Why in news?

The Supreme Court of India has ruled that venture capital firm Tiger Global’s $1.6-billion stake sale in Flipkart to Walmart is subject to taxation.

The verdict, closely watched by foreign investors, is seen as a landmark decision that could influence cross-border deal structures and have wider implications for India’s startup ecosystem.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Dispute Over India–Mauritius Tax Treaty
• Background: Tiger Global’s Flipkart Investment
• Implications of the Verdict for Indian Startups and Investors
• Startup Funding Slowdown Amid Investor Caution

Dispute Over India–Mauritius Tax Treaty

• The case arose from Tiger Global’s 2018 exit, executed through its Mauritius-based entities.
• Tiger Global claimed protection under the India–Mauritius Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA).
  • A DTAA is a bilateral treaty to prevent the same income from being taxed in both nations — the country where the income is earned and the country where the company is based out of.
• However, the Supreme Court ruled that the DTAA benefit could not be extended in this case.
• Court Rejects Treaty Benefits, Overturns High Court Order
  • In denying DTAA protection, the Supreme Court overturned an August 2024 ruling of the Delhi High Court, which had set aside a 2020 decision of the Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR).
  • The AAR had earlier concluded that the transaction was prima facie structured to avoid tax.
• Broader Implications for Startup Investments
  • Mauritius had long been a favoured investment route into India due to the non-taxability of capital gains until 2016.
  • The judgment comes amid slowing startup funding, as investors increasingly prioritise profitability and clear tax certainty, potentially reshaping how foreign capital approaches Indian startup exits.

Background: Tiger Global’s Flipkart Investment

• After acquiring a stake in Flipkart, Mauritius-based entities of Tiger Global—Tiger Global International II, III, and IV Holdings—went on to invest in several Indian companies.
• Claim for Tax Exemption - Following the stake sale, the Tiger Global entities sought a “nil” withholding tax certificate from Indian tax authorities. They argued that capital gains were exempt under the India–Mauritius DTAA due to the “grandfathering” clause for shares acquired before April 1, 2017.
  • Grandfathering essentially means exempting an activity from a new law or regulation.
• Tax Authorities’ Rejection - Indian tax authorities rejected the request, concluding that the Mauritius entities lacked independent decision-making. They held that real control over share purchases and sales did not rest with these entities.
• Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR) Decision - The matter was taken to the Authority for Advance Rulings, which in 2020 dismissed Tiger Global’s claim.
  • The AAR found that the investment structure was primarily designed to obtain DTAA benefits and that effective control lay outside Mauritius—particularly in the United States—through a complex web of entities.
• Delhi High Court Intervention - On appeal, the Delhi High Court overturned the AAR ruling, holding that the conclusion of tax avoidance was arbitrary and unsustainable.
• Supreme Court’s Final Word
  • The Supreme Court of India reversed the High Court’s decision.
  • It held that DTAA protection applies only where assets are directly owned by a Mauritian entity’s permanent establishment.
  • The Flipkart transaction, he ruled, fell outside this scope—rendering the gains taxable in India.

Implications of the Verdict for Indian Startups and Investors

• End of Automatic Treaty Benefits - Tax experts warn that the ruling weakens automatic reliance on the India–Mauritius DTAA. Merely holding a Tax Residency Certificate (TRC) will no longer guarantee capital gains tax exemption.
  • TRC is an official document from a country’s tax authority.
  • It proves that an individual or entity is a tax resident there for a specific period. This is crucial for claiming benefits under a DTAA.
• Substance Over Form Becomes the Test - The judgment reinforces a shift toward examining economic substance. Investors must now show genuine commercial rationale, autonomous decision-making, and real operations in treaty jurisdictions.
• Higher Tax Uncertainty and Litigation Risk - According to practitioners, the ruling raises uncertainty for venture capital and private equity exits. Exit planning, valuations, and indemnities may need reassessment amid increased scrutiny and potential disputes.
• Impact on Offshore Investment Structures - Structures routed through Mauritius or Singapore—especially pre-2017 investments—could face closer examination. While closed cases may not reopen automatically, reassessments are now more likely where legally permitted.
• Costlier Risk Management - Experts anticipate tax insurance and indemnity mechanisms becoming scarcer and more expensive, adding to compliance costs and complicating deal-making for startups and foreign investors alike.

Startup Funding Slowdown Amid Investor Caution

• The Supreme Court ruling comes against the backdrop of a broader slowdown in India’s startup funding.
• In 2025, tech startups raised $10.5 billion, down 17% from 2024 and 4% from 2023. While seed-stage funding fell sharply, early-stage investments showed resilience, signalling selective but continued investor confidence.

Why in news?

India has overtaken China to become the world’s largest rice producer in 2024–25, producing about 150 million metric tonnes and accounting for nearly 28% of global output.

While this marks a sharp rise from a decade ago and reflects stagnant Chinese production, the achievement has downsides. Paddy’s profitability has encouraged its spread into water-scarce regions, yields remain uneven across states, and its dominance raises concerns about water stress, crop diversification, and long-term nutritional security.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Steady Rise in India’s Rice Production
• India’s Rice Stocks: Surplus Beyond Food Security Needs
• Why Paddy Dominates Indian Agriculture
• Environmental and Regional Challenges of Paddy Cultivation
• Push for Crop Diversification Away from Paddy

Steady Rise in India’s Rice Production

• Long-Term Growth Trend - India’s rice output has grown consistently since the Green Revolution era. Between 1969–70 and 2024–25, the area under paddy expanded by over 36%, yields tripled, and total production rose nearly fourfold.
• Sharp Expansion in the Last Five Years - The most notable surge occurred recently. Paddy area increased from 43.66 million hectares in 2019–20 to 51.42 million hectares in 2024–25, while production jumped from 118.87 to 150 million metric tonnes.
• Growing Global Share - As output rose, India’s share of global rice production climbed from 21.95% in 2011 to about 28% in 2024, placing it just ahead of China and far above other producers like Bangladesh and Indonesia.

India’s Rice Stocks: Surplus Beyond Food Security Needs

• Rising Central Pool Reserves - With sustained production growth and high procurement, rice stocks in the central pool have risen steadily. As of January 1, 2026, stocks stood at 63.06 million metric tonnes, including unmilled paddy.
• Far Above Buffer and Welfare Requirements - This level far exceeds prescribed norms. Stocking rules require only 7.61 million tonnes on January 1, while annual needs under the NFSA and welfare schemes are about 37.2 million tonnes.
• Efforts to Reduce Excess - The government has attempted to offload surplus rice through open market sales and by diverting rice for ethanol production. Despite these measures, stocks remain elevated.
• Procurement Concentrated in Few States - During the 2023–24 kharif season, the Food Corporation of India procured 525.48 lakh tonnes—about 38% of national output. Over half of this came from Punjab, Haryana, Chhattisgarh, and Odisha.

Why Paddy Dominates Indian Agriculture?

• Wide Cultivation and Scale - Paddy is India’s most widely grown crop, cultivated in over 600 districts and spread across more than 514 lakh hectares—far exceeding the area under wheat or other major crops.
• Assured Returns Through MSP - A key attraction is assured procurement at Minimum Support Price. Paddy offers higher net returns per hectare than crops like maize and moong, making it financially safer for farmers.
• Weak Performance of Alternative Crops - Stagnant or declining yields in crops such as cotton reduce their attractiveness. Compared to global averages, India’s yields in some non-paddy crops remain low.
• Strong Export Demand - India is the world’s leading rice exporter, earning substantial foreign exchange from basmati and non-basmati rice exports to West Asia, North America, and Europe, reinforcing paddy’s appeal.
  • The country exported six million tonnes of basmati and 14.13 million tonnes of non-basmati rice during 2024-25, earning $5.9 billion and $6.5 billion respectively.
  • India exported basmati to Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, the UAE, the US, the UK, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Jordan and Israel during 2024-25. 

Environmental and Regional Challenges of Paddy Cultivation

• Paddy is an extremely water-intensive crop, requiring nearly 1–3 tonnes of water to produce just one kilogram of rice.
• Its widespread cultivation has severely depleted groundwater in many regions.
• In Punjab, excessive groundwater extraction has led to serious environmental and health problems, while paddy expansion into already water-stressed states has worsened declining water tables.
• Rice productivity also varies sharply across states due to differing agro-climatic conditions.
• In 2024–25, yields ranged from 4,428 kg per hectare in Punjab and 3,928 kg in Andhra Pradesh to much lower levels in Bihar (2,561 kg) and Uttar Pradesh (2,824 kg), compared to the national average of 2,929 kg per hectare.

Push for Crop Diversification Away from Paddy

• With a growing preference for paddy among farmers, the Union government is intensifying efforts to promote crop diversification.
• The objective goes beyond farm incomes to include nutritional security and conservation of scarce water resources.
• Incentives Linked to Fiscal Savings
  • The Agriculture Ministry has proposed incentivising farmers who shift away from paddy to alternative crops.
  • These incentives could be financed from savings in the economic cost of rice, estimated at ₹1.36 lakh per hectare.
  • This cost reflects expenses borne by the Food Corporation of India on MSP-based procurement, milling, transport and storage.
    • According to officials, rice stored by the FCI costs around ₹33 per kg, and with an average yield of 41.25 quintals per hectare, government spending reaches about ₹1,36,000 per hectare, excluding subsidies on power, fertilisers and seeds.
• Officials suggest focusing diversification efforts on districts with below-national-average paddy yields (2,929 kg per hectare) and relatively lower paddy coverage.
• Promoting Oilseeds and Pulses
  • The strategy prioritises oilseeds and pulses to reduce India’s heavy dependence on edible oil imports.
  • These crops would be promoted in a phased manner, aligned with agro-climatic suitability and soil conditions, to ensure sustainable transitions for farmers.

Why in the News?

• India’s response to child trafficking has come under focus following recent judicial directions and data highlighting low conviction rates despite large-scale child rescues.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Child Trafficking in India (Background, Legal Definitions, Constitutional Protection, Key Legislations, Judicial Interventions, Challenges, Way Forward)

Understanding Child Trafficking in India

• Child trafficking remains a persistent and grave violation of human rights in India.
• It involves the recruitment, transportation, harbouring or receipt of children for purposes of exploitation, including forced labour, sexual exploitation, slavery, servitude, or organ removal.
• Despite extensive constitutional and statutory safeguards, trafficking networks continue to operate due to socio-economic vulnerabilities and weak enforcement outcomes.
• Official data indicate that thousands of children are rescued every year, yet convictions remain disproportionately low, exposing gaps between law, enforcement, and justice delivery.

International and Domestic Legal Definitions

• At the international level, child trafficking is defined under the Palermo Protocol (2000), which treats any movement or exploitation of a child for exploitative purposes as trafficking, irrespective of consent.
• This principle has been incorporated into India’s domestic legal framework.
• Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, trafficking is defined broadly to include recruitment, transportation or harbouring through coercion, deception, abuse of power, or inducement for exploitation.
• The law recognises multiple forms of exploitation, including physical, sexual, economic, and organ trafficking, ensuring a comprehensive scope.

Constitutional Protection of Children

• The Constitution of India provides a strong foundation for protecting children against exploitation.
• Article 23 prohibits human trafficking and forced labour, while Article 24 bans employment of children in hazardous industries.
• Additionally, Article 39(e) and (f) directs the State to ensure that children are protected from abuse and are provided conditions of freedom, dignity, and healthy development.
• These constitutional principles impose a positive obligation on the State to prevent exploitation and address the structural conditions that enable trafficking.

Key Legislations Addressing Child Trafficking

• India has enacted multiple sector-specific laws to address different dimensions of child trafficking:

• Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023: Criminalises trafficking and the buying and selling of minors.
• Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956: Targets trafficking for sexual exploitation.
• Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015: Focuses on care, rehabilitation, and reintegration of trafficked children.
• Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012: Provides stringent punishments for sexual offences against children, including life imprisonment and death penalty in extreme cases.

• The POCSO Act is notable for being gender-neutral and for enabling fast-track courts to ensure speedy trials.

Judicial Interventions and Supreme Court Guidelines

• The judiciary has played a critical role in shaping India’s anti-trafficking response. In landmark judgments, the Supreme Court has recognised trafficking as a violation of the fundamental right to life and dignity.
• Cases such as Vishal Jeet v. Union of India, C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu, and Bachpan Bachao Andolan v. Union of India established preventive, rehabilitative, and regulatory principles.
• More recently, the Court has issued strict guidelines emphasising victim-centric approaches, accountability of authorities, and coordinated enforcement.

Structural Challenges in Tackling Child Trafficking

• Despite a robust legal framework, several challenges persist:

• Low conviction rates, which weaken deterrence
• Socio-economic vulnerabilities such as poverty, migration, disasters, and family breakdown
• Misuse of digital platforms for recruitment under the guise of jobs or opportunities
• Fragmented enforcement, due to trafficking networks operating across State boundaries

• Law and order, being a State subject, further complicates coordinated action, making Centre-State cooperation essential.

Way Forward: Strengthening India’s Anti-Trafficking Response

• A multi-dimensional strategy is required to tackle child trafficking effectively.
• This includes improving investigation quality, strengthening rehabilitation mechanisms, enhancing digital surveillance, and ensuring faster trials.
• Most importantly, conviction rates must improve to establish credible deterrence.
• Equally critical is addressing root causes through social protection, education, livelihood support, and awareness programmes.
• A strong institutional partnership between the Union and States is indispensable for disrupting trafficking networks operating across jurisdictions.

Why in News?

