Polity

All (4049)Current Affairs (4038)Mains Practice (126)Mains PYQs by Subjects (40)

How does UCC regulate Live-in Relationships in Uttarakhand?

Context: Uttarakhand’s Uniform Civil Code passed by the State Assembly in February 2024, it mandates the registration of live-in relationships both at their commencement and termination.

Relevance of the Topic:Prelims: Key facts about live-in relationships; Uniform Civil Code.

Uniform Civil Code & Live-in Relationship Registration

The Uttarakhand Uniform Civil Code (UCC) mandates compulsory registration of live-in relationships at both commencement and termination.
The law applies to both residents of Uttarakhand and individuals from other states residing in the state.
The rules came into effect on January 27, 2025, introducing stringent documentation and verification requirements.

Key provisions of the Law

Registration of live-in relationships:
- Mandatory registration is required at both the beginning and end of a live-in relationship.
- Couples can register online through a designated portal or offline by submitting a 16-page form with supporting documents.
- Only unmarried, heterosexual couples are allowed to enter into a live-in relationship, under this law. A person cannot get into a live-in relationship with someone who is already married or is in another live-in relationship.
The registrar is legally bound to notify the parents/guardians of such individuals about the relationship registration or its termination.

Relationship history & prohibited relationships:
- The law equates live-in relationships with marriage, imposing a similar degree of restrictions.
- Couples must provide:
  - Proof of any prior live-in relationships.
  - Current relationship status (single, married, divorced, annulled, separated, or widowed)
- If the couple falls within degrees of prohibited relationships (as per Schedule 1 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955), they must obtain approval from a religious/community leader certifying eligibility for marriage. Prohibited relationships refer to blood relations, unless allowed by custom.

Housing & landlord obligations:

Couples already living together must provide proof of shared accommodation (e.g., latest electricity or water bill).
Couples not yet living together must apply for a provisional certificate. After receiving this certificate, they must secure accommodation within 30 days (extendable by 15 days).
Final registration is granted after submitting proof of new residence.
Landlord Responsibilities:
- Must ensure the couple has a valid registration certificate before renting the property. Failure to comply may result in penalties.

Penalties & Legal Consequences

Failure to Register:	False Information or Concealment of Facts:	Summary Inquiry:	Non-Registration Complaint Mechanism:
If a couple does not register their live-in relationship within one month, they may face: Up to 3 months’ imprisonment₹10,000 fineOr both	If a couple provides false information, penalties increase to: Up to 3 months’ imprisonment₹25,000 fineOr both	The registrar has the power to verify submitted documents and check if the relationship was formed through: Coercion, Undue influence, Misrepresentation, Fraud	The registrar can Suo motu (on its own) or upon complaint issue a notice for compliance.False complaints may attract fines, with higher penalties for repeat offenders.

Benefits of registering a Live-in Relationship

Legal rights for women: A woman abandoned by her live-in partner can seek maintenance, as if they were married. The law applies the same provisions of maintenance as in marriage.
Legitimacy of children & inheritance rights: A child born out of a live-in relationship will be legally recognised as legitimate, ensuring such children have inheritance rights.
Protection against housing discrimination: Landlords cannot refuse tenancy solely because a couple is unmarried.
- If a couple has a registration certificate (provisional or final), they cannot be denied housing on that basis.

Concerns & Criticism

Violation of Right to Privacy: Experts argue that mandatory registration of live-in relationships violates Article 21 (Right to Privacy) of the Constitution.
The Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India (2017) case established that:
- Informational privacy and decisional autonomy are fundamental rights.
- The state cannot intrude disproportionately into an individual’s private life.

Risk of Social Surveillance & Harassment:

The law enables third-party access to personal data without proper safeguards.
It could lead to large-scale surveillance of personal relationships.
No penalties for third-party data leaks, increasing risk of harassment.
Interfaith & inter-caste couples could face disproportionate targeting.

Conclusion

Uttarakhand’s live-in relationship registration law is the first of its kind in India, bringing marriage-like regulations to such unions.
While the law aims to prevent fraud and exploitation, it has sparked constitutional and privacy concerns.
Experts argue that compulsory state monitoring of live-in relationships could set a precedent for further encroachment on personal liberties.

UIDAI notifies new rules for Aadhar Authentication

Context: The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) has notified the Aadhaar Authentication for Good Governance (Social Welfare, Innovation, Knowledge) Amendment Rules, 2025 under the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016.

Relevance of the Topic:Prelims: Key facts about Aadhaar Authentication for Good Governance (Social Welfare, Innovation, Knowledge) Amendment Rules, 2025.

Aadhaar Authentication for Good Governance (Social Welfare, Innovation, Knowledge) Amendment Rules, 2025:

Objective: To enable private entities to gain access to Aadhaar authentication.

Key features:

The amendment enables both government and non-government entities to avail Aadhaar authentication service for providing various services.
- Aadhaar Authentication has now been extended to private entities along with government bodies, for providing various services in the public interest, boosting innovation, knowledge, and public service enhancement.
The amendment will also enhance the scope for residents in availing many new services seamlessly with respect to E-Commerce, Travel, Tourism, Hospitality, and Health Services.
It will promote the ease of living and livelihood and help service providers and seekers to have trusted transactions.

Process of obtaining Authentication

Any entity seeking Aadhaar authentication will be required to apply with the details of intended requirements to the concerned Ministry or Department of the Central or the State government, in a format available on a portal for this purpose.
The applications will be examined by UIDAI, and MeitY will issue the approval based on the recommendation of UIDAI.
The concerned ministry or department of the Central or State Government will notify the entity for Aadhaar usage after receiving confirmation from MeitY.

