Posts

UPSC Law Optional Mains Current Affairs

IS INDIA CRIMINALIZING COMEDY AND ENTERTAINMENT?

IS INDIA CRIMINALIZING COMEDY AND ENTERTAINMENT?Since the stand- up comedy gained popularity through internet, the comedy is taken as offensive   Allegations faced by comedians in recent times Comedian Munawar Faruqui had been accused of making ‘objectionable remarks on Hindu Gods and Goddesses’ and was denied bail. The court was of the opinion that granting bail would create a law and order situation. In December 2020, the Supreme Court of India issued a notice against comedian Kunal Kamra for contempt of court. He criticized apex court’s order of granting bail to Arnab Goswami, Republic TV Editor-in Chief in abetment to suicide case. In 2020, comedian Agrima Joshua who made joke of Shivaji statute project of the Maharashtra project had reeived rape threats and abuses and legal action. In 2017, Comedian Tanmay Bhat was facing charges under Section 500 of IPC (defamation) and Section 67 of the IT Act which provides punishment or publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form. He had tweeted a meme of PM Narender Modi with a dog filter on snapchat. Comedian Kapil Sharma and Kiku Sharda have been accused in 2016 for their remarks against government and Dera Sacha Sauda Chief respectively. RELEVANCE OF ABOVE INCIDENTS | They can be quoted as current happenings while any question on sedition, defamation or offence under IT Act etc was asked.  Call / Whats app : 6382125862 Email : lawxpertsmv@gmail.com Website : www.lawxpertsmv.com Telegram group link : https://bit.ly/37rrcC8 App link : https://bit.ly/3kjznEe

UPSC Law Optional Mains Current Affairs

DEFAMATION AS A CRIME

DEFAMATION AS A CRIMEWhat happened ? Journalist Priya Ramani faced the charges of defamation for defaming M.J Akbar, a former Union Minister journalist and author. Mr. Akbar’s case was rooted in the claim that he had a ‘stellar reputation’ as a highly respected journalist and an accomplished writer. The court found the testimony of Priya Ramani and another journalist who testified in favour of Priya Ramani to be credible and detailed enough to question the reputation. Judgment of the court Major point | Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate noted that a woman who raises a voice against sexual harassment cannot be punished for criminal defamation because the ‘right of reputation cannot be protected at the cost of the right of life and dignity of woman’.  The court was receptive to the defence that Ms. Ramani’s claims were true and made for the public good. The court took note of unequal equations of power of the harasser and the victim and said given that it may result in loss of dignity and self- confidence at the time, it underscored that “a woman has a right to put her grievance at any platform of her choice and even after decades”. The court has acquitted Priya Ramani and preserved the space of women who have found their voice in recent times to speak out about their experience of sexual harassment in the workplace. Court places it in the context of ‘the need for women to have freedom, equality, equal opportunity and social protection, if they were to excel in an atmosphere in which workforce participation is undesirably low. Criminal defamation Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code provides for the offence of defamation as- “Whoever, by- words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is said to defame that person except in the cases referred under exceptions to this Section. Exception 1 to Section 499 applies in the recent case of Priya Ramani which provides defence to the offence of criminal defamation as under- “It is not defamation to impute anything which is true concerning any person, if it be for the public good that the imputation should be made or published. Whether or not it is for the public good is a question of fact.” Constitutionality of criminal defamation A criminal prosecution that is inexpensive and quick becomes a handy tool to silence critics. The constitutionality of offence of criminal defamation was challenged in the case of Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India. The Supreme Court of India upheld the constitutionality of criminal defamation and held that it is not disproportionate restriction on free speech, because protection of reputation is a fundamental right as well as a human right. Call / Whats app : 6382125862 Email : lawxpertsmv@gmail.com Website : www.lawxpertsmv.com Telegram group link : https://bit.ly/37rrcC8 App link : https://bit.ly/3kjznEe

