While rising to the occasion, the Uttarakhand High Court has in a rare gesture most rightly in a latest, landmark, laudable and learned judgment titled State of Uttarakhand vs Smt. Preeti Chand in Special Leave No. 124 of 2021 delivered just recently on April 5, 2021 directed the State to sanction and grant extraordinary pension in favour of the widow of a police officer who lost his life while on duty. It has to be certainly applauded also as the widow has to bear the whole expenses of her, her children and the entire family herself for which she definitely needs support also. There is no reason for not appreciating and admiring it.

To start with, this commendable, courageous, cogent, composed and convincing judgment authored by Chief Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan for himself and Justice Alok Kumar Verma of the Uttarakhand High Court sets the ball rolling by first and foremost observing in para 1 that, “For the sake of brevity and convenience, the party shall be referred to as arrayed in the writ petition.”

In real terms, this notable judgment starts laying itself bare in para 2 wherein it is observed that, “The petitioner-State has challenged the order dated 05.11.2020, passed by a learned Single Judge, in Writ Petition (S/S) No.590 of 2018, whereby the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition, and has directed the State to sanction and grant extraordinary pension in favour of the petitioner, Smt. Preeti Chand, a lady who lost her husband suddenly in call of duty.”

While elaborating on the facts of the case, the Bench then puts forth in para 3 that, “Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner’s husband, Mr. Ramesh Chand Rajwar, was a SubInspector (Civil Police) in the Police Department. In the year 2013, he was posted at Police Station Dharchula. He was incharge of the Special Operation Group (for short ‘SOG’) constituted for controlling typical crimes such as forest smuggling, and poaching. On 25.09.2013 at 8:15 P.M., the Police Station was informed that forest smugglers had entered the forest, and were carrying on their nefarious activities. Therefore, the petitioner’s husband went to the scene of crime in Tawaghat Tapovan. In order to show his departure from the police station, relevant entries were made in the General Diary. Unfortunately, while the petitioner’s husband was returning from the scene of the crime, his vehicle got trapped in a landslide caused by the heavy rains. A boulder struck the head of the petitioner’s husband; he died on the spot. Due to the death of her husband, the Department granted the family pension to the petitioner. But the extraordinary pension has not been granted to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner had filed an application before the Department for seeking the benefit of extraordinary pension. The Superintendent of Police, Pithoragarh submitted his report to the Police Headquarters, Dehradun “that the petitioner is entitled for receiving extraordinary pension”. By a letter dated 20.12.2016, in turn, the Police Headquarters recommended to the Office of Accountant General that the petitioner is, indeed, entitled to receive the extraordinary pension. By letter dated 27.02.2017, the office of Accountant General also recommended to the State Government that under the Rule 3, Sub Rule (3) of U.P. Police Extraordinary Pension Rules, 1961 (for short ‘the Rules’), petitioner is certainly entitled to receive the extraordinary pension. Furthermore, by letters dated 20.03.2017 & 08.09.2017, the Police Headquarters again recommended to the State Government that the petitioner should be granted extraordinary pension. However, despite the repeated recommendations both by Police Headquarter and by Accountant General, State rejected the petitioner’s claim. Left with no other option, the petitioner approached before this Court by filing the writ petition. By the impugned judgment dated 05.11.2020, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition in the terms mentioned hereinabove. Hence, the present appeal before this Court.”

On the one hand, the Bench points out in para 4 that, “Mr. Vikas Pande, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State, has vehemently contended that Rule 3 of the Rules are applicable to only those police personnel who are engaged against the dacoits, or armed offender, or foreign intruders or “during engagements in other activities”. According to the learned counsel, the words “other activities” was further clarified by the Government Order dated 19.08.1988. According to the learned counsel, the said G.O. mentioned the following categories:

firstly, police personnel who have died while fighting the dacoits or other anti-social elements; secondly, those who have died while fighting with the invaders; thirdly, those who have died while fighting with the terrorist; fourthly, those who have died while trying to control the violent crowd; fifthly, those who have died while tackling natural calamities such as flood, landslide, avalanche, earthquake, or while fighting with fire. According to learned counsel, the work assigned to the petitioner’s husband does not fall within any of these categories. Therefore, the petitioner’s case is not covered under the Rules. Hence, the Government was justified in rejecting the petitioner’s claim for receiving the extraordinary pension. Lastly, according to the learned counsel, the learned Single Judge has failed to notice the Government Order dated 19.08.1988. Hence, the impugned judgment deserves to be set aside by this Court.”

