Social Justice

Rising Antibiotic Resistance: A Global Health Emergency

Context: The World Health Organization’s Global Antibiotic Resistance Surveillance Report (2025) warns that nearly 1 in 6 bacterial infections worldwide in 2023 were resistant to antibiotics. Between 2018–2023, resistance rose in over 40% of pathogen–antibiotic combinations, with an annual increase of 5–15%, signaling an accelerating global health emergency.

What is Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR)?

Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) occurs when microorganisms (bacteria, viruses, fungi, parasites) evolve to resist the effects of drugs designed to kill them.

  • Example: Multi-Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis (MDR-TB) — caused by Mycobacterium tuberculosis resistant to both isoniazid (INH) and rifampicin (RMP).
  • AMR makes infections harder to treat, increases hospital stays, and raises mortality risk.

Key Findings from WHO Report (2025):

  • Scale of Resistance:
    Globally, 16% of lab-confirmed infections were antibiotic-resistant in 2023. The highest rates are reported from South-East Asia and the Eastern Mediterranean, where 1 in 3 infections show resistance.
  • Most Affected Pathogens (8 major bacteria):
    E. coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter spp., Salmonella spp., Shigella spp., Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Neisseria gonorrhoeae.
  • Drug Resistance Pattern:
    Over 40% of E. coli and 55% of Klebsiella pneumoniae strains are resistant to 3rd-generation cephalosporins, a mainline antibiotic group.
  • Data Gaps:
    Nearly 48% of countries did not report sufficient data to the Global AMR Surveillance System (GLASS), reflecting weak diagnostic capacity and reporting infrastructure.

India’s Perspective

India faces one of the highest burdens of AMR globally.

  • Causes: Overuse of antibiotics, self-medication, poor infection control, and use of antibiotics in livestock.
  • Initiatives:
    • National Action Plan on AMR (2017–2025).
    • AMR Surveillance & Research Network (ICMR).
    • “One Health” approach integrating human, animal, and environmental health.

Way Forward

  • Stewardship: Rational antibiotic prescription and public awareness.
  • Surveillance: Strengthen global and national reporting systems.
  • Research: Promote new antibiotics, vaccines, and alternatives like phage therapy.
  • Global Cooperation: Coordinated policy response under WHO and UN frameworks.

Conclusion

Antibiotic resistance is not just a medical challenge—it is a societal threat jeopardizing modern medicine. Strengthening surveillance, promoting responsible use, and fostering global partnerships remain key to reversing the tide of AMR.

Government Tightens Online Content Blocking Rules, Adds Senior-Level Oversight

Context: The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) has amended the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 to introduce new safeguards and senior-level oversight in online content blocking under Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act, 2000.

Key Highlights of the Amendment

Who Can Now Issue Blocking Notices

Only senior officials are now authorised to issue content removal or flagging notices to platforms such as YouTube, X (formerly Twitter), and Instagram.
Authorised officers include:

  • Joint Secretary (JS) or equivalent officer at the Centre/State.
  • Director-level officers, where no JS exists.
  • DIG or above, in police departments, specifically authorised.

Each order must clearly specify:

  • Legal basis and statutory provision
  • Nature of the unlawful act
  • Exact URL/digital location of content

A monthly review of all such orders will be conducted by an officer not below the rank of Secretary (e.g., IT Secretary or State Home Secretary).

Rule 3(1)(d): The Legal Basis

Under Rule 3(1)(d) of the IT Rules, 2021, the government can flag content that violates Indian law.

If platforms fail to act, they may lose “safe harbour” protection—their legal immunity from user-generated content liability.
Such notices act as warnings, not direct takedown orders.

Why the Change Was Needed

In some states, junior police officers (like Sub-Inspectors or ASIs) had been issuing blocking notices, raising concerns of misuse and lack of accountability.
The amendment ensures that only senior officers can exercise this power, promoting transparency, due process, and uniformity across states.

Background: X vs. Government Case

Elon Musk’s X (formerly Twitter) had legally challenged the government’s use of Rule 3(1)(d), calling it arbitrary and unconstitutional.
The Karnataka High Court, however, upheld the government’s authority.
Officials clarified that the new amendment is not a reaction to X’s case but does address its core concern by defining clear authority and procedure.