Salient Features of Uniform Civil Code Introduced in Uttarakhand

Context: On 27^th of January 2025, Uttarakhand has officially rolled out the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) for all residents of the State, except the Scheduled Tribes and natives who have migrated out of the State. With this, Uttarakhand has become the first Indian State to implement the UCC post-Independence.

Relevance of the Topic: Prelims: Key facts about Uniform Civil Code (UCC).

About Uniform Civil Code:

A Uniform Civil Code refers to a common civil code or common system of personal laws applicable to all irrespective of religion.
Matters under personal laws include marriage, divorce, maintenance, inheritance, adoption, and succession of the property.

Constitutional provision for Uniform Civil Code

Article 44 of the Indian constitution embodies the Indian State to provide for a uniform civil code for its citizens.
Also, the state of Uttarakhand has enacted the UCC under the legislative powers of concurrent list having subjects of marriage, adoption and succession.

Salient features of UCC of Uttarakhand:

Encompasses common provisions for marriage, divorce, inheritance, live-in-relationship, etc. for citizens of all communities.
NOTE: Schedule tribes have been excluded from the provisions applicability.
Marriage and Divorce
Ceremonies of Marriage: Marriage can be done by any religious or other ceremonies under Special Marriage Act.
- Compulsory Registration of Marriage: All marriages need to be registered within 60 days of ceremony failing which there is a monetary fine of Rs 20,000. However, the marriage will not be annulled for failing to register the marriage.
- Common age of marriage for all communities (18 for women and 21 for men).
- Bigamy and polygamy have been banned.
- Right to remarry following a divorce. So, it indirectly bans certain marriage practices like Iddat and Nikah Halala. Forceful adherence to these activities has been criminalized.
- Provides for gender equality in matters of divorce.
- Custody of a child up to 5 years of age will remain with the mother following a divorce.

Inheritance and Succession
- Influenced by Indian Succession Act, 1925
- Allows Muslim communities to transfer any amount of property according to their will and not just one-third as currently followed under their religious texts.
- No difference between ancestral property and self-acquired property for intestate succession for Hindus. Note:
- No difference between ancestral property and self-acquired property for intestate succession for Hindus.

Succession
Inte-state succession: Succession through a will	Testamentary Succession: Succession in the absence of a will

Defines a list of class of heirs to the property and its inheritance.

Class-1 heirs	Class-2 heirs	Others
Children, widow, parents, etc.	Siblings, nieces, nephews, grandparents, etc.	Anyone most closely related to the deceased person

Elevates both mother and father as class-1 heir in case of intestate succession, which till now included only the mother.
Equal property rights for sons and daughters across all classes.
Contains provision for disqualification from inheritance in cases of murder or remarriage before the death of the person.
Note: Disease or deformity of heir is not a ground for disqualification.
Note: Adopted children, illegitimate children, children born through surrogacy and children born through assisted reproductive technology are all considered to be biological children.

Live-in relationship
- Defines the live-in relationship explicitly ‘as a relationship between a man and a woman (partners), who cohabit in a shared relationship in the mature of marriage.
- Makes registration of live-in relationship mandatory, failing which can lead to a jail term of up to three months.
- Termination of relationship also requires the couple to notify to the authority, failure of which can be penalized.
- Provides woman with right to claim maintenance when deserted by their live-in partner.
- This provision is applicable to all those living in Uttarakhand as well as residents of Uttarakhand living elsewhere in India.

Issues/Concerns/Criticisms of Uttarakhand’s Uniform Civil Code:

Not comprehensive: The UCC code excludes the tribals from its ambit of application. Thus, a wide population will be free to follow its own customs for marriage, succession and inheritance.
Invalidates homosexual live-in relations: Live-in relationship provision recognizes only the heterosexual relationship, thus violating the judicial order in Navtej Singh Johar case.
Lack of synergy: The UCC keeps minimum age of marriage for women at 18 years only. But, Prohibition of Child Marriage (Amendment) Bill, 2021 at Union level seeks to raise the age of marriage for women to 21. Thus, highlighting a conflict between the two.
Violates fundamental rights: Some critics see it as impinging upon the right to freedom of religion of Muslim communities.
Invasion of individual autonomy and privacy: Mandatory registration of live-in relationship and provision for informing the parents in case either partner is less than 21 years of age seem to be violating Supreme Court’s judgement on freedom to choose life partner (Joseph Shine Case).
Removal of distinction between separate and coparcenary joint family property: It may so happen that now the entire property gets willed away to sons excluding females from the guarantee of inheriting property. Thus, reinforcing patriarchy.
Class 1 heir now includes intestate’s father: Now, the mother would get half of what she would have got under Hindu Succession Amendment Act,2005. Thus, reducing mother’s share.
Inappropriate criteria of disqualification: A widow or widower of any predeceased relative of an intestate loses the right to inherit it s/he remarries.
For a Christian Women, who would have received half the intestate’s property will get less under the UCC since, the property will be shared equally with children.
Lack of ‘uniformity’: If every state were to enact their separate UCCs then there will 28 different UCCs which contradicts the claim of uniformity.

Conclusion:

In this regard, it will be important to see the wider implications of this new UCC. Going forward, this code can serve as a learning benchmark for future laws in this aspect, most importantly being the national level UCC which has been seen imminent by Supreme Court in Shah Bano case.

Should Governors be Chancellors of State Universities?