On the contrary, the Bench then discloses in para 5 that, “On the other hand, Mr. D.S. Patni, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that Rule 3 of the Rules has used residuary words, namely, “any other action in which the police personnel is killed”. Moreover, these residuary words have been defined by the Government Order dated 19.08.1988. According to the learned counsel, the very first category i.e. “while fifing dacoit or any anti-social elements” certainly covers the case of the petitioner’s husband. After all, the petitioner’s husband was working for SOG, which was a special task force created for tackling the problems created by forest smugglers and poachers. Further, the petitioner’s husband was informed that forest smugglers/poachers have entered in the forest to carry on their nefarious activities; they need to be stopped immediately. Since, the petitioner’s husband was on duty to tackle the anti-social elements, like forest smugglers and poachers, the petitioner’s case falls under the first category mentioned hereinabove. Therefore, the State has illegally rejected the claim for granting the extraordinary pension to the petitioner. According to the learned Senior Counsel, the learned Single Judge has noticed this point. Moreover, as the impugned orders dated 27.02.2018 and 02.04.2018 were passed without assigning any reasons, since both these impugned orders are cryptic in nature, the learned Single Judge was certainly justified in quashing these two orders and in issuing the directions to the State Government as mentioned hereinabove. Hence, the learned Senior Counsel has supported the impugned judgment.”

Needless to say, the Bench then observes in para 6 that, “Heard the learned counsel for the parties, and examined the records, submitted by both the parties, and perused the impugned judgment.”

Most significantly, the Bench then without mincing any words puts forth in simple, straight and suave language in para 7 that, “Admittedly, the petitioner’s husband was initially working as a Sub-Inspector in Civil Police. However, in the year 2013, he was reposed with the responsibility of Incharge of the S.O.G.. In fact, S.O.G. was constituted for controlling the crimes committed in the forest either by those who are smuggling forest products, like precious woods, or by the poachers who indulge in killing wild animals for their own personal profits. Undoubtedly, on 25.09.2013, the petitioner’s husband was deputed to tackle these anti-social elements who threaten the wildlife, or the environment. Obviously, the petitioner’s husband was not discharging his duty simplicitor. In fact he was risking his life in order to tackle the menace caused by the forest smugglers, or poachers. Thus, it was a special duty, a dangerous task, performed by the petitioner’s husband.”

Please read concluding on thedailyguardian.com.

No less significant is what is then stated in para 8 that, “The Government Order dated 19.08.1988, clearly mentions the category of dacoits and anti-social elements. Any police personnel while fighting the dacoits and antisocial elements is covered by these category. Obviously, the forest smugglers and poachers do fall under the category of “anti-social elements”. As mentioned above on 25.09.2013, the petitioner’s husband was on special duty to control the anti-social elements; while returning from discharging his duties, the petitioners husband met his death. Thus, naturally, the petitioner’s claim for receiving extraordinary pension is clearly covered both by Rule 3 of the Rules, and by Government Order dated 19.08.1988.”

As it turned out, the Bench then lays bare in para 9 that, “A bare perusal of the orders dated 27.02.2018 and 02.04.2018, clearly reveals that they are cryptic in nature. Therefore, the learned Single Judge was justified in observing that any order that adversely affects the civil and fundamental rights of a person would have to be a reasoned order. Hence, the learned Single Judge was justified in quashing the impugned orders, and in issuing the necessary directions to the respondents.”

As a corollary, the Bench then holds in para 10 that, “For the reasons stated above, we do not find any illegality or perversity in the order passed by the learned Single Judge. This appeal, being devoid of any merit is, hereby, dismissed.” Finally, it is then held in the last para 11 that, “No order as to costs.”

To sum up, it needs no Albert Einstein to conclude that the Uttarakhand High Court has most wisely, most commendably and most courageously chosen to stand up in favour of the right of the widow whose husband who was a police officer and who lost his life while on special duty to control anti-social elements. It has therefore rightly directed the State to sanction and grant extraordinary pension in favour of the widow of a police officer. This will now save her from running from pillar to post for getting her basic rights. So there is no ostensible reason as to why the Uttarakhand High Court who has spoken so decisively in her favour in its judgment be not appreciated and applauded.

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,

Cannabis, which has many other forms such as Ganja, Charas or Bhang is a type of physio-pharmaceutical drug. Marijuana often evokes images of euphoria and relaxed lethargy. Some of the earliest human cultures ingested and smoked the leaves of the plant, and its consumption has persisted in modern society. Although it’s most commonly used as a recreational drug, marijuana also has important medicinal, religious, and spiritual applications. To some, it’s an important clinical substance that functions as a pain reliever, appetite booster, and sleeping aid. When smoke of cannabis is inhaled, rapid flow of THC takes place in the bloodstream of individual through lungs and is circulated throughout the body parts including brain. This THC impacts the brain receptors which eventually causes euphoria, dizziness etc. Hence the person who consumes the same experiences enhances sensory awareness & comfortable mentally.

