đŸ’„Join UPSC 2027,2028 Mentorship (July Batch) + XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Polity

  • [28th February 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: A process where free and fair elections will be a casualty

    PYQ Relevance:

    Q)To enhance the quality of democracy in India the Election Commission of India has proposed electoral reforms in 2016. What are the suggested reforms and how far are they significant to make democracy successful? (UPSC CSE 2017)

     

    Mentor’s Comment: UPSC mains have always focused on the Election Commission of India (2017) and role of the Election Commission of India (2022).

    The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Bill, 2023, is the first law made under Article 324(5) of the Constitution for appointing the CEC and ECs. It was introduced after the Supreme Court’s March 2023 order, which aimed to ensure fair appointments through a high-power committee.

    Today’s editorial discusses about the selection process of Election commissioners which is currently in news. This content would help in GS Paper2 mains.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Bill is flawed because it favors the candidate chosen by the government.

    What are the key provisions of the 2023 Bill for appointing?

    • Selection Committee Composition: A three-member committee chaired by the Prime Minister, with the Leader of Opposition (LoP) in the Lok Sabha and a Cabinet Minister (nominated by the Prime Minister) as members.
    • Search Committee: Headed by the Law Minister, along with two senior bureaucrats, to prepare a list of five eligible candidates for consideration.
    • Appointment Procedure: The President of India appoints the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs) based on the recommendations of the selection committee.
    • Seniority Principle: The senior-most Election Commissioner is to be appointed as the Chief Election Commissioner.
    • Binding Nature of Recommendations: It is mandatory for the President to appoint candidates recommended by the selection committee.

    Why has the new law been challenged?

    • Deviation from Supreme Court’s Directive: In March 2023, a five-judge Bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Justice K.M. Joseph, directed that appointments should be made by a high-powered committee comprising the Prime Minister, LoP, and the Chief Justice of India (CJI). The new law replaces the CJI with a Cabinet Minister, weakening the independence of the selection process.
    • Lack of Transparency: The search committee’s list of eligible candidates is not made public, reducing accountability.
    • Government’s Dominance: The composition ensures a built-in majority for the government’s preferred candidate, undermining free and fair selection.

    What constitutional infirmities have been identified in the selection process?

    • Government-Controlled Majority in the Selection Committee: The selection committee consists of the Prime Minister (Chairperson), a Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister, and the Leader of the Opposition (LoP).
      • This structure inherently creates a 2:1 majority in favor of the government, allowing the Prime Minister and the Cabinet Minister to dominate the decision-making process, undermining an independent and impartial selection.
    • Lack of Independent Oversight: Replacing the Chief Justice of India (CJI) with a Cabinet Minister weakens judicial oversight. This reduces checks and balances, as a Cabinet Minister is subordinate to the Prime Minister and unlikely to challenge the government’s preferences.
    • Violation of Fair and Objective Assessment: The process does not ensure objective evaluation of candidates due to the predetermined government majority. This may violate Article 14 (Right to Equality) as it denies a fair chance to qualified candidates outside the government’s favor and threatens the basic structure doctrine by compromising the independence of the Election Commission.

    What are the key observations of the Supreme Court? 

    • Independence of the Election Commission is Vital: The Supreme Court emphasized that the Election Commission of India (ECI) must be independent and impartial to ensure free and fair elections, which is a fundamental feature of democracy.
      • Example: In the Election Commission of India vs. State of Tamil Nadu (1993), the Court held that the ECI has plenary powers to conduct free and fair elections, reinforcing the need for independent appointments.
    • Need for a Neutral Selection Process: The Court highlighted that appointments to constitutional bodies like the ECI should be made through a neutral and independent process to prevent executive dominance.
      • Example: In March 2023, the Constitution Bench directed that, until a law is enacted, the Prime Minister, LoP, and the CJI should select the CEC and ECs to ensure balanced decision-making.
    • Concerns over Executive Overreach: The Court warned that allowing the executive to control appointments could undermine the institution’s autonomy and jeopardize the integrity of the electoral process.
      • Example: The Court observed that the historical practice of Prime Minister-led appointments was unsatisfactory, as it compromised the Commission’s independence.
    • Violation of Article 14 (Right to Equality): The Court observed that a selection process favoring the government could violate Article 14 by denying an equal opportunity to eligible candidates.
      • Example: The current law creates a government-majority panel, allowing political bias in appointments and limiting fair competition.
    • Upholding the Basic Structure Doctrine: The Court reiterated that free and fair elections are part of the basic structure of the Constitution, which cannot be compromised by biased appointment procedures.
      • Example: In S.R. Bommai vs. Union of India (1994), the Court affirmed that any law threatening the democratic process would violate the basic structure doctrine and could be struck down.

    Way forward: 

    • Restore Judicial Oversight: Reintroduce the Chief Justice of India (CJI) in the selection committee to ensure impartiality and independent oversight.
    • Enhance Transparency: Make the search committee’s candidate list public and adopt objective criteria for fair and unbiased selection.

  • Counting matters: On delimitation, federalism, the Census

    Why in the News?

    Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin has called for an all-party meeting on March 5 to discuss the delimitation exercise, aiming to start a national discussion on the issue.

    What is the primary concern of Tamil Nadu regarding the delimitation exercise?