Context: The role of the Governor as Chancellor of State universities has become a subject of intense debate in recent times, because of the draft UGC Regulations on the selection and appointment of Vice Chancellors of Universities, which has given wide ranging powers to the Governors.

Relevance of the Topic: Mains: Governor as Chancellor: Challenges and Way Forward.

Historical Background

In 1857, the British established universities in Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras, making Governors of the respective presidencies their ex-officio Chancellors. This was intended to maintain colonial control over higher education and limit university autonomy.
Post-independence, this role of Governors as Chancellors of universities was adopted without any reassessment of its relevance. The focus remained on control rather than fostering democratic and federal governance in education.
Presently, Governors as Chancellors, exercise significant authority over universities, such as appointing Vice-Chancellors, nominating syndicate members, and approving university statutes, this has led to conflict especially in opposition ruled states like Tamil Nadu.

Challenges in the Current Model

Politicisation of the Governor’s Office: From 1947–67, due to one party dominance at both Centre and State level, Governors acted as ceremonial figures.
- Post-1967, multi-party politics increased the politicization of Governors, transforming them into instruments of Central government control. Studies reveal that a significant percentage of Governors are former politicians or bureaucrats, lacking academic credentials and act on political considerations.
Creates dual authority: Governors, appointed by the Centre, exercise considerable powers in universities matters related to appointments despite State governments funding and managing them. This hampers the implementation of projects and innovation sought by the universities.
Challenges related to federalism: The involvement of Central-appointed Governors in State-run universities undermines the principle of federal autonomy.
Limited accountability: While Governors exercise power in university matters, they are not accountable to elected State governments. Governors often bypass State Ministries of Higher Education while making critical decisions.
Contrasts with Central Universities: In contrast, the President, as Visitor of Central universities, consults with the Ministry of Education and lays statutes before Parliament to ensure legislative oversight. On the contrary, Governors act unilaterally in State universities, with no equivalent accountability.

Recommendations of Various Commissions and Reports:

Rajamannar Committee (1969–71): Advocated that the Governor, even in statutory roles like Chancellor, must act on the advice of the State government.
Sarkaria Commission (1983–88): Recognised that the Governor’s role as Chancellor is statutory (and not constitutional) and must be defined by State laws. It recommended that Governors consult with Chief Ministers while retaining independent judgment in university matters.
M.N. Venkatachaliah Commission (2000–02): It has called for political neutrality in Governors and further suggested a clearer definition of Chancellor’s functions. It also advocated for a supportive rather than authoritative role for the Governor to enhance university autonomy.
M.M. Punchhi Commission (2007–10): Recommended that Governors focus solely on constitutional responsibilities and proposed appointing eminent academics or public figures as Chancellors instead of Governors to ensure academic independence and prevent conflict.

Suggested Models for Chancellor Roles

Governor as ceremonial Chancellor model: The Governor acts on the advice of the State government in university matters. (Gujarat (1978), Karnataka (2000), and Maharashtra (2021) have adopted this model.)
Chief Minister as Chancellor model: Places the Chief Minister in the ceremonial role of Chancellor. West Bengal and Punjab passed Bills in 2023 to implement this model, but these await Presidential assent.
State-appointed Chancellor model: The State government appoints a ceremonial Chancellor (an eminent academician or public figure). Telangana implemented this in 2015, and Kerala passed a Bill for this model in 2022, still awaiting Presidential assent. (This model is best suited for India.)
Chancellor elected by university bodies model: Empowering alumni or university governing bodies to elect the Chancellor. This approach is followed by universities like Oxford and Cambridge.
Chancellor Appointed by the Executive Council Model: The university’s Executive Council or Board of Governors selects a ceremonial Chancellor through a transparent process. University of Melbourne (Australia) follows this model.

Way Forward

Reforming State universities in India demands a careful balance of key principles: ensuring accountability to elected State governments, minimising political interference, promoting institutional self-governance, and fostering academic freedom and excellence.
State-level reforms: States must amend university laws to replace Governors with eminent academicians or public figures as Chancellors. (Telangana’s State-appointed Chancellor model.)
Federal-level reforms: The Centre should facilitate progressive reforms that seek to dismantle colonial-era administrative structures and expedite Presidential assent for progressive State Bills, such as those passed in Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and Punjab.
Promote accountability and autonomy: Universities should have greater self-governance, limiting interference from political or external authorities.
Global best practices: Learn from models in the U.K., Canada, and Australia, where Chancellors provide ceremonial leadership without executive powers.

What is the Whip System?

Context: Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar has recently remarked that the party whips curtail an MP’s freedom of expression by enforcing the party line, and thus it should be abolished.

Relevance of the Topic:Prelims: Key facts about Whip System.

Origin of the Whip System

Whip was popularised by political philosopher Edmund Burke, who referred to the efforts to “whip in” supporters for critical votes in the House of Commons.
Background in India:
- The office of 'whip' is neither mentioned in the Constitution of India nor in the Rules of the House. It is based on the conventions of the parliamentary government.
The All-India Whips Conference, initiated in 1952, provides a platform for whips from various political parties to discuss and exchange views. It is organised by the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs.

Functioning of Whip system in India

The Office of Whip is central to maintaining party discipline, ensuring attendance, and adherence to party lines during crucial votes.
Every political party, whether ruling or opposition has its own Chief whip and whips in the Parliament.
- The whip is appointed by the political party to serve as an assistant floor leader.
He is charged with the responsibility of ensuring the attendance of his party members in large numbers and securing their support in favour of or against a particular issue.
- He regulates and monitors their behaviour in the Parliament.
- The members are supposed to follow the directives given by the whip. Otherwise, disciplinary action can be taken.