MEDICAL USES

Objectively though, there are some scientific data to show that marijuana has some medical uses, foremost of which is the relief of pain, severe nausea and vomiting in cancer patients receiving anticancer chemotherapy or radiotherapy. In terminally ill cancer and AIDS patients, when treatment has shifted to palliative from curative, cannabis —which is also available in capsule or pill form in other countries—can make the patients more comfortable, with less pain and angst during the remaining days or weeks of their lives. It can allow for a peaceful death—something which the family of a terminally ill patient would find comfort in, seeing that their loved one has gone with tolerable pain and distress. Some would call it “leaving with dignity.” Cannabis has been reported to have other medicinal uses like relief of severe spasticity, chronic muscle and joint pains unrelieved by conventional treatments, psychological and mental conditions like attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, autism, bipolar disorder, childhood mental disorders, depression, alcoholism and Tourette syndrome.

ACTIVE INGREDIENT

The active ingredient in the cannabis plant is tetrahydrocannabinol (or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, commonly known as THC). Other cannabis extracts or cannabinoids include delta-8-tetrahydrocannabinol, cannabidiol, cannabinol, cannabicyclol, cannabichromeme and cannabigerol. All of these other cannabinoids are less potent than THC but may also play a contributory role in the overall effect of cannabis in the body. I can imagine that our health authorities, particularly our Food and Drug Administration (FDA), are mentally struggling on the issue whether to legalize medical marijuana or not. Despite the potential benefits of marijuana, it has potential negative side effects — it serves as a “gateway drug” to other dangerous substances and is linked with increased rates of crime and delinquency. High-frequency marijuana use has also been associated with neurological abnormalities, respiratory issues, and improper perinatal development. A major roadblock in marijuana legalization is a lack of carefully conducted clinical trials. The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires thousands of clinical subjects in controlled experiments in order to push the development of a drug. So far, researchers have not published enough large-scale clinical studies which indicate that the benefits of marijuana outweigh its risks. However, the merits of marijuana cannot be ignored. Its prospective medical applications are various, and its status as an illegal drug is undergoing a shift as more people are accepting its recreational use.

CUSTOMARY IMPORTANCE OF CANNABIS IN INDIA

If we start tracing the initial point or having said that the customary importance of cannabis in India we can trace various connections of it with Lord Shiva who is worshipped as the Supreme God in the Hindu Religion. Indian festival such has Maha Shivratri has always witnessed consumption of cannabis because it has always been perceived that elixir of life can be purified with cannabis consumption and is also mentioned within the Hindu scriptures. Various initiatives were taken to highlights its benefits scientific and economical benefit but still no changes took place in the existing legislation for the same. In the earlier times, it was legal to consume cannabis in India, but India was pressurized by the United States since year 1961 to introduce a ban upon cannabis production. As a consequence, to such pressure, India finally introduced a Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act which eventually prohibited producing and selling of cannabis flowers and resin. However, the permission regarding usage of leaves and seeds was granted and the states was allowed to regulate the same accordingly.

LEGAL STATUS

The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act of 1985 provides the definition of cannabis (hemp) as the following and prohibits the same:

Charas: It is a raisin separated in either crude or purified form and obtained through the plant of cannabis. Its oil is known as hashish oil.

Ganja: The fruiting or flowering tops after seeds and leaves are excluded from the cannabis plant.

Any other sort of mixture, inclusive of any form of cannabis mentioned above or any drink prepared individually from such forms or by adding neutralizing material to the same.

Case Law: It is pertinent to note that Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act does not provide any specific definition of “Bhang” which is also a form of cannabis and hence, it is legal to sell and consume bhang in India and is highly consumed in religious cities of northern India. The bhang is sold in government authorized shops and governments keeps a check over sale of bhang as it be used with malicious intention to prepare a new substance which can eventually be potent intoxicant. In Arjun Singh v State of Haryana case, it was held by the High Court of Chandigarh that as far as Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act is concerned, bhang cannot be considered as the cannabis (hemp). However, court also added that it is a product of cannabis plant. It clarified the perception that consuming cannabis leaves is not illegal however, production of cannabis plat is illegal.