• The U.S. President Donald Trump invited India to join the proposed Board of Peace for Gaza, a new governance and conflict-management mechanism.
• The initiative emerges from a group of Islamic countries backed Trump’s peace plan for Gaza and coincides with broader U.S. efforts to restructure global governance outside traditional multilateral institutions, especially the United Nations (UN).
• The proposal has triggered a global debate on the future of the post-World War II international order, particularly the relevance and authority of the UN Security Council (UNSC).

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Board of Peace for Gaza
• India’s Position
• Broader Global Governance Debate
• Key Challenges and Way Ahead
• Conclusion

Board of Peace for Gaza:

• Purpose and mandate:
  • To supervise Gaza’s transitional governance, stabilisation, and reconstruction.
  • To oversee a temporary technocratic, apolitical Palestinian administration.
  • To manage funding for redevelopment until the Palestinian Authority (PA) completes institutional reforms.
  • Trump now seeks to expand this Gaza-specific mechanism into a global conflict-resolution template.
• Composition and leadership:
  • Chaired by U.S. President Donald Trump, its members include select invited countries and global leaders (e.g., Tony Blair).
  • It will operate as an invitation-only body, not based on universal membership.
• UN linkage:
  • UNSC Resolution 2803 authorised a Board to supervise Gaza’s transition until 2027.
  • Russia and China abstained, but the countries of the Global South voted for it.

India’s Position:

• Current status: India has received the invitation but has not formally responded. Pakistan has also been invited.
• India’s stated principles:
  • Consistent support for a Two-State Solution (Israel and Palestine coexisting).
  • India welcomed the first phase of Trump’s peace plan, especially release of hostages, and enhanced humanitarian assistance to Gaza.
• On military involvement: The U.S. is seeking troops for a temporary International Stabilisation Force (ISF). India has clearly ruled out participation, as ISF is not a UN peacekeeping mission.

Broader Global Governance Debate:

• Challenge to the UN system:
  • Critics argue the Board of Peace undermines UN Charter principles, sovereign equality of states, and collective decision-making.
  • It is seen as an attempt to sidestep the UNSC and concentrate authority in the U.S.-led executive body.
• Trump’s multilateral skepticism:
  • Because of the continuation of Trump’s long-standing approach. For example, withdrawal from UNESCO, WHO; exit from over 60 international organisations.
  • Aligned with Project 2025 (the Heritage Foundation’s blueprint for Trump’s second term), which called for sharp reductions in multilateral commitments and a preference for ad hoc coalitions where the US sets the agenda.
• From Gaza to global template:
  • Trump aims to transform the Board into a general crisis-management club.
  • It is framed as a solution to UNSC paralysis, especially veto politics.
  • It risks diverting funds, legitimacy, and attention away from the UN if successful.

Key Challenges and Way Ahead:

• For global order:
  • Erosion of multilateralism and UN centrality. Rise of exclusive, power-driven governance mechanisms. Undermining rules-based international order.
• For India:
  • Tension between commitment to reformed multilateralism, and pragmatic engagement with the U.S.-led initiatives.
  • Risk of legitimising a system that weakens India’s long-term push for UNSC reform, and marginalises voices of the Global South.
• India’s options:
  • Calibrated engagement: Engage diplomatically without endorsing erosion of UN authority. Maintain distinction between political oversight and military involvement.
  • Defend UN-centric multilateralism: Reiterate support for UNSC-authorised mechanisms. Resist normalisation of extra-UN security architectures.
  • Strategic autonomy: Balance ties with the U.S. while safeguarding India’s principled positions. Coordinate with like-minded countries of the Global South.
  • Push for UN reform: Use the crisis to highlight urgency of UNSC reform, not its bypassing.

Conclusion:

• The invitation to India to join the Board of Peace for Gaza places New Delhi at a critical crossroads in global diplomacy.
• While the initiative promises flexibility and decisiveness in conflict management, it also represents a fundamental challenge to the UN-led multilateral order that India has long defended.
• As global governance enters a phase of extraordinary flux, it tests India’s ability to balance principle with pragmatism in an evolving world order.

Context

• The recent partial reunification of ancient Buddhist gems associated with the historical Buddha marks a moment of considerable significance for India’s cultural heritage sector.
• These artifacts, dispersed for more than a century, were reacquired from abroad by an Indian conglomerate and subsequently transferred to the government, prompting a celebratory public exhibition inaugurated in Delhi by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
• Beyond the event itself lies a deeper question about the long-term stewardship, presentation, and interpretation of these relics.
• If handled with care and foresight, their return has the potential to shift public attitudes toward India’s museums, enhance heritage governance, and position India as a central destination for global Buddhist pilgrimage.

Buddhist Relics and Early Indian Heritage Practices

• Understanding the historical place of relics in Buddhism clarifies why such objects, often visually modest and materially unremarkable, commanded extraordinary devotion.
• Following the Buddha’s passing, his corporeal remains, including ash and bone fragments, were periodically divided among followers and ultimately placed in vessels with gems and offerings.
• These relics were interred in stupas, large hemispherical mounds that functioned simultaneously as reliquaries, teaching devices, and ritual centres.
• Their power derived not from aesthetic value but from their perceived ability to sanctify spaces, cultivate devotion, and transform the spiritual lives of those who approached them.

Sanchi as a Model of Spatial and Ritual Engagement

• The Great Stupa at Sanchi illustrates the sophisticated strategies through which relics were contextualized in early India.
• Initially constructed under Ashoka and later expanded, the stupa complex incorporated gateways at the cardinal directions leading to a circumambulatory path.
• Carved reliefs on the gateways depicted episodes from the Buddha’s life, scenes of worship, auspicious symbols, and figures in foreign dress, suggesting both historical continuity and cross-cultural interaction along emerging trade routes.
• Such visual programs prepared visitors emotionally and intellectually to encounter the relics, while railings and monastic presence facilitated a semi-secluded sacred environment conducive to reflection and community-building.
• The success of these strategies is reflected in Sanchi’s growth as a major religious centre supported by diverse social strata and by the expansion of Buddhist sites across the subcontinent.

Adaptation Across Regions and Symbolic Presence

• As Buddhism spread, relic-centred practices evolved.
• In peninsular India, for example, rock-cut cave complexes often contained monolithic stupas that lacked corporeal relics yet conveyed the Buddha’s presence symbolically through sculpture and architectural design.
• This adaptation demonstrates that Buddhist sacred environments could operate even in the absence of physical remains, underscoring the importance of spatial, visual, and ritual framing in mediating sacred experience.
• Such precedents offer instructive models for contemporary institutions seeking to present relics in ways that respect both historical traditions and modern sensibilities.

Contemporary Challenges of Display and Stewardship

• With little of the original Piprawaha stupa surviving, the recently reunited relics are expected to move into a public institution after the Delhi exhibition.
• Merely placing them behind glass vitrines would replicate a colonial museological model that encourages passive viewing and strips objects of ritual potency.
• To avoid this, museums must articulate and implement long-term strategies that honour the multifaceted roles relics have historically played.
• Thoughtfully designed spaces should allow visitors to engage with the relics through chanting, contemplation, meditation, or aesthetic appreciation, acknowledging that relics can still function as living objects within the cultural sphere.

Institutional Responsibilities and Community Engagement

• The return of the relics should also catalyse systemic changes in heritage education and governance.
• Museums could establish grants and fellowships encouraging collaboration among art historians, anthropologists, scientists, and filmmakers to trace how artifacts shape social worlds.
• Educational initiatives should introduce postgraduate students and heritage practitioners to stewardship, restitution ethics, and interpretive methodologies.
• Simultaneously, institutions must engage communities living near heritage sites to combat illicit antiquities trafficking by training them in documentation practices, legal awareness, and heritage advocacy.
• Such programs align India’s heritage stewardship with international norms while empowering local custodians.

Conclusion

• The reunification of the Piprawaha relics represents more than an act of repatriation; it provides an opportunity to reimagine heritage stewardship in India.
• By adopting historically informed display strategies, enhancing educational infrastructures, and involving communities in heritage protection, India can ensure that these relics are not merely preserved but meaningfully revived.
• If such efforts succeed, the relics will not only have returned to the land of the Buddha but will once again be able to exert their transformative aura, inviting both local and international publics to engage with India’s profound Buddhist past.

Context

• The split verdict delivered by Justices B.V. Nagarathna and K.V. Viswanathan in Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL) v. Union of India marks a significant moment in India’s constitutional and anti-corruption
• The dispute concerns Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, which bars inquiry or investigation into allegations against public servants for decisions taken in the discharge of official duties without prior sanction of the appropriate government.
• The controversy revives longstanding questions regarding the balance between shielding honest officials and preserving investigative independence.

Historical and Legal Context

• The conflict surrounding Section 17A follows earlier judicial interventions against executive control over corruption investigations.
• The Single Directive, which required government approval before investigating senior bureaucrats, was struck down in Vineet Narain v. Union of India (1998).
• The judgment emphasised that the rule of law, equality before law, and protection against the politician-bureaucrat nexus demand insulation of investigative agencies from executive interference.
• Parliament later reintroduced a similar threshold through Section 6A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, enacted via the Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003.
• In Dr. Subramanian Swamy v. Director, CBI (2014), the Supreme Court invalidated Section 6A, declaring differential investigative thresholds for senior officials discriminatory and violative of Article 14.
• The Court reiterated that however high you may be, the law is above you, underscoring the principle of accountability irrespective of official rank.
• Section 17A of the PC Act, inserted in 2018, extended the protective threshold from senior bureaucrats to all public servants.
• Critics argue that this framework suppresses corruption detection and conflicts with Lalita Kumari v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2014), which mandates FIR registration upon disclosure of a cognisable offence.
• The government defended Section 17A as a safeguard against frivolous complaints and a necessary measure for administrative confidence and policy stability.

The Competing Judicial Views

• Justice Nagarathna’s Position: Section 17A is Unconstitutional
  • Justice Nagarathna held that Section 17A imposes an impermissible barrier to initial inquiry and thus protects the corrupt.
  • The vice lies not in who grants approval but in the requirement of prior sanction itself.
  • For her, Section 17A revives protections previously rejected and undermines transparency, probity, and the demands of the rule-based governance.
  • She identified structural conflicts of interest: the government both oversees the accused officials and grants approval for investigations, enabling a shared departmental interest to deny sanction.
  • The arrangement promotes an institutional nexus that discourages scrutiny and allows wrongdoing to remain unchecked.
• Justice Viswanathan’s Position: Section 17A is Constitutional with Safeguards
  • Justice Viswanathan agreed that vesting approval power in the government would be unconstitutional but viewed prior sanction as legitimate to prevent policy paralysis and shield honest decision-makers from vexatious complaints.
  • The constitutional defect lies in placement, not existence. He proposed that the Lokpal, conceived as an independent anti-corruption authority, could serve as an external filter.
  • The Lokpal Act and PC Act operate in the same normative field, as both incorporate mechanisms for screening, accountability, and protection against misuse, allowing an institutional equilibrium that balances governance and scrutiny.

The Core Constitutional Disagreement and Broader Implications

• The Core Constitutional Disagreement
  • The core disagreement centres on whether prior investigative filters are impermissible barriers or permissible institutional checks if independent.
  • Justice Nagarathna rejects any pre-investigation threshold as inconsistent with earlier jurisprudence, while Justice Viswanathan endorses a hybrid model where an independent authority mitigates abuse while preventing executive veto.
• Broader Implications and the Way Forward
  • The dispute engages three constitutional concerns: separation of powers, anti-corruption capability, and administrative efficiency.
  • The resolution will shape India’s state accountability
  • Excessive investigative insulation promotes impunity, whereas unmediated investigative power risks bureaucratic hesitation and diminished state capacity in economic and administrative fields.

Conclusion

• The split verdict in CPIL v. Union of India illustrates a constitutional struggle to balance governance, integrity, and oversight within the modern administrative state.
• A larger Bench of the Supreme Court will now determine whether investigative autonomy, filtered scrutiny, or an institutional hybrid best reflects constitutional commitments to democracy and the rule of law.

Why in news?

Nearly six years after the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was amended in 2019, the Union government has still not constituted the Arbitration Council of India (ACI).

The ACI was envisaged as a central body to regulate, grade, and promote institutional arbitration in India, but its absence has delayed reforms aimed at strengthening India’s arbitration ecosystem.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Mandate of the Arbitration Council of India
• Concerns Over Institutional Independence
• Draft Arbitration Law Reform: Key Proposals
• Recalibrating Courts’ Role in Arbitration
• The Way Forward for Institutional Arbitration in India

Mandate of the Arbitration Council of India

• The 2019 amendments to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 proposed the creation of the Arbitration Council of India as a central body to promote, reform, and strengthen arbitration in India.
• The framework was based on recommendations of the High-Level Committee on Arbitration chaired by B.N. Srikrishna, which submitted its report in July 2017.
• The proposed ACI was entrusted with key functions such as grading arbitral institutions, recognising professional bodies that accredit arbitrators, and maintaining a repository of arbitral awards made in India.
• It was to be headed by a Chairperson appointed by the Union government in consultation with the Chief Justice of India, with eligibility extending to former Supreme Court judges, former High Court Chief Justices or judges, or eminent experts in arbitration.
• The Council was also envisaged to include ex officio members from the executive, giving it a broad institutional and regulatory role.