Key Facts

The Chief whip of the government party in the Lok Sabha is the Minister of Parliamentary Affairs.
In the Rajya Sabha, the Minister of State for Parliamentary Affairs holds this position. The Chief whip is directly responsible to the leader of the House.
It is part of his duties to advise the government on parliamentary business and to maintain a close liaison with the ministers in regard to parliamentary business affecting their departments.

Types of Whips

One-line whip: It informs members about a vote but permits them to abstain.
Two-line whip: A two-line whip asks them to be present but does not tell them how to vote.
Three-line whip: Mandates attendance and voting in line with the party’s stance; violation can lead to disqualification under the Anti-Defection Law (1985).
- The three-line whip is largely the norm these days, it directs members to be present and vote as per the party line.

Significance of the Whip system

Maintains party coherence and discipline, critical for parliamentary democracy.
- The Supreme Court has also upheld the whip system as essential for preserving party unity and discipline in Indian democracy.
Ensures stability of the government, as defeat in critical votes can lead to loss of confidence or a no-confidence motion.
Provides structure in decision-making, aligning individual MPs' actions with the party's collective ideology and policy.
MPs violating a three-line whip can be disqualified if the party leader recommends action to the House Presiding Officer.

Arguments in favour of Whip system	Arguments against Whip system
- MPs elected on party tickets must owe their allegiance to the party’s ideology. - Internal party forums should be used for dissent; public defiance undermines the party system. - This robust system balances democratic representation along with the need for intra party cohesion.	- It is often seen as curtailing MPs' freedom of expression and independent judgment. -It is alleged that the system stifles open debate and dissent within parties, reducing intra-party democracy.

Right to Life and Personal Liberty: Evolution and Challenges

Context: As we mark 75 years of the Constitution of India, we need to look at the right to personal liberty, which is a core constituent of an idea of justice.

Relevance of the Topic: Mains: Right to personal liberty: Evolution and emerging threats to personal liberty.

Right to Personal Liberty

Article 21: Protection of life and personal liberty: No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty, except according to procedure established by law.

Evolution of Personal Liberty under Article 21 over the past 75 years

Initial Interpretation: In 1950, Article 21 was interpreted narrowly, emphasis was laid primarily on the physical aspect of personal liberty.
A.K. Gopalan vs. State of Madras (1950): The landmark case established that personal liberty was limited to the physical body, without wider rights such as freedom of movement.
Maneka Gandhi Case (1978): It expanded the scope of Article 21, the right to life includes the right to live with dignity and lead a meaningful life. The Supreme Court held that personal liberty encompasses various rights, including the right to travel abroad and right to livelihood.
Olga Tellis Case (1985): Right to livelihood as an integral part of the right to life. The court ruled that deprivation of livelihood without due process violates Article 21.

Expansion of Rights

Over the period, Article 21 has been interpreted to include wider rights such as privacy, health, clean environment etc., which reflects a more inclusive understanding of personal liberty. The Supreme Court has emphasised that these rights are essential for ensuring individual dignity and a meaningful existence.

Right against Illegal Detention: In the case of D.K. Basu vs. State of West Bengal, the Supreme Court laid down the guidelines to be followed by the Central and the State investigating authorities in all cases of arrest and detention.
Right to Speedy Trial: Indian Judiciary in the case of Hussianara Khatoon vs. the State of Bihar, has made it settled decision that the right to speedy trial is an inalienable right under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
Right to Privacy: In the recent and the most debated case of Justice K.S. Puttuswamy (Retd.) vs. Union of India and Other, the Supreme Court’s 9 judges constitutional bench held privacy to be a fundamental right under the Constitution of India. The Privacy Bench unanimously held that the right to privacy is a fundamental right protected under the Constitution.
Right over one's Intimate Relations: In the case of Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018), SC said that the Right to dignity means the right to "full personhood", and "includes the right to carry such functions and activities as would constitute the meaningful expression of the human self." In this case, a very important aspect of human dignity was talked about - the control over one's own intimate relations.

Role of Judiciary in Upholding Constitutional Justice and Personal Liberties

The judiciary has been instrumental in advancing constitutional justice and safeguarding personal liberties. Landmark rulings such as the Puttaswamy case affirmed privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21, setting a significant precedent for individual rights.
Recently, in Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India (2024), the Supreme Court struck down the 2018 Electoral Bond Scheme, declaring it unconstitutional for infringing on voters’ right to information under Article 19(1)(a).

Emerging Threats to Personal Liberty

Despite judicial interventions, threats to personal liberty persist, which is exacerbated by legislative and executive actions in the form of:

Preventive Detention Laws: Authorities frequently misuse preventive detention laws to hold individuals without trial on vague pretexts.
Arbitrary Arrests: Laws like the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) are often invoked without substantial evidence, leading to prolonged detentions and undermining the principle of “innocent until proven guilty.”
Curtailment of Free Speech: Increased governmental censorship restricts dissenting voices, with websites, social media accounts, and media outlets often blocked or sanctioned for dissent. This stifles public discourse and compromises the right to information under Article 19. (Recent case of Wikipedia)
Crackdown on Activists and NGOs: Civil society organizations and human rights activists face growing challenges such as raids, asset freezes, and cancellation of licenses under stringent foreign funding laws.
Internet Shutdowns: Despite Anuradha Bhasin verdict, India continues to lead globally in the frequency of internet shutdowns, which disproportionately affects marginalized communities by denying access to education, healthcare, and essential services.
Data Privacy: The increasing use of surveillance technologies raises concerns about data privacy and state overreach. Without robust safeguards, individuals risk unlawful intrusion into their personal lives. (Pegasus issue)
Judicial Delays: Delayed hearings in sensitive cases, including habeas corpus and bail applications (Bhima Koregaon), weaken the judiciary’s ability to act as a timely protector of rights.