Section 79(3)(b) vs Section 69A

ProvisionPurposeKey Feature
Section 79(3)(b)Removal of unlawful contentPlatforms lose “safe harbour” if they fail to act
Section 69ABlocking content on grounds of national security, integrity, or defenceDirect blocking by government agencies

Significance

The amendments mark a shift toward responsible digital governance, ensuring that content blocking powers are exercised with legal clarity, senior oversight, and procedural accountability.

They balance freedom of expression with the need to curb misuse and maintain lawful online spaces.

State Mining Readiness Index (SMRI) 2025

Context: The Ministry of Mines (MoM) has released the first-ever State Mining Readiness Index (SMRI), assessing and ranking States based on their readiness and performance in the mining sector. The initiative, reported by Business Standard and Times of India, aims to encourage reforms, strengthen federal cooperation, and promote responsible mineral development across India.

image 42
Note: Map not to scale

About the SMRI

The State Mining Readiness Index is a benchmarking tool designed to evaluate States and Union Territories on their capacity to efficiently manage and develop non-coal mineral resources.

It aligns with the national goal of Atmanirbhar Bharat through enhanced domestic mineral exploration and sustainable mining.

Objectives of the Index:

  • To promote competitive federalism among States in the mining sector.
  • To encourage investment-friendly policies and attract private participation.
  • To foster sustainable and transparent mineral management.
  • To act as a performance monitoring tool for mining reforms.

Key Evaluation Parameters:

The Index evaluates States based on four key pillars:

  1. Auction Performance – Efficiency and transparency in mineral block auctions.
  2. Mine Operationalisation – Speed and success in converting auctioned blocks into operational mines.
  3. Exploration Efforts – Level of geological exploration and resource mapping.
  4. Sustainable Mining Practices – Environmental compliance, community engagement, and mine closure planning.

Ranking Highlights:

CategoryStates with High ReadinessMineral Endowment Type
Category AMadhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, GujaratMineral-rich States
Category BGoa, Uttar Pradesh, AssamModerate mineral endowment
Category CPunjab, Uttarakhand, TripuraLimited mineral endowment

Significance:

  • Enhances policy coherence between the Centre and States.
  • Promotes data-driven decision-making in the mineral sector.
  • Facilitates balanced regional development through sectoral competitiveness.
  • Supports India’s transition to a sustainable and self-reliant mineral economy.

Way Forward

  • Strengthen digital governance in mining through platforms like MCP (Mining Clearance Portal).
  • Expand geoscientific data sharing for faster exploration.
  • Integrate environmental, social, and governance (ESG) metrics into the SMRI framework.
  • Encourage capacity building for State mining departments.

Conclusion

The State Mining Readiness Index marks a crucial step toward modernising India’s mining ecosystem. By linking performance to reforms, it encourages States to adopt best practices in mineral exploration, sustainability, and governance—building a resilient foundation for India’s economic growth.

Health Ministry Advisory on Cough Syrups for Children

Context: The Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS) under the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare has issued a fresh advisory to all States and Union Territories on the rational use of cough syrups in children. The move comes after reports of child deaths in Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh, allegedly linked to syrups containing Dextromethorphan.

image 12

About Dextromethorphan

  • Dextromethorphan (DXM) is a cough suppressant used in many over-the-counter syrups.
  • It acts on the brain’s cough centre to reduce coughing but can cause serious side effects in children — such as drowsiness, breathing difficulty, and accidental overdose.
  • Long-term effects on the developing brain remain unclear, making it unsafe for paediatric use.

Key Guidelines Issued by DGHS

  • Avoid Routine Use: Most coughs in children are self-limiting and do not require medication.
  • Age Restriction: Cough syrups must not be prescribed for children below two years.
  • Clinical Evaluation: For older children, use only after proper medical evaluation — with accurate dosage and for the shortest possible duration.
  • Avoid Polypharmacy: Syrups containing multiple drug combinations should be avoided.
  • Non-Drug Remedies: Encourage hydration, steam inhalation, and rest as safer alternatives.
  • Pharma Compliance: Manufacturers must strictly follow Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) and use pharmaceutical-grade excipients.