Concerns Over Institutional Independence

• A key criticism of the Arbitration Council of India is its perceived lack of independence.
• Since most members are appointed or nominated by the Union government—India’s largest litigant—experts fear undue executive influence over arbitration, undermining neutrality.
• Government Dominance and Conflict Risks
  • Critics argue that a government-heavy regulator empowered to grade arbitral institutions, accredit arbitrators, and advise on policy poses conflicts of interest.
  • Such a model has limited precedent in arbitration-friendly jurisdictions that prioritise institutional autonomy.
• Accreditation Model: Quality and Capacity Issues
  • While inspired by Singapore and Hong Kong, India’s approach differs significantly.
  • Those jurisdictions rely on a single, centralised arbitral institution, not a regulator overseeing many.
  • The 2019 amendments allow the ACI to accredit an unlimited number of institutions, risking diluted standards, heavy administrative burdens, and higher public costs.
• Impact on Global Attractiveness
  • Another concern is the exclusion of foreign legal professionals from the arbitrator pool.
  • This could reduce India’s appeal as an international arbitration seat, especially for foreign parties seeking globally familiar expertise.

Draft Arbitration Law Reform: Key Proposals

• In October 2024, the Union government released the draft Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Bill, 2024, inviting public comments.
• The Bill aims to revitalise institutional arbitration through structural reforms.
• Redefining Arbitral Institutions
  • The draft Bill introduces a revised definition of an “arbitral institution” as any body or organisation that conducts arbitration under its own procedural rules or as agreed by parties.
  • This departs from the 2019 framework, which required formal designation by the Supreme Court or High Courts.
• Shifting Powers from Courts to Institutions
  • To reduce judicial intervention, the Bill proposes granting arbitral institutions powers currently exercised by courts.
  • These include extending timelines for awards, reducing arbitrators’ fees where delays are attributable to tribunals, and substituting arbitrators.
• Status of the Bill
  • Despite these proposals, the Bill remains under consideration.
  • In March 2025, Arjun Ram Meghwal informed Parliament that the draft had not yet been finalised or introduced.

Recalibrating Courts’ Role in Arbitration

• Under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, courts currently have wide powers to grant interim measures before, during, and even after arbitral proceedings (until enforcement).
• The 2024 draft Bill seeks to narrow this role to reduce delays and judicial overreach.
• Limiting Interim Relief by Courts
  • The draft Bill proposes restricting courts’ power to grant interim measures to two stages only: before arbitration commences and after an arbitral award is rendered.
  • This change aims to minimise prolonged court involvement during ongoing arbitration.
• Tweaking the 90-Day Rule
  • A key amendment targets Section 9(2).
  • Presently, arbitration must commence within 90 days of a court granting pre-arbitral interim relief.
  • The draft Bill shifts this clock to start from the date the interim application is filed, discouraging parties from stalling arbitration through extended court proceedings.
• Introducing Emergency Arbitration
  • The Bill also proposes a new Section 9-A, allowing parties to seek interim relief from an emergency arbitrator once arbitration has begun but before the arbitral tribunal is constituted.
  • This move is designed to provide swift, arbitration-led remedies while keeping courts at arm’s length.
• Objective: Fewer Delays, Less Intervention
  • Collectively, these changes aim to curb pre-arbitral delays, strengthen institutional arbitration, and ensure courts play a supportive—not supervisory—role in the arbitral process.

The Way Forward for Institutional Arbitration in India

• The report of the B. N. Srikrishna–headed committee notes that ad hoc arbitration continues to dominate in India due to parties’ strong preference for procedural autonomy and lingering scepticism toward domestic arbitral institutions.
• Concerns about institutional independence and administrative competence have eroded confidence.
• Addressing this trust deficit—by strengthening autonomy, credibility, and governance of arbitral institutions—is essential if Indian centres are to compete with established global arbitration bodies.

Why in news?

Recently, Financial Intelligence Unit–India (FIU-I) updated its AML/CFT (Anti-Money Laundering/Countering the Financing of Terrorism) guidelines for entities providing services related to Virtual Digital Assets.

The revised norms apply to cryptocurrency exchanges and lay down stricter requirements for customer due diligence, mandating how platforms must vet users and monitor transactions to prevent money laundering and terror financing.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Stricter KYC and Due Diligence Norms for Crypto Exchanges
• KYC Practices Across Cryptocurrency Exchanges
• How Indian Crypto Exchanges Vet Customers?
• Unclear Legal Status of Cryptocurrency in India

Stricter KYC and Due Diligence Norms for Crypto Exchanges

• Enhanced Customer Verification - Under the updated guidelines issued by FIU-I, cryptocurrency exchanges must conduct robust Know-Your-Customer (KYC) checks.
  • This includes collecting verified identity details, contact information, occupation, income range, and a selfie with liveness detection.
• Location and Bank Account Authentication - Exchanges are required to record the customer’s onboarding location using latitude–longitude data, along with date, timestamp, and IP address.
  • Bank accounts must be verified through the penny drop method, ensuring the account belongs to the customer and is operational.
    • Penny drop method is a bank account verification technique where a tiny amount of money (like ₹1) is sent to an account to confirm its validity and match the account holder's name against provided details.
• Risk-Based Monitoring - Platforms must identify high-risk clients and transactions and apply enhanced due diligence. High-risk customers must update KYC details every six months, while others must do so annually.
• Restrictions on ICOs and Registration Requirements - The guidelines strongly discourage Initial Coin Offering (ICO) and Initial Token Offering (ITO) activities. They also urge all virtual digital asset service providers to register with FIU-IND as reporting entities.
• Ban on Anonymity-Enhancing Tools - Exchanges are barred from facilitating transactions involving privacy-focused tokens and crypto mixers, which obscure transaction trails and hinder traceability, reinforcing India’s AML–CFT compliance framework.

KYC Practices Across Cryptocurrency Exchanges

• Centralised Exchanges and Compliance - Most centralised cryptocurrency exchanges already conduct KYC procedures to ensure lawful use, deter criminal activity, freeze offending accounts, and trace fraudulent transactions. These checks support AML–CFT compliance to prevent misuse of fiat-to-crypto conversions.
• Why Regulators Insist on KYC - Regulators fear cryptocurrencies could be used to evade reporting requirements or finance terrorism. AML laws and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (CFT) rules aim to curb such risks.
  • In 2023, Binance settled with U.S. regulators over failures to prevent and report suspicious transactions.
• Evidence of Illicit Use – It has been reported that groups such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis have used crypto at unprecedented scales, reinforcing regulatory concerns.
• The Challenge of Decentralised Exchanges - Not all exchanges enforce stringent KYC. Decentralised exchanges (DEXs) allow anonymous, unregulated transactions with minimal controls.
  • While DEXs have legitimate uses—privacy, avoiding repression, and asset self-custody—they are also attractive to money launderers, scammers, hackers, and terror financiers.
• The Road Ahead for India - To effectively address these risks, Indian regulators will need to go beyond issuing guidelines—strengthening enforcement, oversight, and international cooperation to curb illicit crypto activity without stifling legitimate use.

How Indian Crypto Exchanges Vet Customers?

• Leading Indian exchanges already follow global best practices and bank-level compliance, with the Financial Intelligence Unit–India rules largely formalising existing processes.
• Indian exchanges typically conduct core identity checks, selfie-based face match with liveness detection, and bank account verification under FIU/PMLA norms.
• Some of them also uses geo-tagging to match user location with ID details (with exceptions) and instant KYC via DigiLocker for Aadhaar and PAN.
• Overall, FIU-IND’s updated guidelines do not introduce drastic changes; they codify practices already in place across major Indian crypto exchanges, including DigiLocker-based KYC and periodic re-verification.

Unclear Legal Status of Cryptocurrency in India

• Cryptocurrency in India operates in a regulatory grey zone, with investors and industry leaders repeatedly seeking clearer rules.
• While debates continue, policy responses have largely focused on legality and security, lagging behind comprehensive crypto frameworks emerging in the US, Europe, and East Asia.
• Although virtual digital assets are taxed at 30% on capital gains with a 1% TDS, India offers little investor protection against scams, hacks, or unfair practices by private platforms.
• Many users choose Indian exchanges to comply with tax and legal norms, but face uncertainty and a discouraging regulatory environment due to the absence of a clear, investor-friendly legal framework.

Why in News?

• India’s renewable energy sector (private developers, Renewable Energy Implementing Agencies (REIAs), industry bodies) has raised strong objections to a proposed regulatory framework by the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC).
• The proposed framework could lead to the forfeiture of Inter-State Transmission System (ISTS) connectivity if developers fail to execute long-term Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) within a stipulated time.
• The issue is significant in the context of India’s ambitious target of 500 GW of non-fossil fuel capacity by 2030 and ongoing challenges of grid congestion, transmission bottlenecks, and delays in project execution.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Background
• Key Concerns Raised by the Renewable Energy Sector
• Sector-Specific Issues
• SECI’s (Solar Energy Corporation of India) Position
• Challenges and Way Ahead
• Conclusion

Background:

• Existing framework:
  • Under General Network Access (GNA) regulations, renewable projects can secure connectivity through Letters of Award (LoAs), signed PPAs, partial land acquisition, bank guarantees in lieu of land documents.
  • This flexibility aimed to facilitate early-stage project development.
• How the current model works:
  • REIAs like SECI, NTPC, NHPC, and SJVN act as intermediary procurers - buy power from developers via PPAs, sell to discoms through Power Sale Agreements (PSAs).
  • Typically, PPAs are signed only after PSAs, making early PPA linkage difficult.
• CERC’s proposal:
  • PPA-linked connectivity: Grant future transmission connectivity only against signed PPAs, not LoAs.
  • Auction-based allocation: Introduce auctions for allocating connectivity, along with firm commissioning timelines.
• Rationale behind these proposals:
  • Address underutilisation of transmission infrastructure.
  • Nearly 31.8 GW of renewable capacity already has connectivity but lacks PPAs.
  • Around 42 GW of RE capacity remains without PPAs, making PPA delays a systemic bottleneck (ICRA).

Key Concerns Raised by the Renewable Energy Sector:

• Penalising developers for factors beyond control:
  • Industry associations argue that PPA delays are largely due to procedural inefficiencies and slow tariff approvals by state-owned DISCOMs, not developer inaction.
  • Penalising developers undermines the principle of regulatory certainty.
• Impact on India’s clean energy targets:
  • The proposed measures could slow capacity addition, threatening the 2030 non-fossil energy target.
  • Despite rapid renewable growth, transmission infrastructure (495,000 circuit-km grid) has struggled to keep pace.
• Risk of higher tariffs and market concentration:
  • The National Solar Energy Federation of India (NSEFI) opposed auctioning grid connectivity at a premium, warning it would -
    • Increase renewable energy tariffs.
    • Favour large, cash-rich players, marginalising smaller developers.
  • Grid connectivity, they argued, should not become a tradable asset.

Sector-Specific Issues:

• Solar energy sector: Emphasised that delays stem from state-level regulatory and approval bottlenecks. Warned against market distortion through premium-based auctions.
• Wind energy sector:
  • Wind associations termed proposed timelines unrealistic, citing long manufacturing cycles, import dependence for turbines and key components.
  • Opposed the 18-month project completion deadline, seeking a 24–30 month timeframe.

SECI’s (Solar Energy Corporation of India) Position:

• Warned that auctioning connectivity would push up future tariffs.
• Recommended reallocation based on project readiness, such as land acquisition, financial closure, and equipment procurement.
• This approach prioritises execution capability over bidding power.

Challenges and Way Ahead:

• Transmission bottlenecks and idle capacity: Accelerated transmission infrastructure development - Proactive expansion of ISTS to match renewable ambitions.
• Delayed PPAs: Due to DISCOM inefficiencies. Reform DISCOM processes - Time-bound tariff approvals and PPA execution, strengthening financial health of DISCOMs.
• Mismatch between generation growth and grid expansion: Flexible, technology-specific timelines - Differentiated norms for solar, wind, and hybrid projects.
• Risk of policy uncertainty and investor confidence erosion: Integrated policy coordination - Closer coordination between CERC, Ministry of Power, and MNRE, align transmission planning with renewable capacity addition.
• Potential monopolisation of grid access: Non-market-based allocation of connectivity - Prioritise project readiness and execution milestones, avoid auctioning connectivity as a revenue-maximising tool.

Conclusion:

• The controversy over ISTS connectivity rules highlights the broader tension between grid efficiency and renewable energy expansion.
• While addressing idle transmission capacity is necessary, punitive measures risk undermining investor confidence and slowing India’s clean energy transition.
• A coordinated, flexible, and developer-sensitive regulatory approach, focused on structural reforms rather than penalties, is essential to achieve India’s renewable energy and climate commitments.

Why in the News?

• Technology firms and space agencies are exploring space-based datacentres to address the rapidly rising energy demand of artificial intelligence workloads.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Space-Based Datacentres (Background, Concept, Architecture & Design Principles, Challenges, Economic Aspect, India’s Interest)

Rising Energy Demand from Artificial Intelligence

• Datacentres are becoming one of the fastest-growing consumers of electricity worldwide, and artificial intelligence is significantly accelerating this trend.
• Modern AI systems rely on large clusters of graphics processing units (GPUs) and specialised accelerators to train and deploy machine learning models.
• These systems require continuous, high-density computing, leading to enormous power consumption.
• Unlike traditional datacentres that primarily support content delivery and cloud services, AI datacentres consume large amounts of energy internally.
• High-speed data exchange between servers within the same facility or across nearby facilities is essential for training large language models.
• As the adoption of generative AI expands across sectors, concerns over sustainability, carbon emissions, and grid stress are becoming increasingly prominent.

Concept of Space-Based Datacentres

• To address these challenges, researchers are exploring the idea of placing datacentres in low-Earth orbit.
• The central idea is to power datacentres entirely using solar energy available in space, where sunlight is uninterrupted and more intense than on Earth.
• This approach aims to bypass terrestrial constraints such as land availability, cooling limitations, and dependence on fossil fuel-based electricity grids.
• Google Research’s Project Suncatcher proposes deploying clusters of satellites equipped with computing hardware that can process AI workloads in space.
• These satellites would operate in carefully choreographed orbits that maintain constant exposure to sunlight, ensuring an uninterrupted power supply through solar panels.