Steps to Address these Issues

Reforming Preventive Detention Laws: Tighten legal frameworks to limit the use of detention without trial, ensuring strict judicial oversight and accountability.
Ensuring accountability in Arrests: Courts must rigorously evaluate the grounds of arrests under stringent laws like PMLA and UAPA to prevent misuse and uphold due process.
Safeguarding Free Speech: Enact legislative protections against arbitrary censorship and ensure that media and digital platforms can operate independently.
Empowering Civil Society: Create a supportive regulatory environment that enables NGOs and activists to operate without fear of reprisal, fostering transparency and accountability.
Ending unjustified Internet Shutdowns: Introduce clear, enforceable guidelines to prevent arbitrary shutdowns, ensuring continuous access to digital infrastructure for all.
Strengthening Privacy Protections: Comprehensive data protection legislation to regulate surveillance practices and safeguard personal data from misuse.
Improving Judicial Efficiency: Improve judiciary’s capacity by appointing more judges, modernizing court infrastructure, and leveraging technology to expedite case resolutions.
Enhancing access to Legal Aid: Increase funding and support for legal aid programs to ensure that marginalised communities can effectively defend their rights.

Constitutional Issues in UGC Draft Regulation

Context: The recent draft regulation by the University Grants Commission (UGC) on the selection and appointment of vice chancellors of universities has evoked protests by various State governments.

The main objection against this regulation is that it constitutes a violation of the federal principles enshrined in the Constitution of India. Subsequently, the concerned State governments have also demanded its withdrawal.

Relevance of the Topic: Prelims: Key facts about the UGC Act, Key features of the amendments sought in the regulation, and issues arising.

Background:

The University Grants Commission (UGC) has sought to amend Regulation 2010 that relates to the selection and appointment of Vice Chancellors, by widening the area of selection.
- Under the existing regulations, a vice chancellor can be selected only from among academicians who have a minimum experience of 10 years as professor.
- Through the draft amendment, the UGC declares that professionals with 10-plus years of experience in industry, public administration, or public policy, shall also be considered.
The draft regulation raises serious constitutional issues which need to be examined by separating the political context of protest and a possible political reaction from the UGC or the party in power.

Objective and mandate of the UGC Act, 1956

To coordinate and maintain standards in university education.
To carry out functions including allocation of funds, recommending measures to improve education and to regulate university standards.
Section 26 (Regulation making power): Section 26 empowers UGC to make regulations for its mandate, provided that they align with the Act and associated rules.

Key Features of UGC Draft Regulations 2025

Appointments of Vice-Chancellors (VCs):
- Establishing a Search-cum-Selection Committee to appoint the VCs from nominated groups of members from:
  - The Chancellor/Visitor (mostly the Governor in the case of state universities),
  - The UGC Chairperson,
  - The apex body of the university (such as Senate/Syndicate).
Eligibility expansion: Professionals from academia, industry, public administration, public policy having at least 10 years of experience would also be eligible provided that they have a proven track record of academic or scholarly contributions.
Terms: VCs will now hold office for five years. Presently, they hold office for the term of three years.
Significance laid on Noteworthy Contributions: Recruitment and promotion policies for faculty have been keenly revised to make room to consider contributions in nine areas which include:
- Innovative pedagogy
- Research in the Indian Knowledge system.
- Digital content creation for MOOCs
- Teaching in Indian languages and
- Start-ups that blend with HEI policy.

Career Advancement Scheme (CAS): Promotions based on qualitative rather score-based criteria.
- Research, teaching innovation, and community engagement have been emphasised.
Promotion of Indian Knowledge Systems (IKS): Research and teaching in Indian languages and traditional knowledge systems to be encouraged.
Flexibility in faculty recruitment: The provision will also allow candidates to be eligible for teaching (through NET/SET scores) in the areas different from their disciplines in UG/PG degrees.
- Ph.D. specialisation shall hold precedence over former degrees.
Increased role for contractual teachers: Removal of the limit on 10% of lecturers on short-term contracts and introduction of the flexibility to hire more contract faculty.
Inclusiveness and representation: Encouraging active participation from under-represented categories (SC/ST/OBC/EWS/Persons with Disabilities) in recruitment and for leadership positions.
Transparency and governance: Simplified practices of recruitment and promotion that would ensure fairness and accountability.
Professor of Practice (PoP): Up to 10% of sanctioned posts can be reserved for industry professionals other than the regular teaching roles in HEIs.
Promotion of research and entrepreneurship: It will be expected that each faculty contributes to research labs, entrepreneurial activities, and also creates digital content (E.g., MOOCs).
Compliances and penalties: In case of non-compliance, following actions can be taken:
- Debarring from UGC funding and schemes.
- De-recognition from UGC.

Advantages of the UGC Draft Regulations 2025:

Issues and Concerns with the Draft Regulation

Ultra vires regulation:
- The UGC Act does not mandate regarding VC selection or appointment. Its primary role is towards setting teaching standards and qualifications for academic staff.
- The regulations exceeding the extent and scope of the UGC Act are invalid. Here, the selection of VCs is not directly connected with maintaining the educational standards.