    • Loss of Parliamentary Representation: Tamil Nadu fears that if delimitation is based solely on population size, it may lose Lok Sabha seats due to its lower population growth compared to northern States. For instance, while Tamil Nadu’s electorate grew by 171% (1971-2024), undivided Bihar’s grew by 233%, which could lead to a reduction in Tamil Nadu’s political influence.
    • Penalty for Population Control Success: Tamil Nadu is concerned that its effective population control measures will be penalized. States with higher fertility rates (e.g., Uttar Pradesh, Bihar) might gain seats, while those with lower growth like Tamil Nadu and Kerala could lose out, despite their better health and development indicators.

    What are the potential impacts of the delimitation exercise?

    • Shift in Political Power Dynamics: Delimitation could increase the number of representatives from northern States with higher populations (e.g., Uttar Pradesh and Bihar), thereby shifting political influence away from southern and western States that have implemented effective population control measures.
    • Federal Imbalance and Regional Inequality: Southern states that perform better in terms of health, education, and population control may feel penalized. For example, Kerala’s successful population policies could lead to fewer seats despite its contributions to national development, undermining the principle of cooperative federalism.
    • Resource Allocation Disparities: More seats for northern States could lead to greater influence over Union Budget allocations and central schemes, potentially reducing the share of resources to States with fewer representatives like Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh.
    • Political Tensions and Regional Discontent: Perceived favoritism towards northern States could increase regional tensions. For example, Tamil Nadu’s call for an all-party meeting reflects concerns that their voices will be marginalized, which may fuel political agitation and demands for policy reassessment.

    Why was the delimitation exercise frozen based on the 1971 Census?

    • To Ensure Fairness Among States with Varying Population Growth: This aimed to protect the political representation of States that successfully implemented population control policies.
      • Example: Southern States like Tamil Nadu and Kerala have lower population growth but would lose seats if delimitation were updated, while Uttar Pradesh and Bihar would gain due to their higher population increases.
    • To Maintain the Balance of Power in Federal Governance: The freeze ensured that the distribution of parliamentary seats did not disrupt the federal structure by over-representing certain regions. This preserved a geographical balance in national decision-making.
      • Example: Despite Tamil Nadu’s slower population growth, its 39 Lok Sabha seats remain unchanged since 1971, allowing it to maintain a significant voice in national policies.

    What steps has the Union government taken to clarify its position on maintaining proportional representation for Southern States?

    • Delimitation Freeze Extension: The government extended the freeze on parliamentary seat allocation based on population through the 42nd Amendment (1976) until 2001, and later extended it to 2026 through the 84th Amendment (2001).
    • Equitable Resource Allocation: The 15th Finance Commission (2021-26) used a balanced approach by including both population (2011 Census) and demographic performance to ensure fair distribution of resources, addressing concerns of Southern states.
      • Example: The Commission allocated 12.5% weightage for demographic performance, rewarding states with better population control.
    • Consultative Processes: The Union government engages with Southern states through inter-state council meetings and Finance Commission consultations to address their concerns about fair representation and resource distribution.
      • Example: In 2023, the government held deliberations on the implications of delimitation and reassured Southern states of equitable consideration in future seat revisions.

    Way forward: 

    • Balanced Delimitation Framework: Implement a hybrid approach that considers both population size and demographic performance to ensure fair representation without penalizing states with successful population control policies.
    • Strengthen Federal Dialogue: Regular consultative mechanisms through Inter-State Councils and Finance Commissions to address regional concerns, ensuring equitable resource allocation and preserving the spirit of cooperative federalism.

  • Why are PwDs worried about DPDP rules?

    Why in the News?

    The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) plans to complete public consultations on the draft Rules for the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, by March 5. Meanwhile, disability rights activists are urging changes to a key provision of the Act.

    Why are persons with disabilities concerned about a certain provision in the draft Rules of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023?

    • Infringement on Autonomy and Decision-Making Capacity: Section 9(1) clubs adult PwDs with children, requiring consent from a legal guardian for processing personal data. This undermines their ability to make independent decisions.
      • Example: An adult with a physical disability wanting to access online banking may be restricted if the platform requires guardian consent.
    • Lack of Clarity and Ambiguity in Implementation: The Act does not clearly outline how consent should be obtained across various disabilities and degrees of severity, leading to confusion.
      • Example: A person with limited cognitive impairment under “limited guardianship” may still be treated as entirely incapable.
    • Conflict with UNCRPD Principles: The provision conflicts with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), which emphasizes supported decision-making over substituted decision-making.
      • Example: Under the RPWD Act, a PwD may receive assistance only when necessary, but the DPDP Act assumes total incapacity if a legal guardian exists, contradicting the UNCRPD framework.
    • Concerns About Privacy and Data Security: Platforms may need to collect sensitive information (like whether a user has a disability) to verify guardianship status, raising privacy concerns.
    • Exclusion from Digital Services: The additional procedural burden on PwDs and data fiduciaries could lead to exclusion from essential digital platforms.

    How do guardianships for Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) function? 

