Polity

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

Scope of Community Resources under Article 39 (b) of Constitution

Context: Supreme Court has established a 9-judge Constitution Bench to settle the scope of 'community resources' under Article 39 (b) of the Constitution. The constitution bench aims to settle whether the community resource also covers private resources or is only limited public resources.

About Article 39 (b) of Constitution

Article 39 (b): State shall follow the policy that the ownership and control of material resources of the community are so distributed as best to subserve the common good.

Interpretation of Article 39 (b)

In State of Karnataka vs Ranganatha Reddy (1978), two separate interpretations were presented.

Justice Krishna Iyer stated that the material resources of the community covered all resources - natural, manmade, publicly or privately owned. This view was later affirmed by the Constitution bench in Sanjeev Coke Manufacturing vs Bharat Coking Coal Ltd (1982) and later in Mafatlal Industries Ltd vs Union of India (1996).
Justice Untawalia observed that he did not subscribe to this view.

Halting the democratic recession

Context: The A Pew Research Center’s global survey has highlighted that the globally there has been a declining trend in democracy and its aspects like liberalism, freedom of speech and expression, etc.

What is democracy?

It is seen in terms of rule by the people, for the people and of the people.

Types of democracy:

The Electoral Democracy

Whether elections were free and fair, as well as the prevalence of a free and independent media.

Liberal Democracy

It incorporates measures of rule of law, checks and balances and civil liberties.

Participatory Democracy

Degree to which citizens participate in their own government through local democratic institutions, civil society organizations, direct democracy.

Deliberative Democracy

Degree to which decisions are made in the best interest of the people as opposed to due to coercion or narrow interest groups, in addition to the basic electoral democracy index.

Egalitarian Democracy

The level of equal access to resources, power, and freedoms across various groups within a society, in addition to the level of electoral democracy.

Types of democracy level:

Closed autocracy- No multiple elections for the executive; absence of fundamental democratic components such as freedom of expression; freedom of association and free and fair elections.
Electoral autocracy- Multi-party elections for the executive exists; insufficient levels of fundamental requisites such as freedom of expression and association and free and fair elections.
Electoral democracy- Multiparty elections for the executive are free and fair; satisfactory degree of suffrage, freedom of expression, freedom of association.
Liberal democracy- Requirements of electoral democracy are met; judicial and legislative constraints on the executive along with the protection of civil liberties and equality before the law.

Findings of the Pew Research Centre's global survey:

70% endorsement of direct democracy, wherein officials directly influence major decisions, circumventing elected leaders.
Increased inclination towards rule by experts (58%) and a growing acceptance of authoritarian government models (26%).

Rationale behind this shift lies in the perception that democracies, with their need for discussions and consensus-building, lead to delays, while concentrated power facilitates prompt decision-making and quicker economic development.

Situation in low income countries-respondents from countries with lower incomes and less education tend to endorse such ‘strong’ leaders. A noteworthy segment (15%) also supports military rule, particularly in middle-income countries

Indian Case:

In 2017, 44% of Indians favoured representative democracy, which has since decreased to 36% in 2023
The inclination towards a powerful leader with significant authority rose from 55% in 2017 to 67% in 2023.
Support for rule by experts exhibits an upward trajectory, soaring from 65% to an impressive 82%.
Positive response from Indians towards military rule or governance by an authoritarian leader, with a staggering 85% preferring it .
Global democracy rankings have characterised contemporary India as a “hybrid regime”, ranging from “free to partly free” to “electoral autocracy,” and even termed it a “flawed democracy”

Various Democracy Rankings:

Freedom in the World Report by Freedom House.
Democracy Index by Economic Intelligence Unit.
Worldwide Governance indicators by World Bank.
Democracy Report by V-Dem Institute.

Findings of the Democracy report by V-Dem Institute:

No relief for CM’s private secretary: CAT refuses to stay his termination

Context: The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has refused to stay the termination of Bibhav Kumar, personal secretary of Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal. He was suspended by Delhi Government's Vigilance department in a 19-year-old case of obstructing and threatening a public servant.