Contamination and Safety Investigations

  • The Health Ministry clarified that syrups linked to the incidents were free from diethylene glycol (DEG) and ethylene glycol (EG) — two highly toxic industrial chemicals responsible for several global poisoning incidents.
  • In Rajasthan, the formulation in question contained Dextromethorphan, which is not recommended for children under national and WHO safety standards.

Chemical Toxicity Explained

  • Diethylene Glycol (DEG): Used in antifreeze; causes kidney failure, neurological damage, and death.
  • Ethylene Glycol (EG): Another toxic antifreeze component that leads to acute kidney injury if ingested.

Significance

  • Reinforces paediatric drug safety and the need for rational prescription practices.
  • Aims to prevent avoidable child fatalities from inappropriate or contaminated medicines.
  • Strengthens pharmaceutical quality control and public health accountability.

Conclusion:

The DGHS advisory highlights India’s growing vigilance in paediatric pharmacovigilance. Rational use of medicines, strict enforcement of safety standards, and public awareness are key to protecting children from preventable drug-related tragedies.

New Definition of Pandemic Emergency

Context: The amended International Health Regulations (IHR) came into effect in September 2025, introducing a new legal category — Pandemic Emergency. These amendments were adopted by consensus at the 77th World Health Assembly in June 2024 through Resolution WHA77.17.

New Definition of Pandemic Emergency

What is a Pandemic Emergency?

A pandemic emergency is a newly defined sub-category of a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). It applies when a communicable disease:

  • Spreads widely across regions and countries,
  • Overloads health systems,
  • Causes significant social and economic disruption, and
  • Requires rapid, coordinated international action.

Thus, it represents a higher threshold built upon the PHEIC framework.

Key Amendments under IHR (2024):

  • Decision-making: WHO Director-General can determine if a PHEIC amounts to a pandemic emergency (Article 12).
  • National IHR Authorities: Every country must designate an authority to coordinate across ministries.
  • Financial Mechanism: A global financing facility is introduced to support developing countries in pandemic preparedness.
  • States Parties Committee: A non-punitive oversight body to assist and guide implementation.

Features of Pandemic Emergency:

  • Tiered Alert System: Pandemic emergency is a higher tier beyond PHEIC.
  • Broader Triggers: Based on health overload, socioeconomic disruption, and whole-of-society response needs.
  • Equity & Solidarity: Focus on fair access to vaccines, medicines, and financial support.
  • Respect for Sovereignty: WHO cannot impose domestic measures such as lockdowns; national governments retain control.
  • Integration: Enriches the PHEIC mechanism, avoiding duplication of procedures.

Significance:

  1. Legal Certainty: Establishes clear criteria for when a global pandemic can be declared.
  2. Faster Response: Enables quicker mobilization of international resources and expertise.
  3. Equity in Support: Developing nations gain access to dedicated financial and technical assistance.
  4. Global Coordination: Reinforces international cooperation while respecting state sovereignty.

Conclusion

The creation of a pandemic emergency category strengthens global health governance by bridging the gap between national sovereignty and international solidarity. It ensures clarity, faster response, and fairer distribution of resources, making the world better prepared for future health crises.

PM E-DRIVE Scheme: Boosting India’s EV Transition

Context: The Ministry of Heavy Industries (MHI) has released operational guidelines for the PM E-DRIVE (Electric Drive Revolution in Innovative Vehicle Enhancement) scheme, a flagship initiative to accelerate India’s electric mobility transition.

About PM E-DRIVE Scheme

Launched in October 2024, the scheme has a financial outlay of ₹10,900 crore and is effective till March 2026, with certain components extended till March 2028. It builds on earlier initiatives such as FAME-I and FAME-II, but with a larger budget and broader scope.

Objectives

  • Promote adoption of electric 2-wheelers, 3-wheelers, ambulances, trucks, and buses.
  • Support public transport electrification to enhance mass mobility.
  • Establish a robust EV charging infrastructure across the country.
  • Encourage domestic EV manufacturing through a Phased Manufacturing Programme (PMP).
  • Reduce vehicular emissions and improve air quality, aligning with Aatmanirbhar Bharat.