Technical Architecture and Design Principles

• A key feature of orbital datacentres is their reliance on dense inter-satellite communication rather than high-speed connections with Earth.
• AI workloads require extremely high internal bandwidth to allow different processors to work in parallel.
• In space-based systems, this would be achieved through closely spaced satellites communicating with one another using advanced multiplexing and high-frequency links.
• Since most data movement occurs within the system itself, the bandwidth required to communicate with ground stations is relatively modest.
• This mirrors terrestrial AI systems, where user queries require limited bandwidth compared to internal data transfers during model training.

Engineering Challenges in Space Deployment

• Despite the conceptual promise, several technical challenges remain. One major concern is exposure to solar and cosmic radiation.
• Long-term radiation can degrade semiconductor components, affecting performance and reliability.
• Initial tests conducted by Google indicate that some specialised AI chips can tolerate higher radiation levels than expected, but long-duration missions still pose risks.
• Thermal management presents another major challenge. On Earth, datacentres rely on air or liquid cooling systems.
• In space, where there is no atmosphere, dissipating heat becomes significantly more complex.
• Datacentres in orbit would continuously absorb solar radiation while lacking conventional cooling mechanisms, requiring advanced heat dissipation technologies.
• Maintenance is also a critical issue. Unlike terrestrial facilities, repairing or replacing faulty hardware in space is expensive and logistically difficult.
• This raises concerns about system resilience and long-term operational reliability.

Economic Viability and Cost Considerations

• The economic feasibility of space-based datacentres depends heavily on launch costs and hardware durability.
• Currently, launching equipment into orbit is expensive, but projections suggest that satellite launch costs may decline substantially in the coming decades.
• Google estimates that costs could fall to around $200 per kilogram by the mid-2030s, potentially improving the commercial viability of orbital datacentres.
• However, space-based solutions must remain competitive with rapidly advancing ground-based technologies.
• Improvements in renewable energy integration, cooling efficiency, and energy storage on Earth could reduce the relative advantage of orbital systems.
• Past experiments, such as underwater datacentres, demonstrated technical promise but were eventually discontinued due to economic constraints.

India’s Interest in Space-Based Datacentres

• India is also showing interest in this emerging domain.
• The Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) is reportedly studying space-based data centre technologies as part of broader efforts to explore commercial and strategic uses of space infrastructure.
• Given India’s growing AI ecosystem and renewable energy ambitions, space-based computing could become a long-term area of research and collaboration.
• This aligns with India’s broader push towards leveraging space technology for civilian, scientific, and commercial applications, while also addressing sustainability challenges associated with digital expansion.

Why in news?

The Supreme Court of India has urged the Union Law Secretary to consider steps to prevent the misuse of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, particularly in cases involving consensual adolescent relationships.

While setting aside an Allahabad High Court order on age determination in a bail matter, a bench of Justices recommended exploring a “Romeo-Juliet clause”. Such a provision would exempt consensual sexual activity between teenagers close in age from criminal prosecution, an approach followed in several countries, including the US.

The observation comes amid a pending public interest litigation on the age of consent and reflects growing judicial concern over the blanket criminalisation of consensual sexual acts between minors under the existing POCSO framework.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• POCSO Act: Balancing Child Protection and Adolescent Autonomy
• Growing Momentum for Reform
• Union Government’s Case for Retaining the Existing Law
• Data Highlights Misuse and Unintended Consequences of POCSO
• Conclusion

POCSO Act: Balancing Child Protection and Adolescent Autonomy

• Under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, anyone below 18 is considered a child, and the law does not recognise consent by minors.
• As a result, all sexual activity involving a minor is criminalised, irrespective of whether it is consensual or non-exploitative.
• In its recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India acknowledged that while POCSO is a “solemn articulation of justice” aimed at protecting children from abuse, its misuse has created a “grim societal chasm”.
• The court observed that the law is often invoked by families to oppose consensual relationships between adolescents, raising concerns about over-criminalisation and the denial of young people’s autonomy.

Growing Momentum for Reform

• The demand to amend the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 has gained renewed traction through a pending public interest litigation before the Supreme Court of India concerning safeguards for women in sexual offence prosecutions.
• Arguments for Adolescent Autonomy
  • Senior Advocate Indira Jaising, assisting the court as amicus curiae, has argued for either reading down the age of consent or introducing statutory exceptions.
  • In her submissions, she contended that blanket criminalisation violates adolescents’ fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.
• ‘Evolving Capacity’ and the Mature Minor Doctrine
  • Jaising maintained that adolescents aged 16–18 possess an “evolving capacity” to make informed decisions about sexual autonomy.
  • Drawing on the common law “mature minor” doctrine, she argued that treating all under-18s as incapable of consent ignores scientific realities, including the biological onset of puberty.
• Proposal for a Close-in-Age Exception
  • To address misuse of the law, Jaising proposed a “close-in-age” or “Romeo-Juliet” exception.
  • Under this approach, consensual relationships between adolescents close in age—such as a 16- and 17-year-old—would not attract criminal liability, preventing unnecessary incarceration under the POCSO framework.

Union Government’s Case for Retaining the Existing Law

• The Union Government of India has opposed any reduction in the age of consent or the creation of legislative exceptions under the POCSO Act, 2012.
• In its submissions before the Supreme Court of India, it argued that fixing the age of consent at 18 is a deliberate and carefully considered choice to provide an absolute protective shield for children.
• Rationale: Vulnerability and Strict Liability
  • The government maintained that minors lack the legal and developmental capacity to give meaningful consent.
  • It defended the Act’s strict liability framework—where consent is irrelevant—on the ground that children are especially vulnerable to manipulation and coercion by adults, including those in positions of trust.
• Concerns Over Dilution and Misuse
  • According to the government, introducing exceptions or lowering the age of consent could create loopholes that allow child abuse and trafficking to be disguised as consensual relationships.
  • Diluting the age threshold, it warned, would revive the very mischief the law was enacted to address.
• Preference for Judicial Discretion
  • The Centre argued that relief in hard cases should come through judicial discretion exercised on a case-by-case basis, rather than through statutory dilution of protections built into the law.
• Law Commission’s View
  • In 2023, the Law Commission of India also advised against lowering the age of consent to 16.
  • However, it acknowledged the concern by recommending guided judicial discretion in sentencing for cases involving tacit consent by adolescents aged 16–18, instead of creating a blanket statutory exception.

Data Highlights Misuse and Unintended Consequences of POCSO

• Empirical evidence supports judicial concerns over the application of the POCSO Act, 2012.
• A study by Enfold Proactive Health Trust and UNICEF found that nearly 25% of POCSO cases in Maharashtra, Assam, and West Bengal between 2016 and 2020 involved consensual “romantic” relationships between adolescents.
• The data indicates frequent misuse of the law by families to control daughters’ choices, particularly in inter-caste or inter-religious relationships.
• Beyond legal misuse, the criminalisation of adolescent sexuality has serious public health implications.
• Mandatory reporting under POCSO compels doctors to inform police about underage pregnancies or sexual activity, discouraging adolescents from accessing essential sexual and reproductive healthcare due to fear of prosecution.

Conclusion

• The Supreme Court’s recent judgment underscored that this problem cannot be resolved through case-by-case discretion alone.
• It signalled the need for a structural legislative solution, warning that when a law designed to protect children is misused as “a tool for exacting revenge”, the very idea of justice risks being inverted.

Why in news?

India’s belated induction into US-led initiatives like Minerals Security Partnership and Pax Silica has evoked a sense of déjà vu among policymakers. As with MSP—where India joined a year after launch—its entry into Pax Silica came after the initiative was already underway, seen largely as a conciliatory gesture amid efforts to steady bilateral ties.

The significance lies in what these groupings signal about the emerging global tech order, especially as countries reorganise supply chains in strategic sectors with Chinese presence.

Platforms like Pax Silica could shape rules by addressing chokepoints in inputs such as magnets and critical minerals—effectively determining where leverage will sit.

India’s initial exclusion, followed by a late inclusion, carries a subtle message: strategic goodwill alone may not suffice. To be a partner of first choice in US-led initiatives, India must be seen as bringing tangible capabilities and value to the table in shaping resilient, rules-setting supply chains.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• About Pax Silica
• Why India Was Initially Excluded from Pax Silica?
• Shared Challenge: China’s Critical Minerals Dominance

About Pax Silica

• Pax Silica is a US-led strategic initiative aimed at countering China’s dominance in next-generation technologies.
• It seeks to reduce “coercive dependencies” and protect materials and capabilities foundational to artificial intelligence, enabling aligned nations to develop and deploy transformative technologies at scale.
• Objectives and Scope
  • According to the US State Department, Pax Silica is designed to build a secure, prosperous, and innovation-driven silicon supply chain.
  • It aims to ensure access across the entire AI stack—from critical minerals and semiconductor chips to security and logistics infrastructure.
• Key Thrust Areas Under Pax Silica
  • Under Pax Silica, participating countries aim to:
    • Pursue joint ventures and strategic co-investments
    • Protect sensitive technologies and critical infrastructure from undue foreign control
    • Build trusted technology ecosystems spanning ICT systems, fibre-optic cables, data centres, foundational AI models, and applications
• Founding Members and Their Strengths
  • The inaugural Pax Silica Summit brought together Japan, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Israel, the United Arab Emirates, and Australia.
  • These countries collectively host key companies and investors that power the global AI and semiconductor supply chain, reflecting their technological or resource-based leverage.

Why India Was Initially Excluded from Pax Silica?

• Pax Silica aims to secure supply chains spanning critical minerals, energy inputs, advanced manufacturing, and semiconductors.
• India’s initial absence reflects perceptions that it lacks decisive edge technologies or control over key resources central to the grouping’s objectives.
• What the Selected Countries Bring?
  • Each of the eight founding members offers a distinct strategic advantage:
    • The Netherlands controls specialised lithography machines vital for chipmaking.
    • Japan and South Korea bring deep technology and manufacturing expertise.
    • Australia contributes critical mineral reserves and mining capabilities.
    • Israel is a global innovation and technology hub.
    • Singapore serves as a major tran-shipment and logistics hub.
    • The UK offers strengths in services and technology.
    • The UAE has rapidly built AI capabilities and supporting infrastructure.
• A Familiar Pattern from MSP
• A similar logic shaped the initial membership of the Minerals Security Partnership, where early partners included countries with clear mineral, technology, or institutional advantages.
• India joined later, despite its efforts to position itself as a node in global supply-chain realignment as firms diversify away from China.
• The Takeaway for India
  • The common thread among the founding members is a tangible lead in AI or semiconductor supply chains—an area where India currently lacks comparable processing capacity and expertise.
  • As with earlier initiatives such as the MSP, this gap explains India’s absence at the outset.
  • The exclusion underscores a consistent message: entry into US-led strategic groupings hinges on demonstrable capabilities and leverage—not just intent.
  • To be a first-choice partner, India must strengthen its control over critical inputs, technologies, or platforms that shape supply-chain rules.

Shared Challenge: China’s Critical Minerals Dominance

• Experts point out that China’s dominance in critical minerals has created sharp global price gaps, disadvantaging non-Chinese supply chains.
• While this opens space for India to attract US investment, it also raises risks of Chinese coercion as India deepens alignment with Washington.
• US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent framed China’s export controls as “China versus the rest of the world,” calling for support from Europe, India, and Asian democracies.
• Despite this rhetoric and shared concerns, India remained outside Pax Silica’s initial list, underscoring a gap between strategic alignment and perceived capabilities.

Why in the News?

• An apex wildlife advisory body has prepared draft guidelines regulating the diversion of forest land inside wildlife sanctuaries for religious structures.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Protected Areas (Background, National Board for Wildlife, Need for Guidelines)
• About the Guidelines (Key Provisions, Implications, etc.)

Background: Protected Areas and Legal Framework in India

• India’s wildlife sanctuaries and national parks are governed under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, which aims to protect wildlife habitats from human-induced pressures.
• Any non-forest activity within protected areas is highly regulated and generally discouraged unless it meets strict conservation criteria.
• Additionally, the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, places restrictions on the diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes.
• As per this law, forest land diversion after 1980 requires explicit approval from the central government, reinforcing the principle that ecological protection must take precedence over development or encroachment.

Role of the National Board for Wildlife

• The Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife (SCNBWL) is an apex advisory body under the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change.
• It evaluates proposals related to infrastructure and land-use changes within protected wildlife habitats.
• The Committee’s recommendations play a critical role in determining whether activities within sanctuaries align with conservation objectives.
• The formulation of guidelines on religious structures falls within this mandate, given the potential ecological consequences of such constructions.

Context for Framing the Guidelines

• The issue gained prominence following a proposal involving the Balaram Ambaji Wildlife Sanctuary in Gujarat, where diversion of forest land was sought for a religious establishment.
• Although initial approval was granted, it was later revoked after concerns were raised about the absence of recorded forest rights and the risk of setting a precedent.
• This episode highlighted the lack of a uniform framework to assess similar proposals across States.
• It also exposed governance gaps in cases where religious sites exist within forested areas but lack legal recognition in settlement records.

Key Provisions of the Draft Guidelines

• The draft guidelines prepared by the apex wildlife body lay down the following principles:

• Post-1980 constructions on forest land are to be treated as encroachments as a general rule.
• Regularisation of existing structures may be considered only in exceptional cases where the State government provides a reasoned and documented justification.
• Expansion of religious structures within sanctuaries is generally prohibited. Limited expansion may be allowed only if required for managing ecological conflict or essential public utilities.
• Case-by-case scrutiny is mandated, with final decisions resting with the central government after ecological assessment.