About Tribunals:

Tribunals are institutions established for discharging judicial or quasi-judicial duties. The objective can be to reduce caseload of the judiciary or to bring in subject expertise for technical matters.
The Supreme Court has ruled that tribunals, being quasi-judicial bodies, have the same level of independence from the executive as the judiciary. Independence is ensured by the mode of selection of members, the composition of tribunals, and the terms and tenure of service.
Tribunals were not mentioned in the original constitution. The 42nd Amendment Act of 1976 added a new Part XIV-A to the Constitution. This part is titled as 'Tribunals' and consists of only two Articles-Article 323A dealing with administrative tribunals and Article 323B dealing with tribunals for other matters.

About Central Administrative Tribunal:

Origin: Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) was set up in 1985 with the principal bench at New Delhi and additional benches in different states, at present, it has 19 regular benches, 17 of which operate at the principal seats of high courts and the remaining two at Jaipur and Lucknow.
Membership and appointment: At present, the sanctioned strength is Chairman and 69 members. They are drawn from both judicial and administrative streams.
- A person who has not completed the age of 50 years is not eligible for appointment as a chairman or Member.
- They hold office for a term of four years or until they attain the age of 70 years in case of Chairman and 67 years in case of Members, whichever is earlier.
- The appointment of Chairman and Members in CAT is made by the central government based on recommendations of a search-cum-selection committee chaired by the Chief Justice of India or a Judge of Supreme Court, who is nominated by the Chief Justice of India.
Jurisdiction: The CAT exercises original jurisdiction in relation to recruitment and all service matters of public servants covered by it.
- Its jurisdiction extends to the All-India Services, the Central civil Services, civil posts under the Centre and civilian employees of defence services. However, the members of the defence forces, officers and servants of the Supreme Court and the secretarial staff of the Parliament are not covered by it.
Functioning: The CAT is not bound by the procedure laid down in the Civil Procedure Code of 1908. It is guided by the principles of natural justice.
Appeal: Appeals against the orders of the CAT shall lie before the division bench of the concerned high court.

A diagram of court

Description automatically generated

Adjudicating authority under PMLA, 2002

Context: The Adjudicating authority under Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002 has passed a confirmation order for the attachment of properties and assets of National Herald newspaper. In this regard, it is important to understand certain basic aspects of adjudicating authority under PMLA, 2002.

About Adjudicating Authority:

The ED Director issues attachment orders for attachment of properties that may have been acquired with the proceeds of crime.
This provisional attachment order needs to be confirmed within 180 days by the adjudicating authority or else the attached property is automatically released.
In this phase of 180 days, the accused can continue to use the property until the confirmation order by adjudicating authority.
This confirmation order can be challenged in PMLA’s appellate tribunal within 45 days and further in the High Court.
In case of conviction, the trial court can order for confiscation of property and place its authority under the Central government.
Appointment: The Central Government appoints an Adjudicating Authority to exercise jurisdiction, powers and authority conferred by or under this Act.
Composition: An Adjudicating Authority shall consist of a Chairperson and two other Members. One Member each shall be a person having experience in the field of law, administration, finance, or accountancy.
The Central Government shall appoint a Member to be the Chairperson of the Adjudicating Authority.
A person shall, however, not be qualified for appointment as Member of an Adjudicating Authority,
- in the field of law, unless he-
  - is qualified for appointment as District Judge; or
  - has been a member of the Indian Legal Service and has held a post in Grade I of that service.
- in the field of finance, accountancy, or administration unless he possesses such qualifications, as may be prescribed.
Term of Office: The Chairperson and every Member shall hold office as such for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office. No Chairperson or other Member shall hold office as such after he has attained the age of sixty-five years.
Salary and allowances payable to and the other terms and conditions of service of the Member shall be such as may be prescribed. Provided that neither the salary and allowances nor the other terms and conditions of service of the Member shall be varied to his disadvantage after appointment.
If, for reasons other than temporary absence, any vacancy occurs in the office of the Chairperson or any other Member, then, the Central Government shall appoint another person in accordance with the provisions of this Act to fill the vacancy and the proceedings may be continued before the Adjudicating Authority from the stage at which the vacancy is filled.
When the Chairperson of the Adjudicating Authority is unable to discharge his functions owing to absence, illness or any other cause, the senior-most Member shall discharge the functions of the Chairperson of the Adjudicating Authority until the date on which the Chairperson of the Adjudicating Authority resumes his duties.
Resignation: The Chairperson or any other Member may resign by writing to the Central Government.
Removal: The Chairperson or any other Member shall not be removed from his office except by an order made by the Central Government after giving necessary opportunity of hearing.
In the event of the occurrence of any vacancy in the office of the Chairperson by reason of his death, resignation or otherwise, the senior-most Member shall act as the Chairperson of the Adjudicating Authority until the date on which a new Chairperson, appointed in accordance with the provisions of this Act to fill such vacancy, enters upon his office.
Bench: A Bench may be constituted by the Chairperson of the Adjudicating Authority with one or two Members as the Chairperson of the Adjudicating Authority may deem fit. The Benches of the Adjudicating Authority shall ordinarily sit at New Delhi and at such other places as Central Government may, in consultation with the Chairperson, by notification, specify.
Central Government shall, by notification, specify the areas in relation to which each Bench of the Adjudicating Authority may exercise jurisdiction.
The Chairperson may transfer a Member from one Bench to another Bench.
If at any stage of the hearing of any case or matter it appears to the Chairperson or a Member that the case or matter is of such a nature that it ought to be heard by a Bench consisting of two Members, the case or matter may be transferred by the Chairperson or, as the case may be, referred to him for transfer, to such Bench as the Chairperson may deem fit.
The Adjudicating Authority shall not be bound by the procedure laid down by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, but shall be guided by the principles of natural justice and, subject to the other provisions of this Act, the Adjudicating Authority shall have powers to regulate its own procedure.