Key Components

  1. Demand Incentives/Subsidies:
    • Upfront subsidies for purchase of EVs.
    • Capped at 15% of ex-factory price or fixed limits for eligible categories.
  2. Grants for Capital Assets:
    • Acquisition of e-buses and expansion of charging infrastructure.
    • Upgradation of testing facilities under MHI.
  3. Public Charging Stations:
    • Nearly 72,300 charging stations to be deployed with an outlay of ₹2,000 crore.
    • BHEL as the nodal agency for demand aggregation and a Unified EV Super App for real-time tracking and payments.
  4. Governance Mechanism:
    • Implementation through Project Implementation & Sanctioning Committee (PISC) chaired by Secretary, MHI.
    • Periodic review of incentives, charging infrastructure, and EV uptake.
  5. State-Level Incentives:
    • Road tax waivers, toll exemptions, and reduced parking fees encouraged.

Significance

  • Strengthens EV supply chain and boosts domestic manufacturing.
  • Supports India’s climate commitments under the Paris Agreement.
  • Helps reduce dependence on fossil fuels and enhances energy security.
  • Encourages private sector participation through Viability Gap Funding (VGF).

Queer Couples’ Rights in India 

Context: Recently, a same-sex couple moved the Bombay High Court challenging the discriminatory levy of gift tax under the Income Tax Act.

Relevance of the Topic : Mains: Evolution of Rights of Transgenders/ Queer Couples’ and related issues. 

Under the Income Tax Act, no such tax on gifts is levied on heterosexual couples. No such exemption exists for queer couples, which violates Articles 14 and Article 15 of the Constitution.

The case highlights the persistent problem of how to operationalise queer rights recognised in court verdicts and government advisories without a legal framework of relationship recognition.

Who are Queer Couples?

  • Queer couples are partners where one or both identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or other non-heteronormative identities.
  • Such couples do not fall within the conventional legal framework of marriage in India, as the marriage laws (like the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 or Special Marriage Act, 1954) recognise only heterosexual unions.
  • They may cohabit, share financial and emotional responsibilities, and live as families, but the state does not currently grant them the same legal status and protections as heterosexual couples.

Evolution of Queer Rights in India: 

  • Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018): The SC decriminalised consensual same-sex relations by striking down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code.
  • Deepika Singh v. Central Administrative Tribunal (2022): The SC expanded the definition of family beyond marital ties to include non-traditional households. ​​The legal understanding of “family” may include manifestations like queer families as well as single parents.
  • Supriya Chakraborty v. Union of India (2023): The SC upheld the validity of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, and held that the right to marry is not a fundamental right for queer persons. There is no unqualified fundamental right to marry under the Constitution. But it unanimously recognised that queer persons have the right to relationship, cohabitation, and choice of partner. The SC also directed the Union Government to set up a Cabinet Secretary-led committee to identify entitlements of queer couples in the absence of marriage recognition.

Right To Marry in India:

  • As per Article 21 of Indian Constitution, Marriage is an element of the Right to Life. Article 21 guarantees the Right to Marry the person of one's choice.
  • For Queers: The government has already acknowledged the right to love, right to cohabit, right to choose one’s partner, right to one’s sexual orientation as fundamental rights under Article 21.

Policy Measures after the 2023 Verdict

  • The Department of Food and Public Distribution issued an advisory directing states to treat queer partners as members of the same household for ration cards.
  • The Department of Financial Services issued an advisory clarifying that queer persons can open joint bank accounts and nominate their partners.
  • The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare issued guidelines prohibiting discrimination in hospitals and allowing queer partners to claim the body of a deceased partner.

These measures are steps forward, but they remain limited to advisories and face challenges in practical implementation.

Challenges in Realising Queer Rights: 

  • Even if courts or government issue favourable orders, queer couples require a recognised mechanism to prove that they are in a partnership.
  • Departments and authorities lack a uniform way to identify queer couples who should receive entitlements.
  • Without a recognised proof of association, advisories and court verdicts risk remaining ineffective in practice.

The Bombay High Court admitted the petition of the same-sex couple challenging discriminatory taxation of gifts. A favourable ruling could extend equality in tax treatment to queer couples. However, implementation of such a verdict will still require a credible method to verify who qualifies as a partner in a queer relationship.