    • Governed by Two Laws:
      • Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPWD) Act, 2016:  Allows for limited guardianship, where PwDs are supported in making specific legal decisions. This aligns with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) by preserving decision-making autonomy.
      • National Trust (NT) Act, 1999: Provides for full guardianship for individuals with autism, cerebral palsy, intellectual disabilities, or multiple disabilities. This model is more paternalistic and conflicts with the UNCRPD’s emphasis on autonomy.
    • Practical Challenges: Although the RPWD Act emphasizes limited guardianship, PwDs often report that their guardians control all aspects of their lives. The NT Act’s rigid framework assumes a lack of decision-making capacity without defining clear standards for assessing it.

    How are legal guardians defined under the draft rules?

    • legal guardians: Under the draft Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025, legal guardians are defined as individuals appointed through specific legal frameworks to act on behalf of persons with disabilities (PwDs).
      • Data Fiduciaries are required to verify the guardian’s appointment by a court of law, designated authority, or local-level committee under applicable guardianship laws.

    Who are data fiduciaries and data principals?

    • Data Fiduciaries: Entities (organizations, companies, or individuals) that collect, store, and process personal data while determining the purpose and means of such processing under the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023.
    • Data principals: Individuals whose personal data is being collected, processed, or stored. This term generally refers to users, consumers, or citizens under the DPDP Act.

    Where does the conflict lie?  

    • Presumption of Incapacity vs. Legal Recognition of Capacity: The DPDP Act assumes adult PwDs lack the capacity to give consent if a guardian is involved, whereas the RPWD Act recognizes their legal capacity and promotes their right to make decisions.
      • Example: A person with mild intellectual disability working in a corporate setting may need guardian approval for routine data-related tasks, despite their ability to understand and consent.
    • Data Privacy vs. Intrusive Verification: The DPDP Act may require platforms to collect and verify sensitive disability information, potentially breaching privacy rights, while the UNCRPD emphasizes the right to privacy without discrimination.
      • Example: An online service requiring disability verification for consent could store unnecessary sensitive data, increasing risks of unauthorized access or misuse.

    Way forward: 

    • Adopt a Supported Decision-Making Model: Align the DPDP Act with the RPWD Act and UNCRPD by recognizing limited guardianship and allowing PwDs to provide independent consent with appropriate support when needed.
    • Ensure Privacy and Minimize Data Collection: Limit the collection of sensitive disability information to essential cases, ensuring purpose limitation and data minimization while protecting PwDs’ privacy rights.

    Mains PYQ:

    Q Impact of digital technology as a reliable source of input for rational decision-making is a debatable issue. Critically evaluate with a suitable example. (UPSC IAS/2021)

  • Should a third language be compulsory?

    Why in the News?

    The Central government and the Tamil Nadu government are disagreeing over the three-language rule in schools under the New Education Policy (NEP), 2020.

    Why is the Union government withholding funds under the Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan from Tamil Nadu?

    • Non-compliance with the three-language formula: The Union government has linked the release of funds under the Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan to the implementation of the three-language formula outlined in the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. Tamil Nadu’s refusal to adopt this formula has led to a standoff.
    • Policy disagreement: The Tamil Nadu government views the three-language policy as a tool for Hindi imposition and insists on continuing with its two-language policy (Tamil and English).
    • Financial leverage: The Centre is using financial incentives to push for uniform adoption of the NEP guidelines across States, causing friction with Tamil Nadu.

    When was the three-language policy first introduced, and what were its key mandates?

    • The three-language policy was first introduced in the National Policy on Education (NPE), 1968 to promote multilingualism and foster national unity.

    Key Mandates of the Three-Language Policy:

    • First Language – Mother Tongue/Regional Language: Students must learn their mother tongue or the regional language of the state. Example: Kannada is the first language in Karnataka, while Tamil is the first language in Tamil Nadu.
    • Second Language – Hindi or English: In Hindi-speaking states, students must learn English or another modern Indian language. In non-Hindi-speaking states, Hindi is taught as the second language. Example: Hindi is the second language in Kerala, while English is the second language in Uttar Pradesh.
    • Third Language – Another Indian Language or English: In Hindi-speaking states, students must learn a non-Hindi Indian language or Sanskrit. In non-Hindi-speaking states, English is usually taught as the third language. Example: Sanskrit as a third language in Madhya Pradesh, while English is the third language in Tamil Nadu.

    What difficulties do government schools face in implementing additional language courses?

    • Shortage of Qualified Language Teachers: Many government schools lack trained teachers for third-language instruction. Example: In rural Odisha, schools often struggle to find Hindi teachers, affecting the implementation of the three-language formula.
    • Limited Resources and Infrastructure: Schools lack textbooks, teaching aids, and language labs, making it difficult to provide quality language education. Example: Government schools in Bihar face a shortage of English textbooks, leading to poor learning outcomes.
    • Burden on Students and Poor Learning Outcomes: Many students struggle to grasp multiple languages simultaneously, especially those from economically weaker backgrounds. Example: In Tamil Nadu, students from rural areas find it difficult to learn Hindi as a third language due to limited exposure and practice opportunities.

    What are the basic issues in Schools? 

    • Poor Learning Outcomes: ASER 2022 found 60% of Class V students unable to read a Class II-level text. Similarly, ASER 2023 revealed 25% of youth (14-18 years) cannot fluently read basic texts in their regional language, highlighting foundational literacy gaps.
    • Inadequate Public Investment in Education: Despite the NEP 2020 target of 6% of GDP, actual spending on education remains at 4-4.5% of GDP. This underfunding restricts access to quality resources, affecting learning outcomes, especially in rural areas.
    • Disparity in Funding Allocation: 85% of elementary education costs are borne by States, while the Centre contributes only 15%. This fiscal imbalance creates unequal resource distribution, impacting teacher availability and infrastructure quality in less-developed regions.