Original Jurisdiction of Supreme Court

Context: Increasing number of states have been filing cases against the Central Government in the Supreme court under the provisions of original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court as provided for in the Indian Constitution.

About Original Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court

Article 131 of Indian Constitution provides for the original jurisdiction of Supreme Court in following cases of dispute:

(a) Between the Centre and one or more states; or

(b) Between the Centre and any state or states on one side and one or more other states on the other side; or

In the above federal disputes, the Supreme Court has exclusive original jurisdiction. Exclusive means, no other court can decide such disputes and original means, the power to hear such disputes in the first instance, not by way of appeal.

Conditions for filing cases under original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court:

One, the dispute must involve a question (whether of law or fact) on which the existence or extent of a legal right depends. Thus, the questions of political nature are excluded from it.
Two, any suit brought before the Supreme Court by a private citizen against the Centre or a state cannot be entertained under this.

Further, this jurisdiction of the Supreme Court does not extend to the following:

A dispute arising out of any pre-Constitution treaty, agreement, covenant, engagement, Sanad or other similar instrument.
A dispute arising out of any treaty, agreement, etc., which specifically provides that the said jurisdiction does not extend to such a dispute.
Inter-state water disputes.
Matters referred to the Finance Commission.
Adjustment of certain expenses and pensions between the Centre and the states.
Ordinary dispute of Commercial nature between the Centre and the states.
Recovery of damages by a state against the Centre.

Note: In 1961, the first suit, under the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, was brought by West Bengal against the Centre. The State Government challenged the Constitutional validity of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957, passed by the Parliament. However, the Supreme Court dismissed the suit by upholding the validity of the Act.

Right against climate change is a fundamental right

Context: The Supreme Court in MK Ranjitsinh And Ors. v. Union of India has ruled that people have a “right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change”, which should be recognized by the combined reading of Article 14 and Article 21.

The court further said that the environment-related aspects of the Directive Principles of State Policy, the court said that these must be read together with the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21.

Brief overview of the case:

Habitat and Species Status: Desert National Park in Rajasthan shelters the critically endangered Great Indian Bustard and Lesser Florican.
Threats to Species: Overhead cables, particularly in solar parks, pose a significant threat to the survival of these birds.
Mortality Statistics: The Power Line Mitigation, 2018 report highlighted that around 1 lakh birds die annually due to collisions with power lines, necessitating urgent action to prevent the extinction of the Great Indian Bustard.
Ministry of Power's Statement: The Ministry of Power acknowledged the vulnerability of Great Indian Bustards to power lines due to their lack of frontal vision, emphasizing the risk of collision and electrocution.
Case filed: A writ petition filed in 2019 (MK Ranjitsinh And Ors. v. Union of India) sought conservation directives amid the declining population of Great Indian Bustards.
Court Orders: In April 2021, the Supreme Court ordered all power lines be buried in Bustard habitat.
However, the court later agreed to review its order due to practical challenges highlighted by the centre and considering the importance of renewable energy and climate commitments.
Recent Developments
- Revision by Supreme Court: In 2024, while the Supreme Court underscored the importance of protection of Bustard, it modified its order with respect to conversion of overhead transmission line to underground transmission lines. Court has further said that other factors such as low fecundity, fragmentation, habitat loss, predators, and loss of prey must be addressed.