• These guidelines are currently under deliberation by State governments before final adoption.

Balancing Faith, Ecology, and Governance

• India’s forests often contain sacred groves, caves, and pilgrimage sites that predate modern conservation laws.
• While cultural and religious practices are constitutionally protected, they cannot override environmental safeguards in ecologically sensitive zones.
• Unchecked construction can fragment habitats, increase human-wildlife conflict, and undermine conservation goals.
• The guidelines seek to strike a balance by recognising historical presence without legitimising fresh encroachments or large-scale development.

Implications for Wildlife Conservation

• If implemented effectively, the guidelines can:

• Prevent gradual erosion of protected areas through incremental construction.
• Establish uniform standards for States when dealing with sensitive land diversion requests.
• Strengthen the legal position of conservation authorities in resisting non-essential activities inside sanctuaries.

• However, inconsistent enforcement or political pressure could dilute their impact, making monitoring and transparency crucial.

Why in News?

• On January 16, 2025 (National Startup Day), the Prime Minister of India addressed the startup ecosystem on the 10th anniversary of the Startup India scheme, launched on January 16, 2016.
• He highlighted record growth in startup registrations, changing attitudes towards risk-taking, and India’s ambition for global leadership in deep tech and indigenous AI.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• The Startup India Scheme
• Key Highlights of Startup India’s Decade-long Journey
• Challenges and Way Ahead
• Conclusion

The Startup India Scheme:

• It is a flagship Government of India initiative, launched in 2016, to foster a robust ecosystem for innovation and entrepreneurship, transforming India into a nation of job creators through support pillars:
  • Simplification & Handholding,
  • Funding Support, and
  • Incubation & Industry-Academia Partnership.
• It offers benefits like tax exemptions, easier compliance, seed funding, and mentorship to eligible startups, promoting economic growth and large-scale job creation.

Key Highlights of Startup India’s Decade-long Journey:

• Record growth in startup ecosystem:
  • Nearly 44,000 startups registered in 2025 — highest annual addition since inception. India is now the 3rd largest startup ecosystem globally.
  • Growth trajectory: Less than 500 startups, and 4 unicorns in 2014. Over 2 lakh DPIIT-recognised startups, and about 125 active unicorns in 2025.
  • Impact: Startups → Unicorns → IPOs → creates a virtuous cycle of job creation, and innovation-led growth.
• Cultural shift - Mainstreaming risk-taking:
  • Risk-taking is now socially accepted and respected, unlike earlier stigma. Shift from job-seeking mindset to job-creating mindset.
  • Expansion of entrepreneurship beyond elite families to middle class and poor - boosting entrepreneurial culture, risk capital, and demographic dividend.
• Government support and funding ecosystem:
  • ₹25,000 crore invested via Fund of Funds for Startups (FFS).
  • Fund of Funds 2.0 (₹10,000 crore) approved in April 2025 to focus on deep tech sectors (Artificial Intelligence (AI), Machine Learning, Quantum technologies, Defence & Aerospace).
  • Objective: To provide patient risk capital due to long gestation periods.
• Strategic focus on indigenous AI and manufacturing:
  • PM’s call for indigenous AI solutions developed by Indian talent and hosted on Indian servers (data sovereignty).
  • IndiaAI Mission: 38,000+ GPUs onboarded to democratise access to computing power.
  • Emphasis on: Manufacturing, global-standard products, and leadership in new technologies (not mere partnerships) - boosting strategic autonomy, economic security, and data sovereignty.
• Inclusivity in the startup revolution:
  • Women-led startups: For example, over 45% recognised startups have at least one woman director/partner. India is the 2nd largest ecosystem of women-led startups globally.
  • Geographical spread: Rapid rise in tier-2, tier-3 cities and rural areas. Focus on solving local and grassroots problems - promoting inclusive growth, women entrepreneurship, and regional balance.
• Regulatory reforms and ease of doing business:
  • Jan Vishwas Act: Decriminalised over 180 provisions - promoting Ease of Doing Business, and trust-based governance.
  • Key enablers: Self-certification under multiple laws, simplified mergers and exits, and reduction in Inspector Raj.
  • Innovation ecosystem strengthened through Atal Tinkering Labs, hackathons, and incubation support.
• Sectoral breakthroughs enabled by policy support:
  • Defence and space: iDEX enabled startup participation in defence procurement. The space sector opened to private players, with about 200 space startups gaining global approvals.
  • Drone sector: Removal of outdated rules unlocked innovation.
  • Government e-Marketplace (GeM): Nearly 35,000 startups and small businesses are onboarded on GeM, and have received more than 5 lakh orders worth over Rs 50,000 crore, highlighting public procurement reforms.

Challenges and Way Ahead:

• Sustaining funding: During global economic uncertainties. Expand access to risk capital and advanced infrastructure (GPUs, labs).
• Bridging deep tech talent and R&D gaps: Strengthen deep tech ecosystems through academia–industry collaboration. Integrate startups with national missions (AI, defence, space, climate tech).
• Ensuring quality scale-up: Enhance domestic manufacturing under startup-led innovation.
• Managing cybersecurity: Ensuring data governance in AI-driven growth.
• Avoiding regional and sectoral concentration: Focus on export-oriented and globally competitive startups.

Conclusion:

• As India marks a decade of the Startup India Initiative, the country’s startup ecosystem stands at an inflection point - moving decisively from rapid expansion to sustainable scale and deeper integration with the real economy.
• It represents not merely scale, but structural transformation built on demographic advantage, digital public infrastructure, and a sustained reform agenda.
• As India advances towards a $7.3 trillion economy by 2030 and the broader vision of Viksit Bharat 2047, startups are poised to remain central to the country’s development trajectory.

Context

• India entered 2025 amid global economic uncertainty, facing headwinds that many feared would derail its growth trajectory.
• Concerns were reinforced when the United States imposed 50% tariffs, prompting speculation that India’s export-led sectors would face significant strain.
• Yet, contrary to these expectations, the Indian economy proved resilient. This resilience was not accidental but rooted in sustained reform efforts, which PM Modi described as a continuous national mission.
• The upcoming 2026–27 Budget is therefore expected to reinforce this mission by deepening reforms, enhancing competitiveness, and strengthening domestic levers of growth.

Fiscal Strategy for Growth

• A central policy challenge ahead is balancing growth-enhancing expenditure with prudent fiscal consolidation.
• Strengthening the domestic engines of consumption, investment, and productivity requires targeted public spending, especially in infrastructure and social sectors, without undermining fiscal credibility.
• Maintaining India’s current glide path of fiscal consolidation is critical to containing debt risks and sustaining macroeconomic stability, particularly during a time of volatile global capital flows.

Defence Sector as an Industrial and Strategic Lever

• One of the most significant reform thrusts has been in national defence, not only for security reasons but also as a catalyst for industrialisation.
• Continued prioritisation of capital expenditure is necessary to modernise defence capabilities, with proposals to increase the share of capital outlays to 30% in the coming budget.
• Enhanced funding for the Defence Research and Development Organisation would fortify indigenous innovation, while new defence industrial corridors, building on progress in Uttar Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, could geographically diversify industrial capacity.
• An eastern corridor would align defence production with broader regional development goals.
• Private enterprises have also emerged as key drivers of defence exports, accounting for nearly two-thirds of exports in 2024–25.
• Institutional support through a defence export promotion council could strengthen coordination across ministries, foreign missions, defence firms and foreign buyers.
• Such coordination is essential for meeting India’s ambitious export target of ₹50,000 crore by 2028–29.

Strategic Sectors and Critical Mineral Supply Chains

• India’s industrial transition toward clean energy, advanced manufacturing, electric mobility, semiconductors and other strategic technologies is reshaping resource requirements.
• The establishment of the National Critical Mineral Mission in 2025 has given India a strategic platform to secure minerals essential for these industries.
• Complementing this mission with a tailings recovery programme and dedicated financing could further enhance resource security, reduce import dependence, and foster a circular economy for critical minerals, elements increasingly central to technological competitiveness.

Export Competitiveness and Trade Facilitation

• In a period of global trade fragmentation, export competitiveness will require more than market access and exchange rate stability.
• Schemes such as the Remission of Duties and Taxes on Exported Products remain vital in offsetting embedded costs that erode price competitiveness.
• Significantly raising the scheme's budgetary allocation would support exporters facing tightening global margins.
• Reducing tariff complexity and rationalising customs slabs would address inverted duty structures that currently penalize domestic manufacturers and discourage value addition within India.

Deepening Capital Markets and Financial Infrastructure

• Sustained growth also depends on expanding long-term financing beyond the banking sector.
• Deepening corporate bond markets is critical for large-scale infrastructure, manufacturing, and urban development.
• Policy measures such as widening issuer eligibility, encouraging large firms to issue market instruments, increasing investment caps for insurers, and adjusting rating thresholds could boost market liquidity and diversify funding sources.
• Permitting provident funds to invest in non-convertible debentures issued by infrastructure and real estate trusts would mobilise long-term domestic capital for sectors traditionally reliant on public financing.

Institutional Efficiency and Dispute Resolution

• A modern economy requires efficient dispute resolution systems.
• India’s direct tax appellate system faces significant pendency, especially at the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) level, where vacancies approach 40%.
• A dual-track disposal system that differentiates cases by complexity and value could accelerate resolution, reduce uncertainty for businesses, and improve tax administration credibility, an underrated component of competitiveness.

Emerging Technologies and Industrial Scale

• Sectors such as drones highlight India’s evolving innovation ecosystem.
• Global competitiveness in the drone sector will require both R&D and scale.
• Policy proposals for enhancing production-linked incentives and establishing a dedicated R&D fund would accelerate the commercialisation cycle and bolster export readiness, mirroring approaches adopted successfully by major manufacturing economies.

Conclusion

• As India prepares the 2026–27 Budget, its economic priorities are clear: sustain momentum, strengthen structural competitiveness, and crowd in private investment.
• This requires a combination of fiscal discipline, policy certainty, and reform continuity.
• By addressing bottlenecks across defence, manufacturing, critical minerals, export policy, financial markets, and institutional efficiency, India can fortify its domestic growth engines and enhance its global standing.

Why in news?

Union Home Minister Amit Shah laid the foundation stone for India’s first state-funded Bio-Safety Level 4 (BSL-4) containment facility in Gandhinagar.

Describing it as a “health shield” for the nation, he said the laboratory marks the start of a new era in India’s health security and biotechnology capabilities.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• About BSL-4 Facility
• Gujarat’s State-Funded BSL-4 Laboratory
• Existing BSL-4 and ABSL-4 Facilities in India
• India’s Expanding Biosafety Laboratory Network

About BSL-4 Facility

• A Bio-Safety Level 4 (BSL-4) facility represents the highest level of biological containment, designed to safely handle the world’s most dangerous and highly infectious pathogens, many of which lack effective vaccines or treatments.
• Operating under stringent international safety standards, these laboratories enable advanced research on deadly diseases, including the development of diagnostics, vaccines, and therapeutics, as well as rapid outbreak investigation and response.
• India’s upcoming BSL-4 laboratory in Sector-28 of Gandhinagar, along with an Animal Bio-Safety Level (ABSL) facility, will serve as a strategic national asset for research on some of the deadliest known pathogens.
• This will strengthen the country’s health security and bio-preparedness.

Gujarat’s State-Funded BSL-4 Laboratory

• The BSL-4 laboratory being built in Gandhinagar, Gujarat, will be India’s first fully state-funded and state-controlled BSL-4 facility and the second civilian BSL-4 research lab in the country.
• Spread over 11,000 sq metres and costing ₹362 crore, it is being developed under the Gujarat State Biotechnology Mission.
• Institutional Framework and Timeline
  • The facility will operate under the Gujarat Biotechnology Research Centre, which already houses a BSL-2+ laboratory and played a key role during the Covid-19 pandemic by sequencing the SARS-CoV-2 genome.
  • Planning for the BSL-4 lab began in mid-2022, with the foundation stone laid on January 13, 2026.
• Infrastructure and Safety Standards
  • The complex will include BSL-4, BSL-3, BSL-2, ABSL-4, and ABSL-3 laboratory modules, along with advanced utilities and support systems.
  • It is being developed in line with international biosafety guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institutes of Health, Department of Biotechnology, and Indian Council of Medical Research.
• Role in Disease Control and Vaccine Research
  • The lab will strengthen Gujarat’s and India’s capacity to respond in real time to outbreaks of deadly human diseases and zoonotic infections.
  • It will also support advanced research into diagnostics, vaccines, and therapeutics.
  • The ABSL-4 component will allow animal disease research and vaccine production using antibodies derived from animals—work that earlier required sending samples to ICAR–National Institute of High Security Animal Diseases.
• National Facility and Expert Oversight
  • The Department of Biotechnology has signed an MoU designating the lab as a national facility, ensuring guidance from expert institutions across India.
  • Officials note that the lab will remove long-standing bottlenecks caused by the lack of BSL-4 infrastructure in the country.

Existing BSL-4 and ABSL-4 Facilities in India

• Civilian BSL-4 Laboratories - India currently has only one functional civilian BSL-4 laboratory, located at the National Institute of Virology in Pune, Maharashtra. This facility handles research on the most dangerous human pathogens.
• Defence-Sector BSL-4 Facility - In late 2024, the Defence Research and Development Organisation established its own BSL-4 laboratory in Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, under the Defence Ministry, expanding India’s high-containment research capacity.
• High-Security Animal Disease Laboratories
  • India has two major laboratories studying high-risk zoonotic diseases:
    • The National Institute of High Security Animal Diseases (ICAR–NIHSAD) in Bhopal, currently rated ABSL-3+, with plans announced in June 2025 to upgrade it to ABSL-4.
    • The International Centre for Foot and Mouth Disease (ICAR–ICFMD) in Bhubaneswar, Odisha, which operates with an ABSL-3Ag rating.
• Global Context
  • Officials note that globally about 69 BSL-4 laboratories are operational or under development, underscoring India’s relatively limited but gradually expanding presence in high-containment biological research infrastructure.