    What are the constitutional provisions regarding the official languages of the Union and the States in India?

    • Official Language of the Union (Article 343): Hindi in Devanagari script is the official language of the Union.
      • English was to be used for official purposes for 15 years after the Constitution came into effect (until 1965), but the Official Languages Act, 1963 extended its use indefinitely alongside Hindi.
    • Language of the States (Article 345): State legislatures can adopt one or more languages in use in the State or Hindi as the official language for State administration. Example: Tamil Nadu uses Tamil, Punjab uses Punjabi, and Maharashtra uses Marathi as their official languages.
    • Promotion of Hindi (Article 351): It is the Union’s duty to promote the spread of Hindi to serve as a medium for all elements of India’s composite culture while drawing from Sanskrit and other Indian languages.
    • Safeguard for Linguistic Minorities (Article 350A & 350B)
      • 350A: The State must provide primary education in the mother tongue of linguistic minority groups.
      • 350B: Establishment of a Special Officer for Linguistic Minorities to investigate and report on their safeguards.

    What steps can be taken to resolve the conflict between the Centre and the Tamil Nadu government? (Way forward)

    • Promote Cooperative Federalism through Dialogue: Establish a joint consultative body to discuss language policies and ensure that both regional concerns and national goals are addressed. Example: Regular Centre-State meetings under the Inter-State Council could facilitate consensus on the language policy without coercion.
    • Grant Flexibility in Implementing Language Policies: Allow States to adapt the three-language policy based on their linguistic diversity and educational capacity while ensuring basic proficiency in major languages. Example: Tamil Nadu could continue its two-language policy while introducing optional third-language courses without affecting funding under Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan.

    Mains PYQ:

    Q National Education Policy 2020 isin conformity with the Sustainable Development Goal-4 (2030). It intends to restructure and reorient education system in India. Critically examine the statement. (UPSC IAS/2020)

  • The RTI is now the ‘Right to Deny Information’

    Why in the News?

    The RTI Act allowed people to question the government, but the government soon tried to weaken it.

    Why is the RTI now being viewed as the ‘right to deny information’?

    • Judicial Interpretations Diluting the Scope of RTI: Key court judgments, like Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs. CIC (2012), have expanded the definition of “personal information” under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. This allows authorities to deny information about public servants’ misconduct, assets, and disciplinary records.
    • Delayed Appointments and Case Backlogs: Government delays in appointing Information Commissioners have led to massive backlogs, reducing the effectiveness of the RTI. Information is often provided after significant delays, turning it into a “right to history.”
    • Narrow Interpretation of Public Interest: The Supreme Court’s ruling in CBSE vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay (2011) warned against the “misuse” of RTI for seeking all types of information, limiting disclosures that could allegedly disrupt administrative efficiency.
      • Example: Information requests related to public policy decisions are frequently denied on vague grounds of protecting “national integration” or preventing “administrative burden.”

    What have been the key achievements of the RTI since its inception?

    • Increased Transparency and Accountability: The RTI Act has empowered citizens to hold public authorities accountable by providing access to government records and decisions. Example: In 2007, RTI applications exposed corruption in the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGA), leading to better monitoring and payment transparency.
    • Exposing Corruption and Misuse of Power: RTI has played a crucial role in uncovering major scams and irregularities, prompting legal and policy reforms. Example: The 2G spectrum scam (2008) involving massive financial irregularities in telecom licensing was brought to light through RTI inquiries, leading to the cancellation of 122 telecom licenses by the Supreme Court.
    • Empowering Marginalized Communities: Rural and marginalized groups have used RTI to access entitlements like ration cards, pensions, and housing schemes, ensuring their socio-economic rights. Example: In Rajasthan, villagers used RTI to reveal discrepancies in public distribution system (PDS) records, ensuring access to their rightful food supplies.

    What are the limitations of RTI? 

    • Exemptions under Section 8: Certain categories of information are exempt from disclosure, such as matters related to national security, sovereignty, and personal privacy. Example: Information related to defense strategies or confidential Cabinet discussions cannot be accessed through RTI.
    • Delayed or Incomplete Responses: Bureaucratic delays and lack of accountability often lead to incomplete or delayed information, undermining the RTI’s effectiveness. Example: In 2021, RTI applications regarding COVID-19 vaccine procurement faced significant delays, limiting public scrutiny during a critical period.
    • Threats and Intimidation of RTI Activists: Whistleblowers and activists who use RTI to expose corruption face harassment, threats, and even violence. Example: Amit Jethwa, an RTI activist from Gujarat, was murdered in 2010 after exposing illegal mining near the Gir Forest.

    Does India have an alternative to the RTI?