UPSC Law Optional Mains Current Affairs

ANTI-COW SLAUGHTER BILL PASSED IN KARNATAKA

ANTI-COW SLAUGHTER BILL PASSED IN KARNATAKAWhat happened ? Despite protests and uproar by the Opposition, the Karnataka Legislative Council has passed the bill regarding cow slaughter by voice vote- The Karnataka Prevention of Slaughter and Preservation of Cattle Bill, 2020. Act notified The controversial Karnataka Prevention of Cow Slaughter and Prevention of Cattle Act, 2020 was notified and has received the assent of Governor. Aim of the Act | The Preamble of the Act provides for comprehensive legislation for the prevention of slaughter and preservation of cattle.   Provisions of the Bill This Bill will replace the Karnataka Prevention of Cow Slaughter and Preservation of Cattle Act, 1964 which is repealed. It bans all forms of cattle slaughter. Penalizes the offenders who involve in cattle slaughtering. Penalties for violation prescribe punishment of between 3- 7 years and fine ranging from 50,000 to Rs. 10 Lakh. Buffalo (male or female) below the age of 13 years cannot be slaughtered. Smuggling and transportation of animals for slaughter is an offence. Police is empowered to conduct search and seize on the basis of ‘reason to believe’ that cattle is being sold, purchased or disposed of for the purpose of slaughter. Call / Whats app : 6382125862 Email : lawxpertsmv@gmail.com Website : www.lawxpertsmv.com Telegram group link : https://bit.ly/37rrcC8 App link : https://bit.ly/3kjznEe

UPSC Law Optional Mains Current Affairs

NO PLAN FOR LAW AGAINST CONVERSION: MHA

NO PLAN FOR LAW AGAINST CONVERSION: MHA RELEVANCE OF THIS ARTICLE | This news item is related to Constitutional Law ARTICLE 25 – 28 | Right to freedom of religion ARTICLE  21 – Right to choose MILLION DOLLAR QUESTION !!!! How this Current Affairs update could be used ? Type 1 : UPSC tend to ask direct question targeting such current Affairs Example : Freedom of religion is always a crucial fundamental right guaranteed by our constitution, but such freedom does not extend to compel conversion – Explain with recent issues Type 2 : For any general question on freedom of religion you can give 2 lines as current update which will increase your score. Example : Discuss the scope of freedom of religion under Indian Constitution. While answering this question you can mention this current affairs to score more and let the UPSC evaluator know that you are capable of applying concepts to practical issues. Article starts here !!!!!! What happened ? The Central Government told the Lok Sabha that it has no plans for enacting an anti-conversion law to curb inter-faith marriages. REASON | Interfaith marriage- State concern The Union Minister of State G Kishan Reddy said that the religious conversion for inter- faith marriage is a state concern and that that law enforcement agencies took action whenever such instances of violation occurs. While answering to the question ‘whether the government is of the view that interfaith marriages are happening due to forceful conversions and does it have evidence with respect to the same’ the Union Minister said- “Public order and police are state subjects as per the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution and hence, prevention, detection, registration, investigation and prosecution of offences related to religious conversions are primarily the concerns of state governments and Union Territory administrations. Action is taken as per existing laws by law enforcing agencies whenever instances of violation come to notice.” Religious conversion ordinances in states Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh governments have passed ordinances to criminalize forced religious conversions. However, the laws have proven to be open to rampant misuse, especially against interfaith couples who wish to marry of their own accord. In Uttar Pradesh, the law has been used multiple times to harass and jail consenting adult couples. States like Assam and Karnataka are also planning to bring laws to cur inter-faith marriages.  Call / Whats app : 6382125862 Email : lawxpertsmv@gmail.com Website : www.lawxpertsmv.com Telegram group link : https://bit.ly/37rrcC8 App link : https://bit.ly/3kjznEe

