This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the conceptual, historical, and procedural frameworks Examining the basis of the right to a clean and healthy environment helps in an increased understanding of the nature of the right which in turn will further the job of devising effective strategies and policies to meet the interests of the environment and make the right a reality. This paper examines four strategies: Firstly protect environment rights by declaring it to be a right. This would protect it from mutilation at the hands of political processes, and thus would be a safer option, but its dimensions have not yet been crystallized. Secondly, it can be protected by making it part and parcel of human rights. Thirdly, the Interest Theory suggests that the interest of the environment must be protected for its own sake by creating such an interest. Fourthly, the notion of Intergenerational Responsibility which establishes that the present generation has an obligation/duty to preserve and protect the environment for a correlative similar right which the future generation enjoys. The article also examines the conflict between environment protection and developmental needs of humanity. Indian courts have referred to traditional Indian philosophy of ‘Dharma’ and have tried to adopt a balancing approach by integrating environment values with developmental values. Any theory that does not resolve the above conflict would clearly be insufficient.
The rapid expansion of online real-money gaming in India has generated a sharp constitutional collision between the State’s power to prohibit activities harmful to public health, order and morality, and residual claims of economic liberty under Article 19(1)(g) and personal autonomy under Article 21. This paper examines that collision after two decisive 2025–26 developments: the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025, which imposes a pan-India prohibition on all “online money games” irrespective of skill or chance, and the Supreme Court’s judgment in State of Tamil Nadu v. Junglee Games India Pvt. Ltd., which held that the introduction of monetary stakes converts an activity into betting and gambling under Entry 34 of List II, renders it res extra commercium, and strips it of Article 19(1)(g) protection. The paper argues that the legislative and judicial displacement of the classical skill–chance distinction, anchored in R.M.D. Chamarbaugwala (1957) and subsequent High Court jurisprudence, has produced a uniform prohibition of unprecedented breadth. It examines three interlocking tensions: federal competence arising from Parliament’s occupation of a traditionally State field; proportionality and arbitrariness challenges under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) now pending in Head Digital Works Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India; and the normative implications of characterising every smartphone as a “virtual common gambling house.” While the regulatory response rests on legitimate and documented concerns of addiction, financial ruin and money-laundering, its categorical character leaves unresolved questions of overbreadth, legislative competence and the outer limits of economic liberty in the digital economy.
This paper examines the definition of ecocide, offers criticism on the definitions proposed and compares the proposed definition of the crime to the existing provision criminalizing war-time ecocide. It analyses the practicalities i.e., the incidence of liability and tthe incidence of reparations, if ecocide were to be considered as an international crime under the Rome Statute. The incidence of liability of peace-time ecocide will be evaluated under three circumstances: where private corporations carry out ecocidal acts in violation of domestic law, where private corporations carry out ecocidal acts under State sanction and where ecocidal acts are perpetrated by the State or any of its instrumentalities
With the change of societal structure , a new concept has emerged that can be called as LIVE -IN -RELATIONSHIP . Although this concept is prevalent in western countries. But in regard to INDIA it has emerged so my article is related to maintenance in criminal law with special women who LIVE-IN -RELATIONSHIPS . Firstly I have discussed some historical aspects of women and then the general meaning of the term maintenance. Later on provide a certain brief of the criminal code and grounds for refusal to grant maintenance . In criminal law the term married is used so my article is focused on the position of women in LIVE -IN - RELATIONSHIP. And further discussed whether the provision of maintenance in regard with live-in relationship and judicial interpretation in determining the position of women in live -in -relationship , further discussed some landmark cases which provide the scope to live -in -relationship in India. and the lastly discussed about the overview position of women in regard to maintenance in india
The principal of non-refoulment is a key principle under international human rights and proposes for non-deportation of any individual where they might face inhumane treatment or irreparable harm. The migrants in such situations undergo a triple syndrome wherein they are vulnerable and are at risk of facing harm from their native country, non-state entities faced while escaping native country and harm face in destination country. While some nations around the world have adopted this principle, most nations fear that providing refuge to immigrants might lead to breach in their national security. While that may be a valid concern, most nations use this threat as a way of avoiding the infiltration of immigrants in their nation’s population or choose to discriminate between immigrants from different countries based on their nationality, religion, race, etc. The author has delved into the harm faced by immigrants, international frameworks against the same and the security paradigm set up by countries to move their own political agenda. The author has analysed the paper from both a global and an Indian perspective and has further analysed the Indian government and judiciary’s difference of treatment to Rohingyas from Myanmar and refugees fleeing from Afghanistan and has provided for factors involved in formation of a uniform security paradigm.
The Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer (LGBTQ) community is the sexual minority of India, which has been unfairly discriminated in legal and social identity since time immemorial. The civil rights of the LGBTQ community like the right to adopt, right to marriage, etc are also not being recognised at par with their heterosexual counterparts. Equal adoption rights are necessary for the LGBTQ community to live a family life with children’s similar to their heterosexual counterpart. However, the adoptions laws of India are discriminatory towards the LGBTQ community and work as an impediment for them in fully exercising their adoption rights. Such discriminatory adoption laws which are based on the binary understanding of gender violates different principles which are enshrined under Article 14, Article 15 and Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The adoption laws of India are also not in line with the principle of the best interest of the child as they exclude potential prospective adoptive parents from the process of adoption. The researcher in this research paper will critically analyse the LGBTQ right to adopt in India and will try to make a case for equal adoption rights for the LGBTQ Community