India’s Expanding Biosafety Laboratory Network

• As of March 2025, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, through the Department of Health Research, has approved 165 biosafety laboratories under the Virus Research and Diagnostic Laboratories (VRDL) scheme.
• This includes 154 BSL-2 and 11 BSL-3 labs aimed at epidemic preparedness and disaster response.
• ICMR-Led Biosafety Facilities - Beyond VRDLs, the Indian Council of Medical Research has established 21 biosafety laboratories across its institutes, comprising 1 BSL-4, 8 BSL-3, and 12 BSL-2 facilities.
• Science & Technology–Supported Labs - Under the Department of Science and Technology, the Anusandhan National Research Foundation has funded 5 BSL/ABSL-3 laboratories through the Intensification of Research in High Priority Areas (IRHPA) programme.
• Biotechnology, Agriculture, and Industrial Research
  • The Department of Biotechnology has set up 26 biosafety laboratories across DBT institutes.
  • The Indian Council of Agricultural Research has established 9 biosafety laboratories.
  • The Council of Scientific and Industrial Research has created 11 biosafety laboratories across its network.
• Overall Picture
  • Together, these initiatives reflect a broad-based expansion of India’s biosafety infrastructure—anchored by BSL-2 and BSL-3 capacity—with targeted investments in high-containment labs to strengthen national preparedness for infectious disease threats.

Why in news?

X, owned by Elon Musk, has restricted its Grok AI tool from generating sexualised images of women and children following widespread global criticism.

The decision represents a clear retreat after Musk initially placed responsibility on users creating such content and later claimed ignorance about the tool’s misuse involving children.

Escalating regulatory scrutiny across multiple countries ultimately compelled the platform to curb the AI’s image-generation capabilities.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Grok Controversy: AI-Generated Sexualised Images and Safety Gaps
• Initial Response to the Backlash
• Regulatory Pressure Triggers the Rollback

Grok Controversy: AI-Generated Sexualised Images and Safety Gaps

• A December 2025 update to Grok enabled users to generate sexualised and objectionable images of women and children using existing photographs, often without consent or knowledge.
• Users prompted the AI to digitally undress women or place them in suggestive poses, with the generated images appearing publicly in comment threads, leading to harassment.
• Instances involving children further intensified concerns, highlighting serious gaps in AI safeguards and content moderation on X.

Initial Response to the Backlash

• Following global outrage over Grok-generated sexualised images, Elon Musk stated that users generating illegal content with Grok would face the same consequences as those uploading illegal material directly to X.
• Musk emphasised that Grok generates images only in response to user prompts and does not act autonomously.
• He asserted that the AI is designed to refuse illegal requests and comply with the laws of the relevant country or state.
• Denial of Knowledge and Technical Explanation
  • Recently, Musk denied any awareness of Grok being used to create sexualised images of children, claiming there were “literally zero” such instances to his knowledge.
  • He suggested that any unexpected behaviour could result from adversarial hacking, which the company fixes promptly.
• Platform-Level Restrictions
  • Before the final rollback, X had restricted Grok’s image-generation features to paid users.
  • However, within hours of Musk’s denial, the company announced a complete shutdown of Grok’s ability to generate sexualised images, regardless of user status.
  • The move marked a clear reversal by X, effectively acknowledging the severity of the issue and responding to mounting regulatory and public pressure by removing the problematic functionality altogether.

Regulatory Pressure Triggers the Rollback

• X’s decision to restrict Grok followed strong regulatory action, beginning with a stern notice from the Government of India.
• After being flagged for failing to meet due diligence obligations under the Information Technology Act, 2000 and related rules, X removed about 3,500 pieces of content and blocked 600 accounts, admitting lapses in compliance.
• The controversy quickly spread beyond India. In the United Kingdom, an impending legal change is set to criminalise the creation of such sexualised images.
• Malaysia and Indonesia blocked access to Grok and initiated legal action against X and xAI, citing failures to prevent harmful content and protect users.
• In the US, the California Attorney General announced an investigation into Grok and xAI over the generation of objectionable images, adding to mounting legal pressure on the platform.
• X’s New Restrictions and Safeguards
  • In response, X announced technological measures to prevent Grok from editing images of real people into revealing clothing, including bikinis, applying the restriction to all users.
  • The platform also limited image creation and editing via Grok to paid subscribers and introduced geoblocking in jurisdictions where such content is illegal.
  • X reiterated its commitment to platform safety, stating it has zero tolerance for child sexual exploitation, non-consensual nudity, and unwanted sexual content, marking a decisive retreat under sustained global regulatory scrutiny.

Context:

• With elections due in four States and one Union Territory in about 10 weeks, India’s electoral landscape is once again witnessing the fusion of politics, media, and technology.
• From WhatsApp-driven mobilisation (2019) to digital-forward campaigns (2024), Indian elections are evolving rapidly.
• While 2029 is predicted to be the “AI election”, the 2026 elections reflect a hybrid ecosystem—a mix of traditional media, social media, influencers, and artificial intelligence.
• This raises serious concerns about fake news, influencer politics, and deepfakes, with implications for electoral integrity and democratic accountability.

Changing Media–Politics Interface in India:

• Campaigns now extend beyond rallies to reels, podcasts, jingles, AI-generated calls, and algorithm-driven content.
• Votes are cast offline, but perceptions are shaped online, making digital platforms the primary battleground.

Fake News - A Structural Feature of Elections:

• What is fake news?
  • While there is no legal definition of fake news in India, Australia’s eSafety Commissioner defines it as “fictional news stories made up to support certain agendas”.
  • It is often described as “yellow journalism on steroids”, amplified by algorithms.
• Why it matters in elections?
  • Fake news directly impacts voter perception, polarisation, and trust in institutions.
  • With over 90 crore internet users in India in 2025, influencing perception and shaping narratives has become possible with just a few clicks.
  • For example, a study by the Indian School of Business and CyberPeace revealed that 46% of all fake news was political in nature.
• Who is affected: 3 out of 5 Indians access news online. A Pew Research Centre study of 2025 found that 65% of those surveyed viewed made-up news and information as a huge concern, among the highest globally.
• When does it peak: During elections - NCRB recorded a 70% rise in fake news cases in 2019, an election year.
• Where does it spread?
  • Social media and messaging platforms - WhatsApp, X, Facebook, Instagram.
  • AI-generated visuals, doctored videos, synthetic clips blur fact and fiction. Algorithms provide virality without accountability.

Media Consumption Patterns - Digital Dominance:

• India has close to 900 private television channels, and nearly half of them are news channels. Television still has a deep reach — 23 crore homes own a TV set.
• However, shift to digital is decisive -
  • 7 in 10 Indians prefer online news (Reuters Institute).
  • News sources - YouTube (55%), WhatsApp (46%), Instagram (37%), and Facebook (36%).
• Even with these media consumption patterns, newspapers, both in regional languages and English, still remain comparatively high on the credibility quotient.

Influencers - The New Political Intermediaries:

• Influencers wield significant agenda-setting power, backed by professional research and production teams.
• Gen Z trends: Only 13% follow celebrities, 86% prefer influencers.
• Political outreach:
  • Senior politicians and parties actively engage influencers. Union Government empanelled influencer agencies via MyGov (2023).
  • There are concerns over political bias, as at least one empanelled agency’s leadership openly supports the ruling dispensation.

Deepfakes - AI as a Political Weapon:

• Nature of the threat: Digitally altered or AI-generated videos and audio impersonating leaders and celebrities. For example,
  • Deceased political leaders “addressing” meetings.
  • Film actors criticising or endorsing political parties.
• Scale of the problem:
  • In the 60 days before the last Lok Sabha elections 5 crore AI-generated calls were made to voters using synthetic voices.
  • Meta approved 14 AI-generated ads inciting violence against Muslims and an opposition leader.
• Institutional failure:
  • The Election Commission of India (ECI), as a constitutional authority under Article 324, should regulate electoral communication.
  • However, weak implementation capacity (e.g., recent SIR process) raises doubts about its preparedness to handle AI-driven misinformation.

Challenges and Way Ahead:

• Absence of a legal definition of fake news: Legal clarity - define fake news and deepfakes within electoral and IT laws.
• Algorithmic amplification without transparency: Platform accountability - Algorithmic transparency, faster takedown mechanisms during election periods.
• Lack of robust regulation of political influencers: ECI-led regulatory framework mandatory disclosure of AI-generated political content, clear guidelines for influencers and political advertising.
• Rapid proliferation of deepfakes and synthetic media: Strengthen inter-agency coordination (ECI, MeitY, platforms, civil society).
• Institutional inertia and regulatory gaps: Within ECI and digital governance frameworks. Independent oversight bodies for election-time digital content moderation.
• Threats: To free and fair elections, voter autonomy, and democratic trust. Digital literacy and media awareness campaigns for voters.

Conclusion:

• Indian elections are entering a phase where technology is no longer just an enabler but a disruptor of democracy.
• Fake news, influencers, and deepfakes have become structural features of electoral politics, challenging the foundations of free, fair, and informed choice.
• As India moves towards an AI-driven electoral future, institutional preparedness, regulatory foresight, and citizen awareness will determine whether technology strengthens democracy or subverts it.
• For the world’s largest democracy, the credibility of elections is inseparable from the credibility of information.

Why in the News?

• A recent national report has identified India’s deadliest districts for road accidents, revealing that most fatalities are linked to infrastructure and systemic failures rather than traffic violations.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Road Safety Scenario (Statistics, Key Factors Behind Fatalities, etc.)
• News Summary

India’s Road Safety Scenario

• India records the highest number of road accident deaths globally, far exceeding other major countries.
• Despite having the world’s second-largest road network, road safety outcomes remain poor.
• According to recent estimates, nearly 3.5 lakh people died in road accidents during 2023-24, highlighting the scale of the crisis.
• Road safety in India has traditionally focused on driver behaviour, such as speeding or drunk driving.
• However, emerging evidence shows that this approach alone is insufficient, as deeper structural issues dominate accident causation.

Key Structural Factors Behind Road Fatalities

• The report underlines that 59% of road accident fatalities occurred without any traffic violation, clearly pointing to road engineering deficiencies as a primary cause of deaths. These include:

• Poor road design and alignment
• Absence or damage of crash barriers
• Inadequate signage and road markings
• Insufficient street lighting
• Unsafe junctions and pedestrian crossings

• Such defects convert routine travel into a high-risk activity, especially on rural roads and highways.

Geographic Concentration of Road Accidents

• Road fatalities in India are highly concentrated rather than evenly spread.
• The report identifies 100 districts accounting for more than 25% of total road deaths over two years. Among them:

• Nashik Rural and Pune Rural recorded the highest number of severe accidents.
• Other high-fatality districts include Patna, Ahmednagar, Purba Midnapur, and Belagavi.
• States such as Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Karnataka, and Rajasthan dominate the list.

• This concentration indicates that targeted interventions in specific districts can yield substantial reductions in fatalities.

Nature and Timing of Fatal Accidents

• The report highlights clear accident patterns:

• 53% of deaths occurred between 6 PM and midnight, reflecting poor visibility and fatigue-related risks.
• Rear-end, head-on, and pedestrian crashes accounted for 72% of fatalities.
• Speeding contributed to only 19% of deaths, while rash driving and dangerous overtaking together accounted for less than 10%.

• This challenges the perception that driver misconduct alone is responsible and shifts attention to road design and traffic management failures.

Emergency Response and Medical Gaps

• Post-accident response remains weak:

• Only about one-fifth of victims used the government 108 ambulance services.
• A majority were transported using private vehicles or private ambulances, delaying critical care.
• Hospital readiness and trauma care infrastructure vary widely across districts.

• Delayed medical response significantly increases mortality, making emergency preparedness a crucial pillar of road safety.

News Summary: Findings and Recommendations of the Report

• The joint report by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways and SaveLIFE Foundation provides a clear roadmap for action:

• Focus on known crash-prone locations rather than spreading resources thinly.
• Conduct Road Safety Surveys on critical corridors by NHAI and state PWDs.
• Implement site-specific engineering corrections based on Indian Road Congress and MoRTH guidelines.
• Strengthen policing capacity at high-fatality police station jurisdictions.
• Improve emergency response by expanding effective coverage of 108 ambulance services.
• Use existing schemes more efficiently instead of launching new ones.

• The report stresses that reducing road deaths requires better coordination, clearer accountability, and sustained leadership, not additional laws or schemes.

Context

• India’s aspiration to become a developed (‘Viksit’) nation and a $30 trillion economy by 2047 has become a defining narrative in contemporary public discourse.
• While this vision is both desirable and attainable, it cannot be realised solely through investments in infrastructure, manufacturing, and digital innovation.
• Developmental transitions historically succeed when nations prioritise human capital formation as much as physical capital.
• In India, however, one critical dimension of human development remains under-recognised: Early Childhood Care and Development (ECCD).
• Far from being a welfare concern, ECCD represents a strategic economic investment with long-term implications for productivity, equity and national competitiveness.

The Importance of the Early Years

• Scientific evidence highlights the first 1,000 days of life, from conception to age two, as the period during which up to 85% of brain development and most neural connections are formed.
• Extending this window to eight years totals roughly 3,000 days, during which foundational cognitive, emotional, social and behavioural capacities take shape.
• Children who receive adequate nutrition, responsive care and cognitive stimulation during this period are more likely to complete schooling, acquire skills and contribute productively as adults.
• At a macro level, such cohorts reduce future public expenditure on healthcare and remedial education and expand the taxable workforce, demonstrating that ECCD generates durable, intergenerational returns.