Erosion of State Autonomy: By enforcing these regulations, it is feared that UGC might risk centralising power and undermining federalism which is a ‘basic feature’ of the Constitution.
- It is also seen as undermining State governments' role in education, a subject under the Concurrent List.
- States have argued the proposal facilitates the Centre’s control over institutions via gubernatorial proxies, which threatens institutional autonomy.
Conflict between UGC regulations and State laws: UGC regulations cannot override State laws unless approved by Parliament. The Supreme Court in 2015 has also ruled that UGC regulations bind universities but may not apply mandatorily to State universities.
- Furthermore, Article 254 (Doctrine of Repugnancy), State laws shall prevail unless repugnant to central laws. In this case, a regulation (subordinate legislation) does not qualify as "central law" under Article 254.
Previous observations of Court: In past, Bombay High Court (2011) has ruled that VC selection has no "direct impact" on educational standards and UGC lacks the mandate under Section 26 for VC selection.
- Kalyani Mathivanan Case (2015): Supreme Court ruled that UGC Regulations are recommendatory in nature for State universities and held that VC appointments in State universities fall under State legislation.
Inconsistency in approach: UGC's stance on VC appointments has shifted repeatedly (E.g., 2010, 2013, 2018, 2025 draft), which has raised concerns about administrative overreach.
Concerns over non-academic VCs: Critics also fear this could lead to appointments of politically loyal individuals in academic leadership and is viewed as detrimental to the higher education system’s integrity and autonomy.

Suggestions and Recommendations

Removing the clauses contrary to federal structure: UGC should eliminate provisions that undermine federal principles.
Encourage collaborative policymaking: The Central government needs to ensure that state governments have a meaningful role in university governance. There is a need to include state nominees in the VC selection process to balance central and state interests.
Long-term goal of autonomy: The focus should be on reforming universities to become autonomous institutions with minimal governmental interference, retaining the government’s role only in funding.
Balancing inclusivity and standards: Although including non-academics could bring fresh perspectives, strict criteria should ensure appointments align with academic and institutional goals.
Judicial clarification: A Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court should resolve ambiguities to affirm. The UGC regulations remain advisory for State universities unless explicitly adopted by States.

Bail under PMLA for Women

Context: The Supreme Court has granted bail to a woman as an exception in the Prevention of Money Laundry Act (PMLA).

Relevance of the Topic:Prelims: Key facts about Bail Provisions under PMLA.

Bail Provisions under PMLA

Section 45: Section 45 of the Act makes the offences punishable for more than 3 years cognisable and non bailable.
The negative language in the Act shows that bail is not the rule but an exception under PMLA.
The Act makes it mandatory to hear the public prosecutor and if the prosecutor opposes bail, the court is required to apply the twin test.
These two conditions are:
- There are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such offence; and
- He is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.

Exception to the Stringent Bail Provisions

There is an exception to this stringent bail standard, which applies to minors, women, and sick people. It says that provided that a person, who is under the age of sixteen years or is a woman or is sick or infirm, may be released on bail on the direction of Special Court.
This exception is similar to provisions in the Indian Penal Code that provide special consideration for women and minors.

Recent legal precedents for Exception

Delhi HC (2023): Preeti Chandra (Wife of Sanjay Chandra, Unitech Group) granted bail despite being well-educated and belonging to a high social stratum.
- HC ruled that no subclassifications of women (E.g., household lady) should restrict the provision.
- The court criticised the attempt to create sub-classifications within the broader category of "woman," deeming it misconceived.
- The Court however specified that to be eligible for bail, the accused must not be a flight risk or likely to tamper with witnesses.
Delhi Trial Court (April 2024): Interim bail denied to K. Kavitha in the Delhi excise scam case.
- The judge deemed it neither "mandatory" nor "obligatory" to apply the exception for women, especially for well-placed individuals.
Allahabad HC (September 2024): Bail denied to Shashi Bala, with the court ruling she did not qualify as a "vulnerable woman" and her alleged close association with Naseem and the significant magnitude of the fraud.
Supreme Court (January 2025): Shashi Bala appealed the HC decision, and subsequently she has been granted bail by the SC .
- SC remarked that prolonged incarceration (held in jail for a long time without trial) under the PMLA by ‘hook or by crook’ is not acceptable.

Death Penalty in India: Legal Framework

Context: A sessions court in Kolkata has sentenced the convict of the rape and murder of a doctor at RG Kar Medical College and Hospital to life imprisonment. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had argued strongly for the death penalty, but the court granted life imprisonment. In the RG Kar case, the convict Sanjoy Roy is 35 years old.

Relevance of the Topic: Prelims: Key facts about legal framework related to Death Penalty in India.

Death Penalty in India

The Supreme Court has ruled that a sentence of death should be passed only in the rarest of rare cases, after the court has taken into account possible aggravating and mitigating circumstances (Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab, 1980).

Rarest of Rare Test:

In the Bachan Singh case, the SC upheld the death penalty but emphasised that it should be imposed only in the rarest of rare cases, where there is no possibility of reformation.
SC laid down non-exhaustive lists of aggravating and mitigating circumstances for courts to consider while making the decision.

Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances:

Aggravating Circumstances: Factors which could tilt decision towards death penalty:

If the murder is pre-planned, calculated, and involves extreme brutality
If the murder involves exceptional depravity
If the accused has been found guilty of murdering a public servant, police officer or a member of the armed forces while discharging their duty.
Mitigating Circumstances: Factors which could tilt decision away from death penalty:
- If the accused was under extreme mental or emotional disturbance at the time of the offence.
- Age of the accused (would not be given death sentence if they are very young or very old)
- Probability of the accused posing a continued threat to society
- Probability of reforming the accused
- If the accused was acting on the directions of another person
- If the accused believed their actions were morally justified
- If the accused suffers mentally and is unable to appreciate the criminality of their actions.

Interpretations of circumstances by the Supreme Court

1. Age of the Accused:

In some cases (E.g., Ramesh v. State of Rajasthan 2011), the Supreme Court considered the young age of the accused persons (below 30 in these cases) as an indication that they could be reformed.
Law Commission of India noted in its 262nd Report (2015) that in the cases of Death Penalty, the courts have used age as a mitigating factor very inconsistently.

2. Nature of Offence:

In the Shankar Khade case 2013, the SC emphasised the courts should compare the case before them with cases concerning similar offences to determine the punishment. This is to avoid subjectivity in the rarest of rare doctrine.
In Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab case 1983, the SC held that death could be given in cases where the “collective conscience” of society is so shocked that the judiciary is expected to impose the death penalty.

3. Possibility of Reform:

In the Bachan Singh case 1980, the SC held that the government must prove there is no possibility of reform.
In Santosh Bariyar v. State of Maharashtra case 2009, the SC said that the court will have to provide clear evidence as to why the convict is not fit for any kind of reformatory and rehabilitation scheme.
The Law Commission Report said the requirement for evidence is essential for introducing an element of objectivity into the sentencing process.

When should the Court consider these Circumstances?

In the Bachan Singh case, the SC said courts must conduct a separate trial after convicting, so that judges can be persuaded why the death sentence should not be imposed (ensure fair trial).
In Dattaraya v. State of Maharashtra (2020), the court held that if such a hearing did not take place that was a valid reason to commute a death sentence to life imprisonment.

Section 108 of BNS: Abetment to Suicide

Context: The Supreme Court has reiterated the need for investigative agencies to show restraint when invoking the charge of abetment to suicide. Recently, a bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and KV Viswanathan said that Section 108 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita is invoked casually.

Relevance of the Topic: Prelims: Key facts about Section 108 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita.

What is Section 108 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (Section 306 of IPC)?

As per the section, if any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with:
- imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years
- shall also be liable to fine.

It is a non-bailable offence where the police can arrest without a warrant.
The abetment law involving suicide has been strengthened to protect women, reversing the burden of proof against the husband for the first seven years of marriage.

Issues with Section 306 IPC (BNS 108)

Ambiguous definition:
- The term "abetment" is not clearly defined, leading to varied interpretations.
- Abetment can include instigation, conspiracy, or aiding the act, but proving these elements can be challenging.
- The courts have emphasised that mere knowledge of someone's suicidal tendencies does not constitute abetment.
High burden of proof:
- For a conviction under Section 306, the prosecution must demonstrate clear mens rea—the intention to instigate suicide.
- This requirement can be difficult to establish, especially in emotionally charged situations where actions may be misinterpreted as instigative.
- The Supreme Court has reiterated that words spoken in anger or haste cannot be deemed as instigation.
Potential for misuse:
- There are concerns about the misuse of this section, mainly when charges are filed to appease grieving families rather than based on substantive evidence. This has led to wrongful accusations and legal consequences for innocent individuals.
- The non-bailable nature of the offense further exacerbates this issue, allowing for arrests without sufficient grounds.
Low conviction rates:
- Data from the National Crime Records Bureau indicates a low conviction rate for cases under Section 306 (17.5% in 2022), suggesting that many cases do not meet the legal standards required for a conviction.
- This low rate highlights the challenges faced by prosecutors in substantiating claims of abetment.
Impact on individuals:
- The consequences of being charged under Section 306 can be severe, affecting personal lives through social stigma, legal costs, and emotional distress.
- Even if charges are eventually dropped, the mere accusation can have lasting effects on an individual's reputation and mental health.

Judicial caution: Recent Supreme Court rulings have called for greater judicial scrutiny when considering charges under this section.

Conclusion: Section 108 BNS is crucial in addressing suicide abetment, however, its current application raises concerns of potential misuse. The Supreme Court has reiterated that abetment charges should only apply when the act is proximate and intended to incite self-harm, not for casual remarks or actions.

Thus, there is a need to take cognisance by thorough evaluation whether the essential ingredients of abetment are present before proceeding with such cases.

Liberalism and Hinduism

Context: In a recent interview, a Member of Parliament remarked that there are many similarities between Liberalism and Hinduism, and both are compatible.

Relevance of the Topic:Mains: GS-2 (Core Principles of Liberalism); Essay; Ethics.

About Liberalism

Liberalism is a political, social, and economic ideology centered on the principles of individual liberty, equality, and limited government.
It emphasises the protection of individual rights and freedoms along with a system of governance that ensures equality of opportunity and justice.
Principles of liberalism are deeply embedded in the Indian Constitution, particularly in the Preamble and the Fundamental Rights.