The Deed of Familial Association (DoFA) as a Possible Solution

  • In 2023, Justice N. Anand Venkatesh of the Madras High Court suggested that the Tamil Nadu government should consider recognising a Deed of Familial Association (DoFA).
  • A DoFA would allow queer partners to submit affidavits of their free will to a District Magistrate or other authorised officer to register their association.
  • The issuance of a DoFA would give official proof of a queer relationship that could be presented before departments or institutions.
  • It could help operationalise court orders, advisories, and government circulars by creating a uniform recognition of queer partnerships.

Such a mechanism would reduce arbitrariness, help protect rights, and ensure that entitlements already granted are actually accessible.

Also Read: Embracing Diversity: Paving the Way for Transgender Inclusivity and Equality 

Issues with Sikh Marriage Registration

Context: The Supreme Court has directed 17 States and 8 Union Territories to frame rules for the registration of Sikh marriages under the Anand Marriage Act, 1909, within four months. 

Till then, Sikh couples can register their marriages under existing laws. This ensures legal recognition of Anand Karaj marriages, but it does not solve deeper problems with the Act.

Relevance of the Topic: Prelims: Anand Marriage Act. 

What is Anand Karaj?

  • Anand Karaj, literally “blissful union”, is the prescribed form of marriage in the Sikh faith. 
  • The ceremony is conducted in the presence of the Guru Granth Sahib, the holy scripture of the Sikhs. 

Anand Marriage Act 1909: 

  • In the early 20th century, efforts by the Sikh community for legal recognition of their distinct marriage ceremony (specifically to differentiate it from Hindu rituals) led to the enactment of the Anand Marriage Act in 1909. 
  • The Act legally sanctifies all marriages solemnised through the Anand Karaj ceremony. However, the original Act did not include provisions for the registration of these marriages. This gap was addressed over a century later with the Anand Marriage (Amendment) Act, 2012. 

Anand Marriage (Amendment) Act, 2012: 

  • The Amendment introduced Section 6, which directed state governments to create rules for the registration of Anand Karaj marriages. 
  • Once registered under the Act, a couple would not need to register their marriage under any other law.

Issues with Anand Marriage Act

  • The Act only provides for recognition and registration of marriages but does not cover divorce, custody, or other matrimonial disputes.
  • Sikh couples seeking divorce must still rely on the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which undermines the distinct identity of Sikh personal law.
  • Most States and Union Territories have still not framed rules for the registration of Anand Karaj marriages, despite the 2012 amendment.
  • The failure to notify rules has denied Sikh couples a statutory facility and created uneven access to their legal rights.
  • Without a marriage certificate, Sikh couples face hurdles in matters of residence, maintenance, inheritance, and succession.
  • This inaction has effectively disenfranchised a large section of the Sikh community from the benefits of a central law.

The SC recently addressed this gap and issued a comprehensive set of directions to all States and Union Territories to frame rules for registration of Anand Karaj marriages within four months and held that no application can be refused in the meantime.

Limitations of Supreme Court recent directions:  

  • The order only addresses the problem of registration and does not resolve deeper legal gaps such as provisions for divorce, custody, or other matrimonial disputes.

As a result, Sikh couples must still rely on the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for matters beyond registration, leaving the larger demand for a comprehensive Sikh Marriage Code unaddressed. 

Denial of Land Inheritance Rights to Tribal Women

Context: The Supreme Court’s judgment in Ram Charan vs Sukhram (July 2025) held that excluding daughters from ancestral property violates the fundamental right to equality. This has brought tribal women’s inheritance rights into sharp focus.

Relevance of the Topic: Mains: Issues faced by Women: Land Inheritance Rights 

Land Inheritance Rights of Tribal Women: 

  • Tribals in Scheduled Areas are governed by their customary laws in matters of marriage, succession and adoption. 
  • Despite women contributing more in farms than the men, none of the tribal customary laws prevalent in the Scheduled Five Area States give land inheritance rights to females in ancestral properties. 
  • The consequence is stark landlessness among women. As per the Agriculture Census 2015-16, only 16.7% of Scheduled Tribe women possess land compared to 83.3% of men. 

Reasons for Denial of Land Inheritance Rights to Tribal Women: 

  • Fear of Land Alienation: The belief that if tribal women marry outside their community, inherited land may pass into non-tribal hands.
  • Communitarian Nature of Tribal Land: Tribal land is often perceived as communitarian property, where individual ownership is discouraged, and this argument is used to justify women’s exclusion.