India’s Progress and Remaining Gaps

• India’s own experience in child health illustrates the power of sustained investment.
• Over the past decades, programmes such as the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS), the Child Survival and Safe Motherhood initiative and the National Health Mission significantly reduced infant and child mortality and improved immunisation and nutrition outcomes.
• However, these efforts largely targeted survival, not developmental potential. Moreover, ECCD interventions have predominantly focused on low-income households.
• This targeted approach overlooks developmental challenges increasingly observed in middle- and upper-income families, including obesity, digital overexposure, reduced physical activity and delayed socio-emotional skills.
• Developmental risk is therefore more universal than assumed.

The Case for Early and Integrated Interventions

• Advances in neuroscience and epigenetics reinforce the need for interventions earlier than current policy frameworks provide.
• Parental nutrition, mental health, substance use and environmental exposures even before conception can affect gene expression and long-term health outcomes.
• Yet, formal support systems typically begin only around age three through Anganwadi centres or private preschools, well after the most critical developmental window has passed.
• The absence of parental support for responsive caregiving, stimulation and emotional bonding during the first 1,000 days represents a significant policy blind spot.
• To address these gaps, India must transition from fragmented programmes to an integrated ECCD framework that spans preconception to eight years of age.
• Key components include structured preconception counselling, nationwide parental education, growth and developmental milestone monitoring, quality early learning systems for children aged two to five, and collaboration across health, nutrition and education sectors.
• Schools, given their institutional reach, can evolve into holistic hubs for learning, nutrition and well-being rather than merely instructional spaces. 

The Way Forward: Towards a Societal and Policy Movement

• Realising such a transformation requires both state action and societal ownership. ECCD must become a subject of public conversation within homes, communities, workplaces and schools.
• Non-profit organisations, philanthropic institutions and the private sector can play critical roles in shaping ecosystems of care and learning.
• At the governmental level, effective coordination among ministries, including Health, Education and Women and Child Development, is essential.
• A dedicated inter-ministerial mission on ECCD could formalise responsibilities, streamline investments and ensure continuity across election and policy cycles.

Conclusion

• India’s long-term developmental trajectory will depend less on what it promises its children and more on what it invests in them during their earliest years.
• ECCD is not an optional add-on to India’s growth strategy; it is its foundation.
• The health, skills and productivity of future generations will ultimately determine whether India’s ambitions of becoming a developed nation are realised.
• A citizen-led movement for early childhood development, backed by robust policy and institutional frameworks, may prove to be the missing link in India’s journey towards inclusive and sustainable prosperity.

Why in news?

• A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India delivered a split verdict on the constitutionality of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
  • Given the divergent views, the case has been referred to the Chief Justice of India to constitute a larger bench for final adjudication.
• Inserted in 2018, the provision requires prior government approval before police can initiate enquiries or investigations against public servants for decisions taken in official duties.
• The judgment underscores a long-standing tension in administrative law — striking a balance between empowering agencies to act decisively against corruption and protecting honest civil servants from undue harassment.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Addressing Policy Paralysis in Governance
• Section 17A as a Shield for the Corrupt
• Divergent Readings of Supreme Court Precedents

Addressing Policy Paralysis in Governance

• Section 17A was introduced to prevent “policy paralysis” by protecting civil servants from investigative harassment over bona fide decisions.
• The concern was that fear of probes could deter officials from taking bold, necessary policy decisions.
• Protecting the ‘Steel Frame’ of India
  • Justice K V Viswanathan underscored the need for such protection, invoking Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel’s description of civil servants as the “Steel Frame of India.”
  • He warned that without safeguards, honest officers would adopt a risk-averse “play-it-safe” approach, ultimately harming national interests.
• The Constitutional Flaw in Section 17A
  • Justice Viswanathan acknowledged a key defect in the provision: the authority to grant or deny approval for investigations rests with the government itself, undermining the independence essential for corruption inquiries.
  • To preserve the provision’s constitutionality, Justice Viswanathan adopted a “constructive approach.”
  • He upheld the requirement of prior approval but ruled that decision-making must not be confined to the government alone.
  • Instead, complaints must be independently screened by the Lokpal at the Centre and Lokayuktas in the States.
• How the Proposed Mechanism Works?
  • Under this framework, when police seek approval to investigate, the government must forward the request to the Lokpal.
  • The Lokpal’s Inquiry Wing conducts a preliminary assessment, and if a prima facie case is found, the government is obliged to grant approval.
  • This ensures independent scrutiny of corruption allegations while retaining necessary protection for honest public servants, thereby balancing administrative efficiency with accountability.

Section 17A as a Shield for the Corrupt

• Justice B V Nagarathna held that Section 17A is contrary to the very objective of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
• She argued that by blocking enquiries at the threshold, the provision effectively protects corrupt officials rather than safeguarding honest ones.
• Conflict of Interest in Government Approval
  • She rejected the assumption that the government can act as an impartial authority in granting approval for investigations.
  • She highlighted the risks of policy bias and conflict of interest, especially where allegations involve senior officials or ministers, making impartial decision-making by subordinate officers unrealistic.
• Violation of the Right to Equality
  • She found Section 17A violative of Article 14, as it grants protection only to officials involved in “recommendations or decisions.”
  • This, she said, unfairly discriminates against lower-level officials who perform clerical functions or record file notings and are denied similar safeguards.
• Rejection of Judicial Reconstruction
  • Justice Nagarathna strongly disagreed with Justice Viswanathan’s effort to save the provision by routing approvals through the Lokpal.
  • She termed this “judicial legislation,” asserting that courts cannot rewrite statutes by replacing “Government” with “Lokpal.”
• ‘Cart Before the Horse’ Argument
  • She dismissed the government’s claim that Section 17A acts as a gatekeeper against frivolous complaints.
  • Without a preliminary police enquiry, she argued, it is impossible to assess whether allegations are genuine or baseless.
• A Tool of Control Over Officials
  • Justice Nagarathna warned that Section 17A enables the government to wield a “Damocles’ sword” over public servants, pressuring them to conform to political interests under the threat of investigation approvals being selectively granted.

Divergent Readings of Supreme Court Precedents

• A key disagreement in the split verdict centred on how to interpret two landmark rulings of the Supreme Court of India: Vineet Narain v. Union of India and Subramanian Swamy v. CBI.
• Both judgments had struck down prior approval requirements that restricted corruption investigations.
• Justice Nagarathna: Section 17A as a Revival of Invalid Law
  • Justice B V Nagarathna viewed Section 17A as “old wine in a new bottle,” arguing that it resurrects protections earlier invalidated.
  • She relied on Subramanian Swamy Case, where the Court held that any fetter on even a preliminary enquiry undermines the investigation process.
  • In her view, Section 17A creates the same barrier—now extended to all public servants—and therefore suffers from the same constitutional infirmity.
• Justice Viswanathan: Distinguishing the Earlier Rulings
  • Justice K V Viswanathan took a different approach, distinguishing Section 17A from the provisions struck down earlier.
  • He noted that Subramanian Swamy invalidated Section 6A of the DSPE Act mainly because it discriminated between officers based on rank, violating equality under the Constitution.
  • Since Section 17A applies uniformly to all public servants, he argued that this defect does not arise.
  • Justice Viswanathan further reasoned that the core principle of Vineet Narain and Subramanian Swamy was preventing executive control over investigations.
  • By routing prior approval through an independent body like the Lokpal, he argued, Section 17A addresses this concern and meets constitutional requirements.
• The Crux of the Disagreement
  • Thus, while Justice Nagarathna saw Section 17A as fundamentally incompatible with binding precedent, Justice Viswanathan believed that institutional redesign—through independent screening—was sufficient to reconcile the provision with earlier Supreme Court rulings.

Why in news?

Futuristic space and marine biotechnology explores extreme environments such as deep oceans and outer space to generate new biological knowledge, materials, and manufacturing processes.

Marine biotechnology studies microorganisms, algae, and other marine life to develop bioactive compounds, enzymes, biomaterials, food ingredients, and biostimulants adapted to harsh conditions.

Space biotechnology focuses on understanding how microbes, plants, and human biological systems respond to microgravity and radiation, expanding possibilities for innovation in science and industry.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Why Marine and Space Biotechnology Matters for India?
• India’s Current Position in Marine and Space Biotechnology
• Global Advances in Marine and Space Biotechnology
• The Way Forward for Marine and Space Biotechnology

Why Marine and Space Biotechnology Matters for India?

• India’s extensive coastline of over 11,000 km and a vast Exclusive Economic Zone of more than two million sq km provide access to rich marine biodiversity, yet its global share in marine outputs remains low, revealing large untapped potential.
• Investing in marine biomanufacturing can create new sources of food, energy, chemicals, and biomaterials while easing pressure on land, freshwater, and agriculture.
• At the same time, space biotechnology is vital for India’s long-term space ambitions, supporting safe food production, human health management, and biological manufacturing in extreme environments.
• Together, these fields can position India as a global leader in future-ready biomanufacturing.

India’s Current Position in Marine and Space Biotechnology

• India’s marine biomass production, including seaweed, remains modest at around 70,000 tonnes annually, forcing continued imports of seaweed-derived products like agar, carrageenan, and alginates for food, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, and medical use.
• Policy initiatives under the Blue Economy agenda, the Deep Ocean Mission, and BioE3 aim to build integrated marine biomanufacturing linking cultivation, extraction, and downstream applications.
• A limited set of private players such as Sea6 Energy and ClimateCrew, alongside research bodies like ICAR–Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute, are exploring scale-up pathways.
• In space biotechnology, Indian Space Research Organisation is advancing microgravity biology research on microbes, algae, and life-support systems, though private-sector participation remains limited due to the sector’s nascent stage.

Global Advances in Marine and Space Biotechnology

• The European Union is investing heavily in marine bioprospecting, algae-based biomaterials, and bioactive compounds, supported by shared research infrastructure such as the European Marine Biological Resource Centre.
• China has rapidly scaled seaweed aquaculture and marine bioprocessing to strengthen its bioeconomy.
• In space biotechnology, the United States leads through NASA and the International Space Station, where experiments on microbes, protein crystallisation, stem cells, and life-support systems advance drug discovery, regenerative medicine, and long-duration human space missions.

The Way Forward for Marine and Space Biotechnology

• Marine and space biotechnology remain largely untapped frontiers where early movers can secure long-term strategic and technological advantages.
• The main risk is slow, fragmented research and development.
• A dedicated roadmap with clear timelines and outcomes is essential to focus resources, coordinate efforts, and accelerate progress.

Context:

• India’s clean energy transition is increasingly dependent on imported critical minerals and rare earths, making external supply chains vital, especially as China tightens export controls.
• Like other countries, India is seeking to diversify mineral trade partnerships, encourage responsible production, and build standards-based markets.
• To address both immediate needs and long-term resilience, India has adopted a two-pronged approach—securing overseas access while strengthening domestic capabilities.
• Over the past five years, New Delhi has pursued numerous bilateral and multilateral partnerships alongside domestic policy reforms, raising questions about their effectiveness and the need for recalibration.

Uneven Progress Across Critical Mineral Partnerships

• India’s critical mineral partnerships have delivered mixed outcomes, with some countries emerging as more reliable and strategically aligned than others.
• Australia: A Reliable Anchor Partner
  • Australia stands out due to political stability, large mineral reserves, and strategic clarity.
  • Cooperation has progressed through long-term supply talks, joint research, and investments.
  • Under the 2022 India–Australia Critical Minerals Investment Partnership, five lithium and cobalt projects were identified for potential investment.
• Japan: A Model for Long-Term Resilience
  • Japan offers a template for resilience built on diversification, stockpiling, recycling, and sustained R&D—lessons drawn after China restricted rare earth exports a decade ago.
  • Beyond ties with Indian Rare Earths Limited, cooperation now includes joint extraction, processing, and stockpiling, bilaterally and in third countries.
• Africa: Opportunity with a Long-Term Lens
  • African nations present strong opportunities, combining mineral abundance with growing expectations of local value addition.
  • India’s agreements with Namibia (lithium, rare earths, uranium) and asset talks in Zambia (copper, cobalt) signal intent.
  • Success will depend on a long-term industrial approach to compete with more coordinated players.
• United States: Strategic Potential, Policy Volatility
  • Despite “friend-shoring” rhetoric, cooperation with the United States has struggled to move beyond dialogue.
  • Tariffs, shifting trade rules, and Inflation Reduction Act incentives add uncertainty.
  • Initiatives like TRUST and the Strategic Minerals Recovery Initiative offer frameworks, but policy volatility limits reliability.
• European Union: Standards-Driven Synergy
  • The European Union demonstrates how regulation and industrial strategy can align through the Critical Raw Materials Act and the European Battery Alliance.
  • Progress for India requires alignment with EU transparency, lifecycle, and environmental standards.
• West Asia: Midstream Potential, Limited Depth
  • United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia are investing in battery materials, refining, and green hydrogen, acquiring mining stakes globally.
  • The region could serve India as a midstream processing hub, though institutional frameworks remain thin.
• Russia: A Hedge, Not a Foundation
  • Russia holds substantial reserves and has longstanding scientific ties with India.
  • However, sanctions, financing constraints, and logistical risks limit reliability—making Russia a supplementary hedge rather than a core pillar.