    • Public Services Delivery Laws (Right to Public Services Act): Various states in India have enacted Public Services Delivery Laws to ensure the timely delivery of public services and redress grievances.
      • Example: Madhya Pradesh was the first state to implement the Right to Public Services Act (2010), which mandates timely delivery of services like issuing ration cards and driving licenses.
    • Whistleblower Protection Act (2014): This law protects individuals who expose corruption and wrongdoing in government institutions. It allows whistleblowers to report issues while keeping their identity confidential.
      • Example: An employee of a public sector bank can report irregularities without fear of retaliation under this Act. However, delays in operationalizing the law limit its effectiveness.
    • Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act (2013): This law establishes an independent body (Lokpal) at the central level and Lokayuktas at the state level to investigate corruption among public officials.
      • Example: In 2019, the Lokpal was appointed to investigate allegations of corruption against high-level public servants, including the Prime Minister (with conditions).

    Way forward:

    • Strengthen Institutional Framework: Ensure timely appointment of Information Commissioners, enforce penalties for delayed/incomplete responses, and streamline processes to reduce case backlogs.
    • Enhance Legal Safeguards: Amend the Whistleblower Protection Act for better security of RTI activists and clarify exemptions under Section 8 to prevent misuse while balancing public interest.

    Mains PYQ:

    Q “Recent amendment to the Right to Information Act will have a profound impact on the autonomy and independence of the Information Commission”. Discuss. (UPSC IAS/2020)  

  • [24th February 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: What has SC previously ruled on gag orders?

    PYQ Relevance:

    Q) What do 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 CSE 2014)

     

    Mentor’s Comment: UPSC mains have always focused on “freedom of speech and expression”  (2014), and A man is but the product of his thoughts. What he thinks he becomes.” — M.K. Gandhi (2019).

    A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and N. Kotiswar Singh imposed strict conditions, barring Allahbadia and his team from posting on social media until further notice and ordering him to surrender his passport to the police. These conditions go against previous Supreme Court rulings that warn against imposing excessive restrictions that limit personal freedom while granting temporary relief.

    Today’s editorial discusses temporary protection from arrest and the factors the Supreme Court considers when granting interim relief to an accused. This information is valuable for GS Paper 2 and 4 in the UPSC Mains examination.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    On February 18, the Supreme Court granted temporary protection from arrest to podcaster and influencer Ranveer Allahbadia.

    What stringent conditions did the Supreme Court impose on podcaster and influencer Ranveer Allahbadia? 

    • Prohibition on Social Media Activity: The Court barred Allahbadia and his associates from posting any content on YouTube or other audio/video platforms until further orders. Example: Similar restrictions were rejected in Mohammed Zubair’s case (2021), where the Court held that preventing social media activity violates free speech rights.
    • Surrender of Passport: He was directed to surrender his passport to the police to prevent him from leaving the country. Example: In Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022), the Court ruled that conditions like passport surrender must not be disproportionate or impossible to comply with.
    • Gag Order on Professional Work: The Court imposed a gag order restricting him from airing new content until further notice. Example: In Rehana Fathima’s case (2021), the Supreme Court overturned a similar order that restricted the activist from expressing her views online.
    • Monitoring of Public Statements: Allahbadia’s public statements and activities on digital platforms are subject to strict oversight to prevent further controversies. Example: In Frank Vitus v. NCB (2024), the Court struck down a bail condition requiring the accused to share their Google Maps location PIN, calling it an invasion of privacy.
    • Single Investigation for Multiple FIRs: The Court may consolidate the multiple FIRs against him under a single investigation to prevent harassment. Example: In Parteek Bansal v. State of Rajasthan (2022), the Supreme Court denounced the filing of multiple FIRs for the same offense as a form of state harassment.

    What factors does the top court consider when granting interim relief to an accused? 

    • Tampering with Evidence (Interfering with Investigation): The Court considers whether interim relief might allow the accused to destroy, fabricate, or conceal evidence. Example: In Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022), the Court cautioned against imposing impossible bail conditions while ensuring the investigation remains uncompromised.
    • Nature and Gravity of the Offense: The seriousness of the alleged crime and its potential social impact are weighed when deciding on interim relief. Example: In Arnab Goswami v. State of Maharashtra (2020), interim bail was granted, with the Court emphasizing the need to prevent misuse of the law for political harassment.
    • Protection of Fundamental Rights: The Court considers the accused’s fundamental rights, particularly personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. Example: In Frank Vitus v. NCB (2024), the Court struck down a bail condition requiring the accused to share their Google Maps location PIN, calling it a violation of privacy rights.
    • Flight Risk (Likelihood of Absconding): The Court evaluates whether the accused is likely to flee the country or jurisdiction to evade legal proceedings. Example: In Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement (2019), anticipatory bail was denied due to concerns about flight risk and the accused’s ability to influence the investigation.
    • Intimidation of Witnesses (Influencing or Threatening Witnesses): The possibility of the accused threatening, influencing, or coercing witnesses is assessed to ensure a fair trial. Example: In State of Gujarat v. Amit Shah (2010), bail was granted after the Court found no direct evidence suggesting that the accused would intimidate witnesses.

    What has the Court previously stated about gag orders?