The idea of codifying gender-equal inheritance laws for tribal communities has had a contentious history. The opposing argument is that replacing tribal customs with codified laws would undermine tribal identity. However, it perpetuates systemic gender discrimination and economic marginalisation of women.

Problems with Customary Exclusion: 

  • Denial of land rights undermines women’s economic independence and entrenches cycles of poverty and dependence.
  • It perpetuates patriarchal control over resources and denies women equal status within families and communities.
  • The communitarian ownership argument fails in practice, as proceeds from land sales or acquisitions rarely benefit the village community, instead accruing to male members.
  • Violation of fundamental rights: Denial of inheritance rights violates fundamental rights.
    • Article 14 guarantees equality before law.
    • Article 15 prohibits discrimination on the grounds of sex. 
    • Article 21 guarantee of dignity is compromised when women are deprived of property and economic security.
  • It also contradicts constitutional morality, which demands that customs and traditions must conform to the principles of equality and justice. 

Judicial Interventions: 

  • Madhu Kishwar vs State of Bihar (1996), the SC refrained from striking down tribal succession customs, fearing disruption of settled traditions.
  • Prabha Minz vs Martha Ekka (2022): Jharkhand High Court ruled in favour of Oraon women, and upheld the right of females on inheritance, despite being barred by customary law.
  • Kamala Neti vs Special Land Acquisition Officer (2022): The SC held that a woman belonging to a Scheduled Tribe (ST) is entitled to an equal share in inherited tribal land. The SC urged the Central Government to amend Section 2(2) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 which expressly exempts tribal women from the scope of the Act. 
  • Ram Charan case (2025), the SC held that excluding daughters from ancestral property violates the fundamental right to equality.

Way Forward

  • Codify Tribal Succession Act that ensures equal inheritance rights for women while being sensitive to tribal socio-cultural contexts. Codification of succession laws on the lines of Hindu and Christian laws would harmonise customary autonomy with constitutional equality.
  • Greater awareness and sensitisation within tribal communities to counter fears of land alienation and to highlight the role of women as equal stakeholders.
  • Continued judicial scrutiny to ensure that customs failing the test of reasonableness and public policy are struck down.

Empowering tribal women through property rights is essential not only for gender justice but also for achieving inclusive tribal development and social justice.

Mental Health is a Fundamental Right: SC

Context: In July 2025, the Supreme Court of India in a landmark verdict ruled that mental health is an integral part of the Right to Life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The Court also issued 15 strong guidelines for schools and coaching centres to protect student well-being. 

Relevance of the Topic:Prelims: Key Provisions of Mental Healthcare Act 2017. Mains: Mental Healthcare in India: Challenges, Govt. Initiatives & Way Forward. 

Mental health is more than the absence of mental illnesses. It is the foundation for the well-being and effective functioning of individuals. It includes mental well-being, prevention of mental disorders, treatment and rehabilitation.

Mental Health is a Fundamental Right: 

  • The Supreme Court in the Sukdeb Saha vs the State of Andhra Pradesh (2025) judgement explicitly recognised mental health as an integral component of the constitutional Right to Life under Article 21.
  • This interpretation significantly broadens the scope of Article 21 to encompass psychological well-being, extending beyond mere physical survival. 
  • The judgment laid down binding guidelines (Saha Guidelines) for educational institutions and coaching centers across India. They aim to establish a preventive, remedial, and supportive framework for mental health protection and prevention of suicides by students. 

Saha Guidelines: 

The SC has ordered a package of binding interim orders referred to as Saha Guidelines for educational institutions and coaching centers across India. 

  • Schools, colleges, hostels and coaching institutes are required to proactively develop support systems to address the issue of mental health. 
  • The SC has directed all States and Union Territories to notify rules within two months for registering private coaching centres and enforcing these guidelines. 
  • District-level monitoring committees, chaired by District Magistrates, have been tasked to oversee compliance and handle complaints. 
  • Until Parliament passes a full code, these guidelines will have legislative force.