Article 14 and climate change: Supreme Court held that climate change affects the right to equality, the Court reasoned that “If climate change and environmental degradation lead to acute food and water shortages in a particular area, poorer communities will suffer more than richer ones. The right to equality would be impacted in each of these instances”.

Article 21 and right to clean environment: Article 21 of the constitution states that “no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law”. Article 21 has received liberal interpretation from time to time after the decision of the Supreme Court in Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India, Article 21 guarantees fundamental right to life. Right to an environment, free of danger of disease and infection is inherent in it.

Environmental jurisprudence in India

In the 1980s, the SC read the right to a clean environment as part of Article 21. A bundle of rights, including the right to education, the right to shelter (in the context of slum dwellers), the right to clean air, the right to livelihood (in the context of hawkers), and the right to medical care have all been subsequently included under the umbrella of Article 21.
Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra vs. State: Right to a healthy environment is an important attribute of the right to live with human dignity. The right to live in a healthy environment as part of Article 21 of the Constitution was first recognized in the case of Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra vs. State. It is the first case of this kind in India, involving issues relating to environment and ecological balance in which the Supreme Court directed to stop the illegal mining under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.
In M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India: Supreme Court treated the right to live in a pollution free environment as a part of fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar (1991): the Supreme Court held that the right to life includes the right to a healthy environment, and it is the duty of the government to protect and improve the environment. The court observed that the right to life and personal liberty cannot be enjoyed in the absence of a clean environment.
Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs Union of India: The Supreme Court held that though industries are vital for the country’s development, having regards to the pollution caused by them, the principle of ‘sustainable development’ has to be adopted as the balancing concept.
M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath (1996) and Virender Gaur v. State of Haryana: Recognized the right to a clean environment as a part of Article 21 of the Constitution. However, the Court underlined that “it is yet to be articulated that the people have a right against the adverse effects of climate change.” Observing how climate change is increasing year by year, the Court underscored the need to recognize this right as a distinct one.
Consumer Education and Research Centre v. Union of India (1995): The right to health has also been recognized as a part of the right to life under Article 21. In Consumer Education and Research Centre v. Union of India (1995), the Supreme Court held that the right to health is a fundamental right under Article 21, and the government has a duty to provide adequate medical facilities to its citizens.
Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board vs C Kenchappa, 2006: Supreme Court took note of the adverse effects of rising sea levels and rising global temperatures.
Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. Bombay Environmental Action Group, 2006: Supreme Court recognized that climate change posed a “major threat” to the environment.

Outcomes of the judgment:

Impact of climate change on health: The right to health (which is a part of the right to life under Article 21) is impacted due to factors such as air pollution, shifts in vector-borne diseases, rising temperatures, droughts, shortages in food supplies due to crop failure, storms, and flooding. The inability of underserved communities to adapt to climate change or cope with its effects violates the right to life as well as the right to equality.
The judgment acknowledged the right to a healthy environment, safe from the ill-effects of climate change, was a “fundamental human right”.
Expanded scope of Article 14: Judgment has expanded the purview of Article 14. It was observed that if climate change and environmental degradation lead to acute food and water shortages in a particular area, poorer communities will suffer more than richer ones.
Important legal precedent: This judgment will set an important legal precedent and will influence the broader public discourse on environmental matters and has the potential to shape future government policies.
Importance of solar power: Judgment also highlighted the importance of solar power for arresting ills of climate change.
- Increased energy demand: 25%of global energy demand is likely to be from India in the next two decades.
- Enhanced energy security: Renewable energy provides enhanced energy security by reducing reliance on fossil fuels.
- Improved public health: adoption of renewable energy technologies helps in curbing air pollution, thereby improving public health and reducing healthcare costs.