UPSC Law Optional Mains Current Affairs

UNIFORM MINIMUM AGE FOR MARRIAGE: SC DECIDES TO EXAMINE PLEA TO TRANSFER TO ITSELF CASES PENDING IN HCS

UNIFORM MINIMUM AGE FOR MARRIAGE: SC DECIDES TO EXAMINE PLEA TO TRANSFER TO ITSELF CASES PENDING IN HCSWhat happened ? Plea has been filed in Delhi and Rajasthan High Court to declare a ‘uniform minimum age’ for marriage. The Supreme Court has decided to examine this plea to transfer to itself cases pending in the High Courts regarding declaration of uniform minimum age for marriage. Reason for this plea : Plea has been filed to ‘secure gender justice, gender equality and dignity of women’. Why the transfer plea is filed? Different legal rules and guidelines state that the minimum age for getting married is 18 years for girls and 21 years for males. There is lack of uniformity in age of marriage and several PILs may be filed in the High Courts seeking uniform age of marriage which lead the petitioner to approach the court. The petition states that to avoid multiplicity of the litigations and conflicting views on the interpretation of Articles 14, 15 and 21 and judgments on gender justice and gender equality, the court may be pleased to transfer these PILs and decide them collectively. Uniform age need of the hour | The plea asks the centre to take reasonable steps to remove the anomalies regarding minimum age of marriage and make it gender-neutral, religion-neutral and uniform for all the citizens in the spirit of the basic rights of equality and proper to life and worldwide conventions. Petition states that the minimum age of marriage should be 21 years for all the residents. Why different minimum age of marriage for men and woman ? The difference in minimum age of marriage of a male and female is based on patriarchal stereotypes and perpetrates de jure and de facto inequality against women, and goes completely against the global trends.  The petition referred the provisions of different legislations which provide for distinction in minimum age of marriage such as Indian Christian Marriage Act, Parsi Marriage Act and Divorce Act, The Special Marriage Act, The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act. Legal provisions prescribing minimum age : Section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act- the bridegroom must have completed the age of twenty-one years and the bride, the age of eighteen years at the time of marriage. Section 60 of the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872- the person intending to be married if male shall not be less than 21 years of age and in case of female, shall not be less than 18 years. Section 3 of the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936- In case of any Parsi who is a male must have completed 21 years of age and if a female, 18 years of age at the time of marriage. Section 4 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954- At the time of marriage the male must have completed 21 years of age and female the age of 18 years. Call / Whats app : 6382125862 Email : lawxpertsmv@gmail.com Website : www.lawxpertsmv.com Telegram group link : https://bit.ly/37rrcC8 App link : https://bit.ly/3kjznEe

UPSC Law Optional Mains Current Affairs

NEW LABOUR CODE TO ALLOW 4 DAY WORK WEEK

NEW LABOUR CODE TO ALLOW 4 DAY WORK WEEKWhat Happened ? Labour and Employment Secretary, Apurva Chandra said that new labour codes will be implemented soon and Draft rules under the labour codes are finalized. Further added, that most states were part of the rule framing process and others would soon be ready with their drafts. Proposals under labour codes It would provide flexibility of reducing the working days to four days a week.Free medical check-ups would be provided to workers trough the Employees State Insrance Corporation.The new Code would provide an option for organizations to allow their employees as per three following choices:         a)Deploying employees for 4 days at 12 hours a day, or         b)For five days at around 10 hours per day, or         c)Six days at 8 hours a day. The total limit of working hours would be 48 hours a week. What are the codes that will be enforced ? This ministry would soon be in a position to bring into force the four Codes, viz., a)Code on Wages b)Industrial Relations c)Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions (OSH) d)Social Security Codes The ministry is aiming to implement all the four codes in one go. The limit of 48 working hours was ‘sacrosanct’ as said by Mr. Chandra and thus, a change is required in working days but it would not be forced. RELATED CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION | Article 39(e) - Duty of state to protect health and strength of workers Online Portal for registration of workers An online portal will be established by June for the registration of workers in an unorganized sector, including gig and platform workers and migrant workers. This portal would assist in the formulation of health, housing, skill, insurance, credit and food schemes for such workers and they would also be provided with an incentive of free coverage for one year for accidental and disability cover under the Centre’s Pradhan Mantri Suraksha Bima Yojana (PMSBY). Call / Whats app : 6382125862 Email : lawxpertsmv@gmail.com Website : www.lawxpertsmv.com Telegram group link : https://bit.ly/37rrcC8 App link : https://bit.ly/3kjznEe