Latin America: Emerging Opportunities and Intense Competition

• Latin America is emerging as a new frontier for India’s critical minerals strategy, with growing engagement in Argentina, Chile, Peru, and Brazil.
• These countries are increasingly central to global copper, nickel, and rare-earth supply chains.
• Indian public and private firms have begun investing in the region, including a ₹200 crore exploration and development agreement signed by Khanij Bidesh India Limited with Argentina.
• However, competition is intense and engagement remains nascent, underscoring the need for value-chain partnerships and local processing beyond extraction.

Canada: Potential Partner Amid Diplomatic Reset

• With diplomatic ties restored, Canada re-emerges as a promising minerals partner for India.
• Canada’s reserves of nickel, cobalt, copper, and rare earths, alongside a recently signed trilateral agreement with Australia and India, position it well for cooperation.
• Sustained progress, however, will depend on political stability and consistent bilateral engagement.

From Ore Access to Value-Chain Resilience

• Across regions, a clear lesson emerges: securing mineral ore alone is insufficient. The real vulnerability lies in processing.
• Without domestic refining and midstream capacity, India remains exposed to supply-chain disruptions.
• Building Integrated, End-to-End Partnerships
  • India needs integrated partnerships across the value chain:
    • Upstream ore extraction: Africa, Australia, Canada, Latin America
    • Midstream processing of the mineral ores: West Asia (the Gulf) and Japan
    • Downstream technologies creation: European Union and United States (batteries, recycling)
    • Diversification hedge: Russia
  • Technology, innovation, and on-ground project execution matter more than announcements.
• Strategic Focus Before Expansion
  • While cooperation with additional partners like South Korea and Indonesia is valuable, India must first sharpen a coherent strategy for existing partnerships to ensure results.
• Strengthening the Domestic Foundation
  • None of these efforts will succeed without a robust domestic framework for responsible mining.
  • Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) standards, transparency, and regulatory certainty are increasingly decisive in international partnerships.

The Way Forward

• India has built an extensive network of critical mineral partnerships. The next step is to deepen what works, recalibrate what doesn’t, and anchor the strategy in processing capacity, technology leadership, and long-term certainty.

Why in the News?

• The University Grants Commission has notified revised regulations to address caste-based discrimination in higher education institutions, introducing stricter compliance requirements and enforcement mechanisms.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Caste Discrimination (Background, UGC Regulations, Inclusion of OBCs, Institutional Mechanisms, Significance & Way Forward)

Background: Caste Discrimination in Higher Education

• Caste-based discrimination has remained a persistent concern within India’s higher education system, particularly affecting students from Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), and Other Backward Classes (OBCs).
• Issues such as social exclusion, academic marginalisation, biased evaluation, and lack of grievance redressal mechanisms have been highlighted by multiple committees, court judgments, and civil society reports.
• In response, the UGC had first introduced anti-discrimination regulations in 2012, mandating equal opportunity cells in universities.
• However, implementation gaps, weak monitoring, and changing socio-academic realities necessitated a comprehensive revision of the regulatory framework.

University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity) Regulations, 2026

• The newly notified University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026 update and replace the earlier framework.
• These regulations aim to institutionalise equity, strengthen grievance redressal, and ensure accountability at all levels of higher education governance.
• A key shift in the 2026 regulations is the clearer articulation of institutional responsibility, placing direct accountability on the heads of institutions for ensuring compliance.

Expanded Definition of Discrimination

• The regulations define caste-based discrimination as unfair or biased treatment against members of SCs, STs, and OBCs solely on the basis of caste or tribe.
• The scope of “discrimination” has been broadened to include both explicit and implicit acts that impair equality in education or violate human dignity.
• In addition, the definition also recognises discrimination on intersecting grounds such as religion, race, gender, place of birth, and disability.
• This expanded framing aligns the regulations with constitutional principles of equality under Articles 14, 15, and 21.
• However, unlike the 2012 rules, the new regulations do not explicitly list specific manifestations of discrimination during admissions or academic processes, which has drawn some academic critique.

Inclusion of OBCs and Removal of Penal Clause

• One of the most significant changes in the final regulations is the inclusion of OBCs within the ambit of caste-based discrimination.
• The earlier draft had excluded OBCs, triggering widespread criticism from scholars, student groups, and social justice advocates.
• The UGC has also dropped the proposed provision to penalise “false complaints” of discrimination.
• This clause, present in the draft version, was criticised for potentially discouraging genuine complainants and creating a chilling effect on reporting. Its removal strengthens access to justice and grievance redressal.

Institutional Mechanisms: Equity Committees and EOCs

• The regulations mandate the establishment of Equal Opportunity Centres (EOCs) in every higher education institution. These centres are tasked with promoting equity, inclusion, and social justice on campuses.
• Under each EOC, an Equity Committee must be constituted, chaired by the head of the institution and comprising representatives from SCs, STs, OBCs, women, and persons with disabilities.
• Equity Committees are required to meet at least twice a year, while EOCs must submit bi-annual reports on their functioning.
• Institutions must also submit annual reports to the UGC, enabling periodic review and oversight.

Monitoring and Enforcement Mechanism

• To ensure effective implementation, the UGC will establish a national-level monitoring committee comprising representatives from statutory councils, commissions, and civil society.
• This body will review compliance, examine cases of discrimination, and recommend preventive measures.
• Non-compliance carries serious consequences. Institutions may be debarred from UGC schemes, prohibited from offering degree or online programmes, or even removed from the UGC’s list of recognised higher education institutions.
• This marks a shift from advisory regulation to enforceable accountability.

Significance and Way Forward

• The 2026 regulations represent a stronger institutional response to caste-based discrimination in higher education.
• By expanding coverage, strengthening monitoring, and removing deterrents to complaint filing, the UGC has reinforced the principles of social justice and inclusion.
• However, effective implementation will depend on institutional capacity, sensitivity training, transparent grievance handling, and regular audits. For lasting impact, regulatory reform must be accompanied by cultural change within campuses.

Context:

• The Kashi–Tamil Sangamam, a flagship cultural initiative under the spirit of “Ek Bharat, Shreshtha Bharat”, highlights India’s civilisational continuity, cultural unity and people-to-people bonds.
• The Somnath Swabhiman Parv (1026–2026), marking 1,000 years since the first attack on Somnath, puts the Sangamam within India’s broader historical and cultural consciousness.

Background - Idea of Sangamam:

• Sangam in Indian ethos symbolises confluence, integration and unity amid diversity.
• The Kashi–Tamil Sangamam represents the living unity of India’s traditions while respecting regional uniqueness.
• Kashi (Varanasi), a civilisational and spiritual anchor for millennia, where people from all over have come in search of knowledge, meaning and Moksha, is a natural venue for such cultural integration.

Civilisational Linkages Between Kashi and Tamil Nadu:

• Spiritual and cultural bonds - Kashi–Rameswaram axis:
  • Baba Vishwanath (Kashi) and Rameswaram (Tamil Nadu) are key spiritual centres. Tenkasi in Tamil Nadu is known as Dakshin Kashi.
  • Saint Kumaraguruparar Swamigal strengthened spiritual and institutional ties between Kashi and Tamil Nadu.
• Intellectual and nationalist connections: Mahakavi Subramania Bharati found in Kashi a space for intellectual growth, spiritual awakening, and deepening nationalism and vision of a united India.

Evolution of the Kashi–Tamil Sangamam:

• First edition (2022): Participation of scholars, artisans, students, farmers, writers and professionals, who travelled to Kashi, Prayagraj and Ayodhya.
• Second edition (2023): Greater use of technology to overcome language barriers. The aim was to introduce innovative formats and deeper engagement, so that the Sangamam continued to evolve while remaining rooted in its core spirit.
• Third edition: The focus was on Indian Knowledge Systems (IKS), expanding academic discussions, exhibitions and cultural interactions.
• Fourth edition (2025):
  • Theme: Tamil Karkalam (Learn Tamil)
  • Teachers from Tamil Nadu taught Tamil to students in Kashi, emphasising linguistic integration and cultural learning.

Key Highlights of the Fourth Edition:

• Translation: Of Tholkappiyam (ancient Tamil literary classic) into 4 Indian languages, and 6 foreign languages.
• Sage Agastya Vehicle Expedition (SAVE): From Tenkasi to Kashi, it included activities like eye camps, health awareness, digital literacy camps. Tribute to King Adi Veera Parakrama Pandiyan, symbol of cultural oneness
• Other highlights: Academic sessions at Banaras Hindu University (BHU), cultural exhibitions at Namo Ghat, and high participation of Yuva Shakti (youth).

Role of Institutions and Governance:

• Indian Railways operated special trains for participants.
• Warm hospitality by people of Kashi and Uttar Pradesh.
• Strong administrative coordination ensuring a seamless experience.
• Valedictory function held at Rameswaram, attended by the Vice President of India, highlighting spiritual unity and national integration.

Challenges and Way Ahead:

• Sustaining long-term engagement: Linking cultural exchanges with education, tourism and local economies.
• Ensuring deeper grassroots participation: Institutionalising Sangamam-type platforms across regions.
• Avoiding symbolic tokenism: Greater academic, youth and digital integration.
• Bridging linguistic and regional gaps: Using technology for inclusive participation. Expanding translations and documentation of classical texts.

Conclusion:

• The Kashi–Tamil Sangamam exemplifies India’s living civilisational unity, where diversity is not erased but harmonised.
• By fostering cultural understanding, academic exchange and youth participation, it strengthens the foundations of national integration.
• Alongside India’s shared festivals like Pongal, Sankranti, Magh Bihu and Uttarayan, such initiatives reinforce harmony, collective heritage and the timeless idea of One India, Many Traditions.

Context

• The Supreme Court of India’s January 5, 2026 order in the Delhi Riots larger conspiracy case, which granted bail to five accused but denied it to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, has renewed debate on the interaction between criminal procedure, personal liberty, and state power.
• The controversy arises from the prolonged detention of seven students and activists arrested during the 2020 protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) under provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), despite the absence of a completed trial.

Right to Speedy Trial and Reason Behind Delayed Trial

• Right to Speedy Trial
  • More than five years have elapsed since the arrests, with the trial still pending commencement.
  • Indian constitutional jurisprudence locates the right to speedy trial within Article 21, making procedural delay a direct infringement of liberty.
  • When pre-trial incarceration approaches half a decade, detention becomes indistinguishable from punishment and undermines the presumption of innocence.
  • The Supreme Court has previously stated that if the state cannot ensure trial within a reasonable period, its opposition to bail lacks legitimacy.
  • In this case, the Court concluded that delay justified bail for five accused but not for Khalid and Imam.
  • This distinction rested on the assertion that the latter two allegedly conceptualised the disturbances, placing them on a different footing.
  • Yet such differentiation relies on unproven allegations and grants excessive weight to prosecutorial assertion.
  • Liberty cannot be contingent upon the gravity of accusation alone, for this would empower the state to curtail freedom simply by escalating charges.
• Reason Behind the Delay
  • The Court also observed that delay was partly attributable to the accused, but the pace of proceedings remains fundamentally under judicial control.
  • Judges can refuse adjournments and streamline hearings. The presence of hundreds of witnesses suggests the trial is unlikely to conclude swiftly, creating the risk of prolonged incarceration without adjudication.
  • The Court’s suggestion that bail may be reconsidered after another year implies that five-and-a-half years have not yet crossed a constitutional threshold, raising the spectre of detention spanning a decade or more without verdict.

Terrorism, the UAPA, and Expansive Interpretation

• The order also raises structural concerns regarding the interpretation of Section 15 of the UAPA, which defines terrorism.
• Alongside explicit elements involving weapons or violence, the statute includes the residual phrase by any other means.
• Criminal law traditionally requires narrow construction of ambiguous provisions to safeguard individuals against state overreach.
• Instead, the Court adopted a broad reading that could encompass non-violent protest actions such as chakka jams, vastly expanding the statute’s scope.
• Such interpretation vests wide discretion in the executive, enabling it to classify forms of civil disobedience under anti-terror law rather than under ordinary criminal provisions.
• The broader the definition, the greater the risk of suppressing dissent and discouraging democratic mobilisation.
• Moreover, the interpretation directly affects bail due to Section 43D (5), which bars bail if a prima facie case exists based solely on prosecution material.
• A wider definition of terrorism makes it easier to satisfy the prima facie threshold, thereby entrenching pre-trial detention and shifting power from judiciary to prosecution.
• Across legal systems, stringent statutes demand cautious judicial construction. Departing from this principle accelerates the collapse of procedural safeguards and normalises preventive detention over judicial adjudication.

Deference, Evidence, and the Language of Conspiracy

• The factual assessment within the order reflects a deferential approach toward prosecutorial narratives.
• The available evidence indicates organisational efforts surrounding anti-CAA protests, including coordination of demonstrations and chakka jams.
• These activities fall within the constitutional right to protest, even when disruptive. In the absence of direct evidence linking the accused to violence, the prosecution invoked a theory of conspiracy, alleging managerial responsibility for the riots.
• Conspiracy theories often operate as substitutes for evidentiary gaps. Throughout history, from political trials in colonial contexts to episodes like the Dreyfus Affair, conspiracy has served as a legal framework for incarcerating individuals without concrete proof.
• When liberty is at stake and trial delays are acute, judicial scrutiny should intensify rather than retreat.
• Accepting speculative inferences without robust evidence risks turning accusation into pretext and detention into indefinite punishment.

Conclusion

• The continued imprisonment of Khalid and Imam exemplifies the dangers posed by expansive statutory interpretation, prosecutorial discretion, and judicial deference.
• When protest merges with terrorism and delay merges with punishment, constitutional commitments to liberty, dissent, and due process erode.
• Correcting this imbalance is a matter of democratic principle and requires judicial willingness to prioritise liberty over speculative narratives of national security.