    • Gag Orders Violate Freedom of Speech: The Court has consistently held that gag orders restricting speech violate Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and expression. Example: In Mohammed Zubair v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2021), the Court refused to restrict Zubair from tweeting while on bail, stating it would create a chilling effect on free speech.
    • Prior Restraint is Constitutionally Disfavored: The Court has cautioned that prior restraint—preventing speech before it occurs—is unconstitutional except in exceptional circumstances like public order or national security. Example: In R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu (1994), the Court ruled that prior censorship is permissible only when there is compelling public interest.
    • Gag Orders Must Be Proportional: Any restriction on speech must be narrowly tailored and proportionate to the harm being prevented. Broad, vague restrictions are unconstitutional. Example: In Rehana Fathima v. State of Kerala (2021), the Court struck down a bail condition prohibiting Fathima from expressing her views on social media, calling it disproportionate.
    • Right to Practice a Profession: Gag orders must not prevent individuals from pursuing their profession, especially when their work depends on public communication. Example: In Vinod Dua v. Union of India (2021), the Court quashed FIRs against journalist Vinod Dua, stating that his journalistic work was protected under Article 19(1)(a).
    • Interference with Judicial Process is an Exception: The Court has upheld gag orders only when speech could obstruct the judicial process or prejudice a fair trial. Example: In Sahara India Real Estate Corp. v. SEBI (2012), the Court allowed temporary restrictions to prevent media trials from affecting the outcome of legal proceedings.

    Way forward: 

    • Balance Fundamental Rights with Fair Trial: Ensure that any restrictions on speech, including gag orders, are narrow, proportionate, and imposed only when necessary to protect the integrity of judicial proceedings while safeguarding freedom of expression under Article 19(1)(a).
    • Establish Clear Guidelines for Interim Relief: Formulate uniform guidelines to regulate conditions like passport surrender, social media bans, and public statement monitoring, ensuring they are consistent with constitutional protections and do not impose disproportionate burdens on the accused.

  • What are Zonal Councils?

    Why in the News?

    Union Home Minister chaired the 27th meeting of the Western Zonal Council in Pune.

    About Zonal Councils in India:

    Details
    Origin & Purpose
    • Proposed by Jawaharlal Nehru in 1956 to promote cooperation among states after reorganization.
    • Established under the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, with the goal of resolving inter-state disputes and ensuring balanced socio-economic development.
    Composition & Structure
    • Five Zonal Councils + North-Eastern Council (NEC).
    • Chairperson: Union Home Minister.
    • Vice-Chairperson: Chief Ministers (rotating one-year term).
    • Each state is represented by its Chief Minister + 2 ministers, with NITI Aayog participation.
    • Standing Committees of Chief Secretaries review issues before full meetings.
    Zonal Councils & Member States
    • Northern: Haryana, HP, J&K, Punjab, Rajasthan, Delhi, Chandigarh.
    • Central: Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, UP, MP.
    • Eastern: Bihar, Jharkhand, Odisha, West Bengal.
    • Western: Goa, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Daman & Diu.
    • Southern: AP, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Puducherry.
    • North-Eastern Council (NEC): Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, Tripura, Mizoram, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Sikkim (added in 2002).
    Functions & Recent Developments
    • Resolves inter-state disputes, improves Centre-State coordination, addresses border issues, economic planning, transport, and linguistic minorities.
    • Strengthens cooperative federalism and regional development.
    • 2018: Union Home Minister became NEC Chairperson.
    • Modi government transformed Zonal Councils from advisory bodies to action-oriented platforms.

     

    PYQ:

    [2013] Which of the following bodies is/are not mentioned in the Indian Constitution?

    1. National Development Council

    2. Planning Commission

    3. Zonal Councils

    Select the correct answer using the codes given below.

    (a) 1 and 2 only

    (b) 2 only

    (c) 1 and 3 only

    (d) 1, 2 and 3

  • [22nd February 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Converting court case backlogs into treasure troves

    PYQ Relevance:

    Q) Critically examine the Supreme Court’s judgement on ‘National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014’ with reference to appointment of judges of higher judiciary in India.

    (UPSC CSE 2017)

    Mentor’s Comment:  UPSC Prelims have focused on ‘appointment of judges of higher judiciary in India’ (in 2017), and  ‘Arbitration and Conciliation’ (2015).

    Every Chief Justice of India and senior member of the higher judiciary faces the persistent challenge of case backlogs. Currently, the Supreme Court has around 82,000 pending cases, High Courts have over 62 lakh, and lower courts nearly five crores. About 50 lakh cases have been pending for over 10 years. India can address its legal backlog by adopting mediation as an effective solution for faster and amicable dispute resolution. 

    Today’s editorial discusses the pending cases in the Supreme Court and explores alternative solutions. This is useful for GS Paper 2 (Polity) in the UPSC Mains.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    Recently, the Supreme Court has around 82,000 pending cases, High Courts have over 62 lakh, and lower courts have nearly five crores.

    What is the status of case backlogs in India?

    • Supreme court: As of recent data, there are approximately 45.3 million pending cases in lower courts across India, with 34.3 million being criminal cases and 10.9 million civil cases. The Supreme Court has a backlog of nearly 83,000 cases, while high courts collectively have about 5.9 million pending cases.
    • High Court: As of recent data, there are approximately 62.39 lakh (6.24 million) pending cases across all High Courts in India, with a significant portion being more than a year old6. This includes both civil and criminal cases.
      • Nearly 62,000 cases have been pending for over 30 years in various High Courts, including some dating back to the early 1950s. This highlights the chronic issue of long-standing pendency affecting the judicial system.

    How can court case backlogs be transformed into valuable resources?