Electric Mobility Promotion Scheme 2024 (EMPS 2024)

Context: The Electric Mobility Promotion Scheme 2024 (EMPS 2024), a ₹500 crore scheme to promote electric mobility in India will come into force from April 1. The scheme will continue till the end of July.

About Electric Mobility Promotion Scheme 2024 (EMPS 2024)

Launched in: 2024
Extended till: July’24
Nodal ministry: Ministry of Heavy Industries
Aim: For faster adoption of electric two-wheeler (e-2W) and three-wheeler (e-3W) to provide further impetus to the green mobility and development of EV manufacturing ecosystem in the country.
Eligibility: Scheme will be applicable mainly to those e-2W and e-3Ws (including e-rickshaws, e-carts and L5 category vehicles) registered for commercial purposes.
- Further, in addition to commercial use, privately or corporate owned registered e-2W will also be eligible under the scheme.
Components:
- Subsidies/Demand Incentive: Incentive for electric 2W (e-2W) and electric 3 W including registered e-rickshaws & e-carts and L5 (e-3W)
- Administration of scheme: Including IEC (Information, Education & Communication) activities and fee for Project Management Agency
Key features: The second phase of Faster Adoption and Manufacturing of Electric Vehicles in India (FAME-II) programme, ends in 2024. Subsidies under the FAME scheme will be eligible for e-vehicles sold till March 31, or till the time funds are available.
- Under the scheme, customers will be provided with a support of up to ₹10,000 per 2-wheeler with the aim is to provide support for about 3.33 lakh two-wheelers.
- For the purchase of small 3-wheelers support of up to ₹25,000 will be given and over 41,000 such vehicles will be provided incentives under the scheme.
- The financial support will be up to ₹50,000 in case of a large three-wheeler, as per the scheme.
Significance: The Scheme promotes an efficient, competitive and resilient EV manufacturing industry in the country thereby promoting the vision of Aatma-Nirbhar Bharat.
- For this purpose, Phased Manufacturing Programme (PMP) has been adopted which encourages domestic manufacturing and strengthening off EV supply chain. This shall also create significant employment opportunities along the value chain.

Allotment of Election symbols to parties in India

Context: There has been a recent controversy regarding allotment of ‘free’ election symbols to some regional political parties in Tamil Nadu, which fall under the category of registered but unrecognized political parties.

Allotment of Election Symbols in India:

The power of allotment of election symbols in India rests with the Election Commission of India.
For the allotment of Election Symbols in India, Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment Order), 1968 has been issued under the Representation of People Act, 1951 and the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961.

About Election Symbols (Reservation and allotment Order), 1968:

There are two kinds of symbols- Free and Reserved.

The Reserved symbols are of recognised parties- National and State parties.
The free symbols are chosen by the candidates of unrecognised parties or independent candidates.

A symbol reserved for a State Party in any State –
- shall not be included in the list of free symbols for any other State or Union Territory; and
- shall not be reserved for any other party which subsequently becomes eligible as a State or National party.
If any free symbol has been chosen by only one candidate at such election, the returning. officer shall allot that symbol to that candidate, and to no one else.
If the same free symbol has been chosen by several candidates at such election, then it shall be allotted to candidate set up by an unrecognised political party if all the rest are independent candidates.

For registered but unrecognised political parties, one of the free symbols is allotted as a common symbol during an election if that party contests in two Lok Sabha constituencies or in 5% of seats to the Assembly of a State as the case may be.

Rule 10B of the Symbols Order provides that the concession of a common free symbol shall be available to a ‘registered unrecognised party’ for two general elections.

A party shall be eligible for a common symbol in any subsequent general election if it had secured at least 1% of votes polled in the State on the previous occasion when the party availed of this facility. Such an unrecognised party should however apply for a symbol every time in the prescribed format.

Tax Exemption to Political parties

Context: Income tax department has given notice to Congress Party to pay the due tax on account of being denied the tax exemption benefits due to violation of tax exemption compliance requirements.

Income tax exemption to parties:

Section 13A of Income Tax Act is a special provision for the political parties that provide tax exemption in some cases. According to this section, any income a political party receives from voluntary contributions or any interest, dividend, or rent from its assets is not included in the party's total income for taxation.

Which are the exemptions available for the political party?

