Eg: According to the UNFPA State of World Population Report 2025, 36% of Indian adults faced unintended pregnancies, while 30% had unmet reproductive goals, reflecting systemic gaps in reproductive healthcare access.
    • Socio-cultural norms and gender inequality: Patriarchal attitudes, early marriages, and taboos around women’s reproductive rights often prevent young women from making independent fertility decisions. Eg: Though child marriage rates have declined, they remain high at 23.3% (NFHS-5, 2019–21), indicating how cultural practices continue to limit women’s reproductive autonomy.
    • Economic insecurity and structural barriers: Financial constraints, lack of housing, quality childcare, and secure employment inhibit couples from achieving their desired family size. Eg: A UNFPA survey found that 38% of Indian respondents cited financial limitations and 22% housing constraintsas major reasons for not fulfilling fertility aspirations.

    How have schemes tackled child marriage and women’s empowerment?

    • Promoting girls’ education to delay early marriages: Schemes like Project Udaan in Rajasthan focused on keeping girls in secondary school using government scholarships, reducing the incidence of child marriage and teenage pregnancy.
    • Enhancing reproductive health awareness and services: Programmes such as Udaan and Advika improved access to modern contraceptives and sexual and reproductive health education, thereby strengthening reproductive agency among young women.
    • Empowering adolescents through life skills and leadership training: The Advika programme in Odisha helped prevent child marriage by providing life-skills training, leadership development, and child protection awareness across thousands of villages.
    • Fostering economic independence and employment: Project Manzil, implemented in Rajasthan, aligned skill training with young women’s aspirations and connected them to gender-sensitive workplaces, empowering over 16,000 women with employment and negotiation power.
    • Engaging communities to shift social norms: Behaviour change strategies under projects like Manzil worked to challenge harmful gender norms and involved families and communities, leading to reduced resistance against girls’ education and work.

    Why should population discourse focus on rights and gender equity over fertility panic?

    • Respecting reproductive autonomy prevents coercion: Framing falling fertility as a “crisis” can lead to target-driven pronatalist policies that pressure women to reproduce, threatening their right to bodily autonomy. Eg: In countries like Hungary and Iran, such policies have led to restrictions on abortion and contraception, undermining women’s freedom.
    • Empowering women yields long-term social gains: Promoting gender equality, economic participation, and education for women improves both fertility decisions and broader development outcomes. Eg: Nordic countries like Sweden focus on workplace equality and parental leave, ensuring women can choose when and whether to have children.
    • Inclusive policy design avoids harmful stereotyping: Fertility panic often ignores the needs of those who want children but face barriers, while blaming those who are voluntarily childfree. Eg: The UNFPA’s 2025 report shows that 40% of respondents globally had to forgo childbearing due to financial and structural obstacles, not personal choice.

    What can India learn from global responses to fertility decline?

    • Focus on enabling choices, not coercion: Countries like South Korea have spent billions on pronatalist incentives, but results remained limited until recent societal support systems (e.g., childcare, housing, and financial aid) improved. India must prioritize voluntary reproductive agency over target-driven incentives.
    • Promote gender equity in workforce and caregiving: Fertility policies that reinforce traditional gender roles have backfired. Instead of pressuring women to bear more children, countries like Sweden have boosted fertility by promoting gender-equal parenting, paternal leave, and women’s employment, which India can emulate.

    Way forward: 

    • Invest in rights-based reproductive health systems: Ensure universal access to quality contraceptives, safe abortion, maternal care, and infertility services, while safeguarding individuals’ reproductive autonomy through accurate health education and gender-sensitive policies.
    • Shift from fertility targets to gender equity: Focus on empowering women through education, economic independence, and childcare support, instead of promoting pronatalist incentives that risk reinforcing patriarchal norms and limiting personal choices.

  • The unregulated drink: rethinking alcohol control in India

    Why in the News?

    India’s rising alcohol use is not just a health issue — it is a major national problem affecting many areas. Even though experts say no amount of alcohol is safe, about one in four Indian men drink. Drinking heavily and often is now becoming more common across the country.

    What are the key risks of alcohol consumption in India?