UPSC Law Optional Mains Current Affairs

SC TO HEAR PLEA AGAINST 69% QUOTA IN TAMIL NADU

SC TO HEAR PLEA AGAINST 69% QUOTA IN TAMIL NADUPlea filed in Supreme Court What happened ? A plea has been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of 1993 Tamil Nadu quota law which provides for 69% quota to scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and backward classes in admissions and government jobs in the state. What Court said ? The Supreme Court said that the petition will not be decided until there is decision by Constitutional Bench on the validity of the Maratha quota law. The Bench also took note of the submissions that a similar petition has been pending before the court since 2012. The petition filed this year is based on the ground that it violates Supreme Court’ s Mandal judgment passed in 1992 in which the ceiling of 50% quota was fixed. Arguments made The state pointed out to the Court that the Supreme Court in 1996 had allowed reservations under the 69% law to continue. Subsequently, the state had also produced quantifiable data to justify reservation under the 1993 law. But the petitioners were aggrieved that the reservation in admissions were being carried out without creating additional seats. This was seriously prejudicing open category candidates, the petitioners argued.Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, who is appearing for Tamil Nadu has opposed the contention and submitted that the Tamil Nadu Act of 1993, enjoys special protection under Article 31B of the Constitution (Ninth Schedule) and the hearing on these writ petitions can await till the Constitutional Bench gives a decision in Maratha quota case.He also pointed out that the TN quota law was enacted in 1993 but the Maharashtra Act, 2018 was enacted after the Constitution 102nd Amendment. 102nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2018 Point to note | This Amendment granted constitutional status to the National Commission for Backward Classes. Legal provisions | Article 338B and 342A has been inserted by this Amendment Act, Article 338B provides that there shall be a Commission for the socially and educationally backward classes to be known as the National Commission for Backward Classes. Article 342A provides that the President may with respect to any State or UT and where it is a State, after consultation with the Governor thereof, by public notification, specify the socially and educationally backward classes which shall for the purposes of this Constitution be deemed to be socially and educationally backward classes in relation to that State or UT. Article 31B | The provisions of Article 31B provide that the Acts and regulations specified in the Ninth Schedule or any other provisions thereof shall not be void on the ground that such Act, Regulation or provision is inconsistent with, or takes away or abridges any of the rights conferred by any provisions of this Part. Call / Whats app : 6382125862 Email : lawxpertsmv@gmail.com Website : www.lawxpertsmv.com Telegram group link : https://bit.ly/37rrcC8 App link : https://bit.ly/3kjznEe