According to Section 13A, following income of a political party from the following sources is exempt from tax:

Income from house property.
Income from other sources.
Capital gains;
Income by way of voluntary contributions the political party receives from any individual.

Conditions to avail of exemptions U/S 13A:

A political party that wants to claim tax exemption under Section 13A must meet the following requirements:

Must be registered under Section 29A of RPA, 1951.
Must keep books of account and other documents that allow the Assessing Officer to compute its income.
Must record every contribution of more than Rs 20,000 along with the name and address of the contributor unless the contribution is made through an electoral bond.
Must have its books of account audited by a chartered accountant
Must not have received any donation of more than Rs 2,000 except by way of account payee cheque/demand draft or ECS or through a bank account or electoral bond
Must submit a report of donations received above Rs 20,000 to the Election Commission of India for the financial year on or before the due date for furnishing the return of income for that financial year under Section 29C of RPA.

How does a political party furnish their return of Income?

According to Section 139(4B) of the Income Tax Act, a political party must file a return of income if its income (before claiming exemption) under Section 13A exceeds the basic exemption limit (without considering the exemption under Section 13A). The tax rate applicable for political parties is the same as that for a normal resident individual. The return of income must be filed and signed by the Chief Executive Officer of the political party for the relevant financial year.

Tax exemption for donation to political party:

Under Section 80GGC of the Income Tax Act, 1961, an individual can claim a tax deduction for any donations or contributions to any political party or an electoral trust. The entire amount of donation or contribution is eligible for deduction under this section. However, the donation or contribution must be made through legitimate banking channels and not in cash or kind. The individual must also furnish a receipt for proof of donation or contribution.

Is it mandatory for political parties to pay taxes?

Even though political parties cannot participate in commercial activities and cannot make profit, they do have income from voluntary contributions, and such income are exempt u/s 13 A of Income tax act subject to furnishing of report to Election commission.

Judicial custody

Context: Recently, Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal has been sent to 15 days judicial custody in Delhi Excise policy case.

Concept of Custody: The word 'custody' means apprehending someone for protective care. The principle behind arresting the suspect of a crime is to save other people from the accused in society.

Police Custody:

After the receipt of an information/complaint/report by police about a crime, an officer of police arrests the suspect involved in the crime reported, to prevent him from committing the offensive acts further, such officer brings that suspect to police station, this process is called as Police Custody.
It is the custody of a suspect with the police in a lock up at the police station, to detain the suspect. During this detention, the police officer in charge of the case may interrogate the suspect. This detention is not supposed to be longer than 24 hours.
When Police take a person into custody, Section 57 of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) kicks-in and police must produce the accused before a Magistrate within 24 hours of the arrest.

Judicial Custody:

Judicial Custody means an accused is in the custody of the concerned Magistrate.
In police custody, the accused is lodged in police station lockup while in case of judicial custody, it is the jail.
When judicial custody kicks in, the accused is processed under Section 167 of Cr.P.C. and the judicial magistrate has the power to extend this period of custody from time to time.

Difference between police custody and judicial custody:

Police custody	Judicial custody
It means that police have the physical custody of the accused.	Judicial Custody means an accused is in the custody of the concerned Magistrate.
Accused is lodged in lock up.	Accused is lodged in jail.
A person lodge in police custody has to appear before the concerned magistrate within 24 hours.	The person detained in judicial custody is kept in jail until Court gives bail.
Police custody begins when a police officer arrests a suspect upon receiving a complaint or FIR.	Judicial custody begins when the public prosecutor satisfies the court that for the purpose of the investigation, custody of such accused is necessary.
The maximum period of police custody is 24 hours, and which may be extended to 15 days as a whole by the appropriate magistrate	Maximum period of detention is 90 days where the investigation is related to offenses punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term not less than ten years and 60 days where the investigation is related to offenses punishable with imprisonment for a term less than 10 years.

Counting of Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT)

Context: Supreme Court issued notice to the Election Commission of India on a petition calling for counting of all Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) paper slips in elections.