PROS OF LEGALISATION OF MARIJUANA

1. Medical science and cannabis share a relationship with each other since ages. In many countries it is prescribed for those patients who are undergoing chemotherapy for cancer treatment. Studies have proved that cannabis is capable of preventing metastasis in the cases of aggressive cancer.

2. Enhanced production will eventually provide newer revenue opportunities for government other than liquor and tobacco. Such, revenue generated can be further utilized for welfare of general public.

3. India is one of the most favourable location for production of cannabis. If the cannabis is legalized, it will lead to higher production of the same which would in turn increase exports of our country India in a huge way.

4. It will be a very big boost to the agricultural sector of India, Since, the cannabis has numerous ways of usage, its demand will be higher and farmers will be having an alternative to produce and gain higher profits.

5. Cannabis has various components which are proved to be effective in curbing mental health issues, it will act as an antidepressant having less side effects than the chemical drugs that are given to patients in today’s time.

6. As a result of statutory prohibitions, trade of cannabis is taking place illegally within the country. If the cannabis is legalized, it will be formally and openly produced and will eventually prevent any sort of illegal trade killing the black market of the same.

CONS OF LEGALISATION OF MARIJUANA

1. The cannabis inhabits an active ingredient known as carcinogens which has a severe impact on the respiratory system. If any individual inhales the smoke of cannabis, he will be exposed to high volume of carcinogens which can be further lead to conditions which can even be life-threatening.

2. Constant consumption of cannabis will eventually develop a drug habit and once that habit is developed, it is not easy to deal with it. Those individuals who have tried to give up such habit have seen various symptoms such as depression, anxiety, fits of rage, headaches and emotional outbursts.

3. Marijuana can obstruct the user’s short-term memory and the ability to perform tasks like studying. Because of its effect on perceptions, marijuana can interrupt various skills such as driving and machine operation. It may also cause hallucinations and affect one’s sexual behavior.

CONCLUSION

It might be a shock to many; but like marijuana, some of the substances that we consume are potentially habit-forming. These include alcohol, tobacco, coffee, and even refined sugar. For some, all of these are part of their daily consumption. Tobacco and alcohol are not safe, after all, and both are already reported to cause many serious conditions including cancer. In some countries, marijuana is an additional option to treatment and has paved way to the right to health of the people. It has been used as the last resort for untreatable conditions. A good demonstration of this is when marijuana was used to stop an American child’s severe seizures. Legalization of Marijuana is not a problem but it’s implementation is definitely one of the concerns in a country like India, also there should be guidelines on medical marijuana treatment, dose, and the route of administration that must also be established. Nonetheless, it is important that we open our minds to the potential benefits of marijuana. May we set aside any political barrier and be open to the possibilities that we could benefit from this disputed plant. If ever it is fully legalized within the country , I hope it won’t be profit-oriented and instead, patient-oriented and research-oriented with proper regulation and taxation.

India, a leader of the developing world, on Friday strongly opposed attempts from developed countries to prioritise climate change-related issues at the G20 discussions without a consensus within the influential bloc comprising 20 major global economies. New Delhi described such attempts pushing for a ‘green recovery’ with stringent conditionalities as one that will amount to a form of ‘green colonisation’ at a time when the developing world was vulnerable on account of the COVID-19 pandemic and was looking at somehow recovering from the aftermath of the global health crisis.

“We do have the Paris agreement (on climate change mitigation) and we need to adhere to that. The great danger of putting it in G20 and that too without a consensus (among G20 members), is actually diluting it. Far from helping the cause, it would instead be a diversion from what was agreed by everybody (in the Paris agreement) and would end up in a parallel track,” said Dr. Sanjeev Sanyal, Principal Economic Advisor, Ministry of Finance, India.

He was speaking at a webinar organised by the think-tank RIS on “Priorities for Growth and Stability in Post-COVID World: Role of G20 Framework Working Group.”

Climate change was a serious issue, but should not be confused with the immediate objective of economic revival post the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, Sanyal said, adding, however, that some of the revival package could be directed towards meeting the climate change-related concerns. He said the link between climate change and the pandemic was far from established as pandemics happen from time to time whether or not climate change occurs. He added that the response to the pandemic should be science-based and not one filled with rhetorical flourishes. He said India was adhering to its climate change commitments and was willing to do more, adding that New Delhi was uncomfortable with certain efforts to bring climate change issues to the G20 forum as there was no agreement on the same.