    • Promoting Mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): Identify and refer suitable cases (e.g., family disputes, commercial disagreements) for mediation to reduce court workload. Example: The Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre has successfully resolved thousands of cases through mediation, reducing pendency and fostering amicable settlements.
    • Leveraging Data Analytics for Case Management: Use AI and data analytics to categorize cases by complexity, urgency, and likelihood of settlement for faster resolution. Example: The Supreme Court’s SUPACE (Supreme Court Portal for Assistance in Court Efficiency) uses AI to assist judges in analyzing and prioritizing cases.
    • Expanding Fast-Track and Special Courts: Establish dedicated courts for high-pendency areas like cheque-bouncing cases (Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act) and sexual offenses. Example: Fast-track courts for rape cases under the POCSO Act have expedited justice delivery in many states, reducing backlog in sensitive matters.
    • Implementing E-Courts and Digital Filing: Shift to e-filing and virtual hearings to streamline processes and reduce procedural delays. Example: The E-Courts Project has enabled online case filing and digital record management, reducing paperwork and improving case tracking.
    • Imposing Costs for Frivolous Litigation: Introduce punitive costs for unnecessary appeals and frivolous cases to discourage misuse of the judicial system. Example: The Supreme Court has imposed heavy fines in cases of “Public Interest Litigations” (PILs) found to be motivated by personal agendas.

    Should India consider adopting mediation as a dispute resolution method?

    • Faster and Cost-Effective Resolution: Mediation is quicker and less expensive than prolonged litigation, saving time and financial resources for both parties. Example: In commercial disputes, companies like Tata and Reliance have used mediation to resolve conflicts, avoiding lengthy and costly legal battles.
    • Preserving Relationships: Mediation focuses on mutual agreement, fostering cooperation and maintaining relationships, which is crucial in family and business matters. Example: Matrimonial disputes in family courts are often referred to mediation, leading to amicable settlements and reducing emotional distress.
    • Encouraging Confidentiality and Flexibility: Mediation proceedings are confidential, protecting sensitive information and offering flexible solutions tailored to the parties’ needs. Example: Intellectual Property (IP) disputes in the Bombay High Court have been successfully mediated, protecting trade secrets while resolving conflicts.
    • Global Best Practice Alignment: Many countries, including the United States and Singapore, prioritize mediation to resolve civil and commercial disputes efficiently. Example: India’s Commercial Courts Act, 2015, mandates pre-institution mediation for commercial cases, aligning with international standards and reducing case influx.
    • Reducing Judicial Backlog: Mediation can significantly reduce the burden on courts by resolving disputes outside the formal judicial system. Example: The Delhi Dispute Resolution Society has successfully mediated thousands of civil and matrimonial disputes, easing pressure on the Delhi High Court.

    What are the steps taken by the Indian government? 

    • Enactment of the Mediation Act, 2023: The Mediation Act provides a statutory framework for mediation, aiming to encourage institutional mediation and enforce mediated settlement agreements. It also establishes a body for registering mediators and promotes community and online mediation.
    • Introduction of Court-Annexed Mediation Centres: Mediation centres have been set up in various High Courts and District Courts to facilitate dispute resolution. Example: The Delhi High Court Mediation Centre (Samadhan) and Bangalore Mediation Centre successfully mediate thousands of cases annually.
    • Incorporating Mediation in Specific Laws: Laws like the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 mandate pre-institution mediation for commercial disputes, promoting early settlements.

    Way forward: 

    • Strengthen Mediation Infrastructure: Expand court-annexed mediation centres, train mediators, and promote online dispute resolution (ODR) to enhance accessibility and efficiency.
    • Policy and Public Awareness: Implement awareness campaigns to encourage mediation adoption and introduce incentives for parties choosing alternative dispute resolution methods.

  • Supreme Court’s Ruling on Remission

    Why in the News?

    In a historic judgment, the Supreme Court of India has ruled that prisoners eligible for remission under state policies must be considered for release even if they do not apply for it.

    This decision comes as part of the suo motu case “In Re: Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail”, initiated in 2021 to address prison overcrowding.

    Supreme Court’s Ruling: Key Takeaways

    • The SC overruled its earlier stance in:
      • Sangeet v. State of Haryana (2013) – Held that remission was not automatic and required a convict’s application.
      • Mohinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2013) – Ruled that courts cannot grant remission suo motu.
    • The new ruling recognizes the existence of remission policies in states and holds that:
      • Prison superintendents must initiate remission proceedings for eligible convicts.
      • Failure to consider eligible prisoners for remission violates Article 14 (Right to Equality).

    What is Remission?

    • Remission refers to the reduction of a prison sentence without altering the conviction.
    • It is different from pardon or commutation, which may involve modifying or canceling the sentence entirely.

    Legal Provisions on Remission

    • The power of remission is governed by:
      • Section 473 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (formerly Section 432 of CrPC) – Grants state governments the power to remit sentences at any time under specific conditions.
      • Section 475 of BNSS (formerly Section 433A of CrPC) – Prevents remission for life convicts guilty of crimes punishable by death until they serve at least 14 years.
      • Articles 72 & 161 of the Constitution – Provide remission powers to the President and Governors at the Union and State levels.
    • Earlier, remission was initiated only when a prisoner applied for it, but the new ruling removes this necessity if states already have structured remission policies.