About VVPAT

Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) is an independent system attached with the Electronic Voting Machines that allows the voters to verify that their votes are cast as intended.
When a vote is cast, a slip is printed containing the serial number, name and symbol of the candidate and remains exposed through a transparent window for 7 seconds.
Thereafter, this printed slip automatically gets cut and falls in the sealed drop box of the VVPAT.
This allows the voter to verify & confirm that he vote has gone to the candidate of her choice. The system has been made essential for all EVMs.
This is due to fact that many concerns have been raised by stakeholders on the integrity of EVMs.
Supreme Court in Subramanian Swamy vs Election Commission of India gave a judgement that 'paper trail' is an indispensable requirement for free and fair elections. Confidence of voters in EVMs can be achieved only with the introduction of 'Paper Trail'.

Current Rules for counting of VVPATs

Limited counting of VVPATs: Presently, the VVPATs are counted in a limited sense and election results totally depend on EVM vote count. Mandatory verification of VVPAT paper slips is done, as under:
- In case of General and Bye elections to State Legislative Assembly, verification of VVPAT paper slips is done for randomly selected 5 polling stations per Assembly Constituency.
- In case of General and Bye elections to Lok Sabha, verification of VVPAT paper slips of randomly selected OS(five) polling stations of each Assembly Segment of the Parliamentary Constituency concerned.
- The mandatory counting takes place after the last round of counting of votes as recording in EVMs.
- The 5 polling stations for which the counting is to be done are randomly selected by draw of lots.
Sequence of VVPAT count: ECI has prescribed given a priority order in which counting of VVPATs is to be done. This causes undue delay. If simultaneous verification of VVPAT paper slips is done the process of counting can be made more efficient.

Opinion of Election Commission of India

EVMs are non-tamperable, both owing to technological and strict administrative measures. Hence, EVMs cannot be tampered with or manipulated.
Counting all VVPATs slips manually would be labour and time-intensive and will also be prone to 'human error' and 'mischief'. This will be as going back to paper ballot system.
According to ECI, Ballot slips of 38,156 randomly selected VVPATs have been tallied till date with the electronic counts of their control unit (CU), asserting that not a single case of transfer of vote meant for one candidate to another has been detected.

Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT)

Context: Most of the matters that have come up at the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) in the past few weeks have been adjourned due to non-availability of the Bench, with no final hearings.

About Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT)

Body: Statutory body
Developed under: Section 15K of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) Act.
Appeal against: It was mainly established to hear an appeal against the order passed by the SEBI or by an adjudicating officer under the SEBI Act.
- Currently, SAT hears appeals against orders passed by the SEBI, the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India and the Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority.
Compositions: It would consist of the one presiding officer and other 2 members.
- The Central Government will appoint the presiding Officer in discussion with the chief justice of India or nominee. The person so appointed as the presiding Officer should meet with the following requirements:
  - The retired or sitting judge of the supreme court
  - The retired or sitting judge of the high court
  - The retired or sitting judge of the high court, who has completed at least seven years of service as a judge in a high court.
- The Central Government will appoint the two members, should possess the following qualities:
  - The member should be capable of dealing with problems related to the securities market.
  - The member should possess qualification and experience related to corporate law, securities laws, economics, finance or accountancy.
Tenure: Presiding Officer: 5 years from the date of appointment or re-appointment.
Members: 5 from the date of appointment or re-appointment.
Power: SAT will have the same powers as vested in a civil court under the code of civil procedure while trying a suit, with respect of the following matters namely:
- Enforce and summon the attendance of any person
- Require the discovery and production of documents
- Receive evidence on affidavits
- Issue commissions for the examination of the documents or witnesses
- Dismiss an application for default or deciding it ex-parte
- Set aside any order or dismissal of any application for default or any other order passed by it ex-parte
- Any other matter as and when prescribed.
Eligibility for filing an appeal: Every person aggrieved by order of the Securities and Exchange Board of India or adjudicating officer is liable to make an appeal to the SAT.
- Note: No appeal can be made to the SAT against any order made with the consent of the parties.
Time Limit: Every appeal to the SAT should be filed within 45 days from the day on which a copy of the order passed by the SEBI or adjudicating office is received.
Appear before SAT: As per the SEBI Act, any authorised person is a Company Secretary, Chartered Accountant (CA), Cost Accountant or Legal Practitioner can appear before Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT).
Appeal against the orders of SAT: Every person aggrieved by any order or decision of Securities Appellate Tribunal can file an appeal to the supreme court. The appeal should be made within 60 days from the date of receiving a copy of the order or decision of SAT.