UPSC Law Optional Mains Current Affairs

Competition Commission dismisses complaint against Bar Council of India

Competition Commission dismisses complaint against Bar Council of IndiaWhat Happened ? The Competition Commission of India (CCI) in re: Thupili Raveendra Babu v. Bar Council of India and Ors. has dismissed a complaint alleging that the Bar Council of India (BCI) abused its dominant position by imposing a maximum age limit for admissions into legal education. Facts | The order came in pursuance of the complaint filed by Mr. Thupili Raveendra Babu who aspired to pursue law after his retirement. The complainant invoked Clause 28 of the Rules of Legal Education, 2008 which bars candidates above 30 years of age from pursuing legal education. The allegation | It was alleged that the BCI has acted in contravention of Section 4 of the Competititon Act, by abusing its quintessential position of controlling legal education and practice in India thereby imposing barriers to new entrants in legal profession. Relevant Legal Provisions: The legal provisions and statutes relevant to the present controversy are as follows: 1.Section 2(h) of the Competition Act, 2002; 2.Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002; 3.Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002; 4.Section 26(2) of the Competition Act, 2002; 5.Section 33 of the Competition Act, 2002 6.Section 4 of the Advocates Act, 1961; 7.Section 7 of the Advocates Act, 1961; 8.Section 49 of the Advocates Act, 1961; 9.Clause 28 of the Rules of Legal Education, 2008 What CCI said ? CCI rejected the complaint and stated that in order to sustain allegations the BCI must fall within the ambit of definition of ‘enterprise’ under Section 2(h) of the Competition Act. Point to note | It was observed that the functions carried out by BCI are regulatory in nature in respect of the legal profession, therefore, it cannot be termed as an enterprise. It further reiterated its order in Dilip Modwil case, wherein, it was held that, “for an entity to qualify as an enterprise, it must be engaged in commercial and economic activities and regulatory functions are not amenable to the jurisdiction of the commission”. Conclusion | Thus, the commission concluded that while discharging regulatory functions BCI cannot be said to be an enterprise and consequently, the allegations made in relation to discharge of such functions which appears to be non-economic in nature, do not make a prima facie case under Section 4 of the Competition Act. Related Case Laws: re: Dilip Modwil and Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA) (2014) Call / Whats app : 6382125862 Email : lawxpertsmv@gmail.com Website : www.lawxpertsmv.com Telegram group link : https://bit.ly/37rrcC8 App link : https://bit.ly/3kjznEe

UPSC Law Optional Mains Current Affairs

Consensual love affair not a defense against criminal charge of kidnapping minor girl

Consensual love affair not a defense against criminal charge of kidnapping minor girlWhat happened ? The case before the Supreme Court that prosecutrix and accused were in love and prosecutrix eloped from her parents home and joined the accused of her own free will.Issue involved |  The question before the Supreme Court was- Whether a consensual affair can be a defence against the charge of kidnapping a minor.The verdict | The Supreme Court has recently held that a consensual love affair is not a defense against the criminal charge of kidnapping a minor girl under 18 years of age.The court held that Section 361 of the IPC (kidnapping from lawful guardianship) bestows the ability to make crucial decisions regarding a minor’s physical safety upon his/her guardians. Therefore, a minor girl’s infatuation with her alleged kidnapper cannot by itself be allowed as a defense, for the same would amount to surreptitiously undermining the protective essence of the offense of kidnapping.Final point | The court said, “winning over the affection of a minor girl” would be considered as inducement in a charge of kidnapping.Call / Whats app : 6382125862 Email : lawxpertsmv@gmail.com Website : www.lawxpertsmv.com Telegram group link : https://bit.ly/37rrcC8 App link : https://bit.ly/3kjznEe

UPSC Law Optional Mains Current Affairs

Supreme Court takes suo motu cognizance of contamination of rivers

Supreme Court takes suo motu cognizance of contamination of riversWhat happened ? The Supreme Court recently took suo motu cognizance of the contamination of rivers by sewage effluents through lapses committed by municipalities. The court directed the registration of a PIL titled “Remediation of polluted rivers” and issued notice to the center, the Ministries of Environment and Housing and urban affairs and the central pollution control board. Duty of State : The court held that it is the duty of the state to ensure access to clean drinking water which is included in the right to Life. The court directed the CPCB to submit a report identifying municipalities along the river which have not installed total treatment plants for sewage as per the requirement or have gaps in ensuring that the sewage is not discharged untreated into the river. Relevant legal provisions: Article 21 of the Constitution includes ‘the right of enjoyment of pollution-free water an air for full enjoyment of life.’ Article 51A provides a fundamental duty on every citizen to protect and improve the natural environment, including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife. Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 974 provides for prevention and control of water pollution and to maintain or restore the wholesomeness of water. Environment Protection Act, 1986 also punishes for pollution water. Section 277 of the Indian Penal Code punishes the person who pollutes a public spring or reservoir.   Call / Whats app : 6382125862 Email : lawxpertsmv@gmail.com Website : www.lawxpertsmv.com Telegram group link : https://bit.ly/37rrcC8App link :https://bit.ly/3kjznEe