Significance of the ruling: 

  • Placing psychological integrity in Article 21 means that the Court has opened up room for these victims (suicide victims) to be heard and safeguarded. 
  • It opens the door for restorative measures i.e., counselling, reform in institutions, mechanisms of accountability that go beyond retribution to prevention.
  • It will strengthen the implementation of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017. The Act enshrines the right to receive mental health care in India.  

Key Provisions of Mental Healthcare Act 2017

The Act provides the legal framework for providing services to protect, promote and fulfil the rights of people with mental illnesses. The Act is in line with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (UNCRPD).

  • The Act guarantees mental health services for all. The government is responsible for creating opportunities to access less restrictive options for community living such as halfway homes, sheltered accommodations, rehab homes, and supported accommodations.
  • It decriminalised the attempt to suicide which hitherto was criminal offence under section 309 of Indian Penal Code, and mandates care instead of punishment.
  • It provided for the concept of ‘Advanced directive’, i.e. a person (suffering from mental illness) shall have the right to specify the manner in which he/she wishes to be treated or not to be treated. The person shall have the right to nominate representatives to take decisions on their behalf regarding treatment. 
  • All States are required to establish a State Mental Health Authority and Mental Health Review Boards (MHRB) bodies that can further draft standards for mental healthcare institutes, oversee their functioning and ensure they comply with the Act. 

WHO’s data on Mental Health

As per the recent data from the World Health Organisation: 

  • More than 1 billion people globally are living with mental health disorders (including anxiety and depression). 
  • Mental health conditions affect people of all ages and income levels, and are the second leading cause of long-term disability, contributing to loss of healthy life. 
  • The prevalence of mental health disorders can vary by sex, and women are disproportionately impacted. 
  • Depression and anxiety alone cost the global economy an estimated $1 trillion each year.
  • Progress made in reducing suicide mortality is quite low (only 12% reduction achieved) to meet the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) of a one -third reduction in suicide rates by 2030. 

Challenges: 

  • India has a significant shortfall of mental health professionals, with roughly 0.7 psychiatrists per 100,000 people, far below the WHO’s recommended ratio of 3 per 100,000 people.
  • Systemic neglect of mental health and stigma and reluctance to seek help.  
  • Inadequate funding for community-based programmes and the effective utilisation of funds. E.g., India’s direct mental health budget has remained at roughly ₹1,000 crore in recent fiscal years.
  • Inconsistent implementation of the Mental Healthcare Act 2017. 

Way Forward

  • Active policy interventions and resource allocation by the government. 
  • Measures to train and sensitise the community/society to reduce the stigma around mental health.
  • Awareness to educate society about mental diseases as done by Accredited Social Health Activist (ASHA) by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.
  • Steps to connect the patients with each other by forming a peer network, so that they could listen and support each other.
  • People experiencing mental health problems should get the same access to safe and effective care as those with physical health problems.
  • Telemedicine and digital health platforms can extend the reach of mental health services, particularly in areas with a shortage of mental health professionals.

Also Read: Bridging Health Cover: Mental Healthcare in India 

Transforming mental health services is one of the most pressing public health challenges. However, the national tele-mental health programme has expanded, educational development and awareness programmes are happening at an advanced pace. 

Women’s Economic Empowerment Index

Context: India aspires to become a $30 trillion economy by 2047, but women who constitute nearly half the population contribute only 18% to the GDP. Their invisibility in data makes gender-disaggregated data crucial for inclusive growth.

Relevance of the topic:

Prelims: Gender budgeting, WEE Index (Uttar Pradesh)

Mains: Role of gender data in inclusive growth, governance reforms, women’s economic empowerment.

Almost 196 million employable women in India are outside the workforce. The biggest barrier to women’s economic empowerment is not merely the lack of opportunities but their invisibility in data. Without gender-disaggregated data their participation gaps across education, skilling, employment, and entrepreneurship will remain stalled. 

Women’s Economic Empowerment Index: 

  • The WEE Index was recently launched by Uttar Pradesh. It aims to track the impact of government schemes on women's economic participation across all 75 districts of the state.
  • It is India’s first district-level tool to track women’s participation across five economic levers:
    • Employment
    • Education and skilling
    • Entrepreneurship
    • Livelihood and mobility
    • Safety and inclusive infrastructure
  • The index shifts focus from participation numbers to structural barriers that limit women’s empowerment. E.g., Data showed women dominate skilling enrolments but remain very low in entrepreneurship due to poor access to credit. 