Core Principles of Liberalism

Individual Liberty: The belief that individuals should have the freedom to make choices regarding their lives, thoughts, and actions, as long as they do not harm others. This includes freedoms such as speech, religion, and association.
Equality: It advocates for equal treatment under the law regardless of race, gender, or social status. It seeks to ensure that everyone has equal opportunities to succeed.
Limited government: Advocates for a government with clearly defined powers that exist primarily to protect individual rights and prevent harm. Excessive state control is seen as a threat to personal freedoms.
Rule of Law: Laws must be applied fairly and consistently to all individuals, ensuring justice and accountability in governance.
Economic freedom: Supports free markets, private property rights, and minimal state interference in economic activities to foster innovation and individual enterprise.
Democratic governance: Advocates for representative democracy, where governments are accountable to the people through elections and public participation.
Tolerance and Pluralism: Commits to accepting diverse viewpoints and cultures within society. This aligns with the liberal ideal of fostering co-existence without imposing uniformity.

About Hinduism

Hinduism, in the context its compatibility with liberalism, is characterised by its pluralistic and inclusive nature.
It embodies several principles that resonate with liberal values like pluralism, individual autonomy, tolerance and non-violence.

Similarities between Liberalism and Hinduism

Pluralism and Diversity of choices: Both liberalism and Hinduism emphasize the importance of pluralism. Hinduism, as described by Tharoor, offers an "extraordinarily eclectic mix of choices" in worship and belief systems, reflecting the liberal value of individual freedom to choose one's path.
Tolerance and Acceptance: Hinduism, according to Swami Vivekananda, not only teaches tolerance but also universal acceptance. This is in consensus with liberalism's core principle of respecting diverse viewpoints and lifestyles.
Individual Freedom: Liberalism places a high value on individual autonomy and personal freedoms. Similarly, Hinduism allows "tremendous amounts of freedom" for individuals in their spiritual and religious practices, as highlighted by Tharoor.
Rejection of Monopoly or Exclusivity of idea: No one holds a monopoly on Hinduism, reflecting a rejection of narrow, authoritarian interpretations. Liberalism also opposes monopolistic control over ideas or systems, and advocates for open discourse and multiplicity.
Adaptability to Modern time: Hinduism acts as an "ideal faith for the 21st century" due to its flexibility and inclusivity, echoing liberalism's adaptability to contemporary societal needs and challenges.
Non-dogmatic Approach: Both ideologies reject dogmatism. Liberalism encourages critical thinking and skepticism towards absolute truths, while Hinduism is often described as non-dogmatic, allowing for various interpretations of spiritual texts and practices. This flexibility enables adherents to adapt their beliefs to modern contexts without losing their core values.
Focus on Social Justice: Hinduism contains elements that promote social justice through concepts like Sarva Dharma Samabhava, which emphasizes equality among all religions. Liberalism also includes a commitment to social justice, advocating for equality and the protection of minority rights.
Spirituality beyond Materialism: Both Liberalism and Hinduism encourage a view of life that transcends materialistic pursuits. Liberal thought often critiques excessive consumerism, advocating for a life guided by values rather than possessions. Similarly, Hindu teachings emphasise non-attachment to material goods as a pathway to spiritual fulfillment.

The pluralistic ethos of both ideologies offer solutions to emerging issues like religious intolerance, authoritarianism, and would contribute to a more equitable and harmonious society.

Does Blood Money have a legal standing?

Context: Nurse Nimisha Priya from Kerala was sentenced to death by a Yemen court for murdering her business partner. Debates are ongoing around her acquittal and repatriation through ‘blood money.’

Relevance of the Topic: Prelims: Basic understanding of the terms ‘Blood Money’, ‘Plea Bargaining’.

About ‘Blood Money’?

Known as ‘diya’ in Islamic Sharia law, it involves monetary compensation paid by the perpetrator to the victim’s family in cases of unintentional murder, culpable homicide, or when the victim’s family forgoes retaliation (qisas).
Its objective is to alleviate the suffering of the victim’s family, not to price human life.
Even after reconciliation via ‘blood money,’ the state/community may impose additional penalties.

Contemporary Applications

Saudi Arabia: Compensation for road accident victims or workplace deaths is determined by Sharia courts or committees.
Iran: Gender and religion influence compensation; recent efforts toward equalisation have remained incomplete.
Pakistan: Incorporated ‘diya’ and ‘qisas’ into mainstream law through the 1991 Criminal Laws Amendment.
Yemen: Present, but judicial oversight ensures fairness in compensation agreements.

India’s Position on ‘Blood Money’

No Blood Money: Indian legal and penal system does not recognise or have provisions for ‘blood money.’
Plea Bargaining, as an alternative:
- The Indian legal system does provide provisions for Plea Bargaining, introduced through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2005.
- Plea bargaining allows the accused to plead guilty for concessions offered on a charge or a sentence.
  - Charge concession: The defendant may plead guilty for one of the several charges or a less severe charge in return for dismissal of other charges.
  - Sentence concession: The accused may plead guilty in exchange for a reduced sentence than what is prescribed for the concerned offence.
- Limitations: Applicable for offences with imprisonment under seven years, provision is also not available for heinous crimes and offences against women or children.
- Victim Compensation: Section 265E of CrPC allows victims to receive compensation during the process of plea bargaining.

Indian cases of Pardons via Blood Money abroad

Recent examples:
- 2019: Arjunan Athimuthu’s death sentence in Kuwait commuted to life imprisonment after ₹30 lakh payment.
- 2006: Abdul Rahim’s death sentence in Saudi Arabia was pardoned after ₹34 crore was paid but remains in prison.
- 2017: Ten Indians in the UAE pardoned after paying 200,000 dirhams.
- 2009: Seventeen Indians pardoned in the UAE after paying ₹4 crore equivalent in dirhams.
Nimisha Priya: Iran assured India of reviewing her case, leaving the outcome uncertain.