    Impact of the Ruling on Prison Reforms

    • India’s prison population far exceeds capacity, with a 131.4% occupancy rate (2022 NCRB data).
    • Over 75% of prisoners are undertrials—this ruling may not directly help them, but it could ease congestion by enabling timely release of eligible convicts.
    • The new ruling ensures all eligible prisoners get equal consideration, preventing biases in prison administration.
    • International standards (like UN Nelson Mandela Rules) emphasize prisoner rights and rehabilitation.
    • The judgment upholds fairness and reintegration into society.

    PYQ:

    [2014] Instances of the President’s delay in commuting death sentences has come under public debate as denial of justice. Should there be a time specified for the President to accept/reject such petitions? Analyse.

     

  • SC stays Lokpal order on power over judges

    Why in the News?

    The Supreme Court recently halted a Lokpal order that sought to include High Court judges under its jurisdiction, calling the anti-corruption body’s interpretation “very disturbing.”

    Why did the Supreme Court stay the Lokpal order?

    • Violation of Judicial Independence (Article 50 & Article 121): The Supreme Court held that bringing High Court judges under Lokpal’s jurisdiction undermines judicial independence, which is a part of the Basic Structure Doctrine.
      • Article 50 mandates the separation of the judiciary from the executive, preventing interference in judicial functioning.
      • Article 121 prohibits Parliament from discussing the conduct of judges except in matters of impeachment, reinforcing judicial autonomy.
    • Judges Are Appointed Under the Constitution (Article 124 & Article 217): The Supreme Court rejected Lokpal’s argument that High Courts were created by British laws, emphasizing that all judges are appointed under the Constitution.
      • Article 124 establishes the Supreme Court, while Article 217 governs the appointment of High Court judges, ensuring their independence from executive control.
    • Judicial Oversight Is an Internal Process (Article 124(4) & Article 217(1)(b)): The Supreme Court reaffirmed that judicial misconduct should be handled internally, either through the in-house procedure or the impeachment process.
      • Article 124(4) (for Supreme Court judges) and Article 217(1)(b) (for High Court judges) provide for removal only through Parliamentary impeachment, making external investigations by the Lokpal unconstitutional.

    What is suo motu case? 

    Suo motu (Latin: on its own motion) refers to the Supreme Court or High Courts taking up a case on their own initiative, without a formal petition being filed.

    In which circumstances do courts in India exercise suo motu powers?

    • Constitutional Concerns (Separation of Powers, Judicial Independence): Courts intervene suo motu when an issue threatens constitutional principles like the separation of powers or judicial independence.
      • Example: In re: Article 370 of the Constitution (2023) – The Supreme Court took up the matter of abrogation of Article 370 to examine whether the Union government’s decision upheld constitutional principles.
    • Fundamental Rights Violations: Courts act suo motu when fundamental rights under Articles 14 (equality), 19 (freedom), and 21 (right to life) are violated.
      • Example: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Criminal) No.1 of 2020 – The Supreme Court intervened during COVID-19 migrant crisis, directing the government to provide food, shelter, and transport to stranded workers.
    • Public Interest or Institutional Integrity: Courts take suo motu cognizance to protect public interest and prevent harm to democratic institutions.
      • Example: Suo Motu Cognizance of Lakhimpur Kheri Violence (2021) – The Supreme Court intervened to monitor the UP government’s investigation into the killing of protesting farmers, ensuring transparency and accountability.

    Why did the Lokpal order bring High Court judges under its jurisdiction?

    • Interpretation of ‘Public Servants’ Under Lokpal Act: The Lokpal classified High Court judges as public servants under the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, making them subject to its jurisdiction.
    • Reliance on Section 14(1)(f) of the Lokpal Act: This section grants Lokpal jurisdiction over any body or authority established by an Act of Parliament.
      • The Lokpal argued that High Courts were established by British Parliamentary Acts (Indian High Courts Act, 1861 & Government of India Act, 1935), making them fall within this clause.
    • Distinction Between High Courts and Supreme Court: The Lokpal reasoned that Article 124 of the Constitution explicitly established the Supreme Court, but Article 214 only recognized High Courts, implying that High Courts were not directly created by the Constitution.
      • Based on this, the Lokpal ruled that Supreme Court judges were outside its jurisdiction, but High Court judges were not.
    • Lack of Explicit Exemption for Judges: The 2013 Lokpal Act does not explicitly exclude High Court judges from its jurisdiction, which the Lokpal interpreted as allowing it to investigate them.
    • Case-Specific Justification: The complaint involved a High Court judge allegedly influencing judicial decisions for personal benefit. The Lokpal argued that since the judge was serving in a High Court of a State reorganized by an Act of Parliament, it had jurisdiction over the matter.

    Way forward: 

    • Judicial Accountability Within Constitutional Framework: Strengthen in-house mechanisms for judicial oversight while ensuring compliance with constitutional provisions like Articles 124(4) and 217(1)(b), which mandate impeachment as the sole removal process for judges.
    • Clarify Lokpal’s Jurisdiction Through Legislative Review: Amend the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, to explicitly define its jurisdiction, ensuring it does not encroach upon judicial independence while maintaining transparency in the judiciary.

    Mains PYQ:

    Q Judicial Legislation is antithetical to the doctrine of separation of powers as envisaged in the Indian Constitution. In this context justify the filing of large number of public interest petitions praying for issuing guidelines to executive authorities. (UPSC IAS/2020)