Why Gender Data is Needed?

  • Inclusive Growth: Inclusive economic growth cannot occur if half the population remains invisible in policy datasets. Gender-disaggregated data ensures women’s contribution is measured, valued, and integrated into growth strategies.
  • Making Gaps Visible: Without a gender lens, existing indices on health, economy, and infrastructure mask inequities. Data reveals critical drop-off points such as high female dropout rates after Class 12 and post-graduation, or the gap between skilling enrolment and entrepreneurship.
  • Catalyst for Reforms: Visibility of inequities prompts departments to act. E.g., In Uttar Pradesh, data on low female representation among bus drivers and conductors, led to new recruitment strategies and women-friendly infrastructure such as women’s restrooms in bus terminals.
  • Shifting beyond Participation Rates: Gender data helps track retention, leadership roles, re-entry into work, and quality of employment, not just surface-level participation. It highlights systemic barriers such as limited access to credit for women entrepreneurs despite high skilling enrolments.
  • To improve Gender Budgeting: Gender budgeting is often confined to welfare schemes or finance departments. True gender budgeting requires applying a gender lens to every rupee spent in sectors like education, infrastructure, energy, and housing, and this is only possible if robust gender-disaggregated data exists.
  • Guiding Policy and Investment: Data makes it possible to design district-wise gender action plans, guiding budget allocations and infrastructure priorities.

A robust framework such as the WEE Index can be replicated and scaled in other states as well. It can help the states translate intent into implementation: turning data into district-wise gender action plans that guide budget allocations, infrastructure priorities and programmatic reforms.

Also Read: Budgeting for a gender-inclusive ‘Viksit Bharat’ 

Anticipatory Bail under the SC/ST Act 1989

Context: The Supreme Court in Kiran vs Rajkumar Jivaraj Jain quashed the Bombay High Court order granting anticipatory bail to an accused of caste atrocities reaffirming the statutory bar under the Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989.

Relevance of the Topic: Prelims: About Anticipatory bail and SC/ST Act 1989.

What is Anticipatory Bail?

  • Anticipatory bail is a pre-arrest legal safeguard provided under the Code of Criminal Procedure (now Section 482 of BNSS) allowing a person to seek bail in anticipation of arrest for a non-bailable offence. 
  • It is preventive in nature and distinct from regular bail, which is sought after arrest.
  • It was recommended by the Law Commission of India to protect citizens against arbitrary or mala fide arrests. 

The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 explicitly excludes the application of Section 482 of BNSS which provides for anticipatory bail. 

Why is Anticipatory Bail barred under SC/ST Act 1989? 

  • Parliament introduced this bar to protect victims from intimidation, harassment, and coercion by accused persons after registration of cases.
  • The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutional validity of this bar in multiple judgments, holding that it does not violate Article 14 (equality before law) or Article 21 (right to life and liberty).
  • Offences under the Act are treated as a distinct class because they are rooted in systemic untouchability, caste oppression, and social exclusion.

In Kiran vs Rajkumar Jivaraj Jain (2025): 

  • The Supreme Court quashed anticipatory bail granted by the Bombay High Court terming it a manifest error and jurisdictional illegality. 
  • It held that courts cannot conduct a mini-trial at the bail stage and must only check for a prima facie case. 
  • The ruling reinforced that the SC/ST Act is a substantive shield to protect dignity and security of vulnerable groups. 

Judicial Precedents: 

  • State of M.P. vs Ram Krishna Balothia (1995), the SC upheld the validity of Section 18 emphasising the need for strong deterrent measures.
  • Vilas Pandurang Pawar vs State of Maharashtra (2012), the Court reiterated that anticipatory bail is statutorily barred when a prima facie case under the Act exists.
  • Prathvi Raj Chauhan vs Union of India (2020), the Court clarified that anticipatory bail may be considered only if no prima facie offence under the Act is made out, but not otherwise. 
image 48

Trending now

SC Directions on Online Content Regulation
PM Jan Vikas Karyakram (PMJVK): Strengthening Inclusive Area Development
From Waste to Wealth: India’s Shift Towards a Circular Economy
IMF Rating on India’s GDP Data