    • Health Risks and Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs): Alcohol significantly increases the risk of cancer, liver disease, cardiovascular issues, and mental illnesses. Eg: Chronic alcohol use is a leading cause of liver cirrhosis and is linked to mouth and throat cancers in India.
    • Injuries and Accidents: Alcohol impairs judgement and coordination, leading to road accidents, falls, and workplace injuries. Eg: A large number of road traffic fatalities in India are associated with drunk driving, particularly among youth.
    • Mental Health and Suicide: Alcohol contributes to depression, anxiety, and is a major risk factor for suicide. Eg: The National Suicide Prevention Strategy (2022) identified alcohol use as a key driver of suicides in India.
    • Violence and Crime: Alcohol consumption is linked with domestic violence, sexual assault, and violent crimes. Eg: NFHS-5 data shows higher incidence of domestic violence in households where alcohol is consumed regularly.
    • Economic and Social Burden: Alcohol use contributes to ₹6.24 trillion in societal costs (2021), including healthcare, lost productivity, and law enforcement. Eg: The burden of alcohol-related diseases adds pressure to India’s public health system, particularly in rural areas.

    Why is a national alcohol policy necessary?

    • Fragmented and Inconsistent State Regulations: Alcohol laws, legal drinking age, pricing, and prohibition vary widely across States, causing regulatory confusion and uneven implementation. Eg: Bihar enforces prohibition, while States like Kerala promote toddy as a “natural beverage” under its Akbari Policy.
    • Public Health Emergency: Rising alcohol consumption is linked to cancer, mental illness, suicides, and injuries, posing a major national health burden. Eg: In 2021, alcohol-related harm caused 2.6 million DALYs and cost India ₹6.24 trillion in societal losses.
    • Lack of Centralised Coordination and Accountability: Regulatory responsibility is scattered across multiple ministries with no unified approach, weakening policy impact. Eg: Demand reduction is handled by the Ministry of Social Justice, while supply and harm reduction are spread across Health, Finance, and Home Affairs ministries.

    Who regulates alcohol demand and supply in India?

    • State governments: Regulate production, distribution, pricing, sale, and consumption.
    • Ministry of Social Justice: Leads demand reduction (e.g., Nasha Mukta Bharat Abhiyan).
    • Ministries of Home Affairs, Finance, and Health: Handle supply and harm reduction.
    • No single authority: Regulatory efforts are scattered and lack coordination.

    How do marketing and digital platforms influence alcohol use?

    • Surrogate Advertising and Brand Promotion: Despite legal restrictions, alcohol brands use surrogate advertising, brand sponsorships, and strategic product placements to maintain visibility. Eg: Alcohol brands often sponsor music festivals and sports events, indirectly promoting their products to younger audiences.
    • Social Media and Algorithmic Amplification: Social media algorithms boost alcohol-related content (ARC), while “alcohol influencers” glamorize drinking and normalize it among youth. Eg: Platforms like Instagram and YouTube promote posts showing alcohol as part of a luxury lifestyle, increasing its social appeal.
    • Attractive Packaging and Retail Tactics: Use of sleek bottles, premium branding, and Happy Hour deals enhance the aspirational value of alcohol and make it more appealing. Eg: Pre-mixed cocktails and flavoured spirits are marketed to attract young and first-time users.

    Way forward: 

    • Formulate a Unified National Alcohol Control Policy: Develop a comprehensive, evidence-based policy that aligns efforts across States and Central ministries, focusing on public health, harm reduction, and regulation of digital content.
    • Invest in Public Awareness and Education: Launch large-scale awareness campaigns highlighting the health risks of alcohol, similar to tobacco control programs, to shift social norms and perceptions. Eg: Educating youth on links between alcohol and mental illness, cancer, and poverty can reduce its aspirational appeal.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2024] In a crucial domain like the public healthcare system, the Indian State should play a vital role to contain the adverse impact of marketisation of the system. Suggest some measures through which the State can enhance the reach of public health care at the grassroots level.

    Linkage: This article explicitly highlights alcohol consumption as a significant public health issue in India, leading to injuries, mental illness, non-communicable diseases like cancer, and contributing to approximately 2.6 million Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) in 2021.