Besides, there was an issue about “who decides what is green”, Sanyal said. The issue was important because once a system of rigid ideas (of what is considered as ‘green’) was established for the rating agencies to be then seen as credit-worthy or not, there would be problems on account of mechanical application of that thinking process as seen in debt restructuring, he said. The pro-cyclicality of the ratings process “causes and worsens the shock from a crisis”, he pointed out. “If you do the same thing here (on climate change issues), a rigid system with ‘green-rating agencies’ becoming the equivalent of credit-rating agencies, there is a danger of all kinds of unintended consequences being built into the system, not to mention the high likelihood that such agencies almost certainly will be emanating out of developed countries,” he said. Unless there was a democratic spread of green rating agencies across the w orld, and a ‘green’ framework agreed by all the countries, there is a genuine danger that the world will end up with a form of ‘green colonisation’, Sanyal said.

Speaking on the occasion, Mr. P. Harish, Additional Secretary (Economic Relations), Ministry of External Affairs, India, said India was the only G20 country that has met the Paris climate change agreement commitments. Referring to the move to establish a new goal post outside the Paris framework in the G20 or in some other framework, he said there was a developmental cost to taking on such new commitments outside the Paris framework. There was nothing on the table regarding what all would constitute the USD 100 billion climate finance for developing nations (by 2020 and set a higher annual goal by 2025), and whether every Official Development Assistance would be added to this number, as well as regarding technology transfer commitments, he said. Even if carbon emissions peak at 2050, the net total of emissions of India will be less than that of China, the US and the European Union, he said. “It would not be correct to ignore the historic case load and the developmen tal situation, where India’s per capita GDP is 5% of that of the G7 countries, and a fraction of the overall G20 per capita, and that India’s low per capita energy consumption,” he pointed out. Constraining India’s options at this point through other extra conditionalities will impose a huge financial and developmental cost, Harish said.

Prof. Sachin Chaturvedi, Director General, RIS, chaired the session, while Prof. Kevin Gallagher, Professor of Global Development Policy, Frederick S. Pardee School of Global Studies, Boston University, Mr. Federico Bonaglia, Deputy Director, OECD Development Centre, Paris and Dr. Priyadarshi Dash, Associate Professor, RIS, also spoke on the occasion. (ENDS)

The recent spate of arbitral awards by international tribunals against the Indian government underlines the sticky points that remain in the way of the “India means Business” mantra at Davos. These awards come at a time when the government is eager to draw foreign investors to India by making relentless efforts on improving ease of doing business. India consistently improved in the Ease of Doing Business Index, from 142nd in 2014 to 63rd in 2019. However, it performed miserably on ‘enforcement of contracts’ at 163 out of total 190 countries. For instance, Mumbai took 1420 days for enforcing a contract reflecting its dire position.

Several reasons led to this poor performance. The judicial courts, being highly overburdened and inadequately skilled to handle commercial disputes, tend to take 3-4 years in offering a resolution. Further, the frequent relaxation of statutory timelines by courts add to the delay jeopardizing the enforcement of the award/decree. Then comes the biggest irritant: the government and PSUs with their precarious record of honouring contracts.

SOVEREIGN AS A ‘FORMIDABLE’ LITIGATOR

The Government being the single biggest litigator in the country has a dubious record of enforcing contracts with steps such as initiating coercive actions against the opposing party while dispute is still sub-judice and introducing ‘retrospective amendments’ in order to offset any adverse judgement against it avoiding enforcement of award.

The international arbitration awards on legacy tax disputes concerning Vodafone Plc. followed by Cairn Energy UK has once again brought the ghost of ‘retrospective taxation’ often termed then as ‘tax terrorism’ by the ruling party to the limelight, which continues to haunt the business community in India for a decade. The government believes it was deliberately denied tax revenue on capital gains from sale of shares between the parties with transactions structured through tax havens and misuse of Bilateral Investment Treaties (BIT), prompting seizure of share assets and sale proceeds by tax authorities in return. However, the government’s stand was rejected by the Apex court in 2012 after which an amendment in the form of ‘retrospective taxation’ w.e.f. 1963 introduced to circumvent the decision of SC. This step adversely affected the business sentiments and FDI inflows. The retrospective tax amendment was termed by government as standard practice followed globally by established economies. The Permanent Court of Arbitration at Hague upheld the award against the Indian government ordering compensation in both Vodafone and Cairn Energy tax disputes, respectively and held the tax amendment to be unjust and void of terms under BIT. The Government has, recently, challenged the awards in both cases. Cairn has already initiated the process of getting the awards registered in various jurisdictions to ensure enforcement against assets owned by Indian Government.

Another such instance of dishonour of contract is the infamous Antrix Corporation – Devas Multimedia deal in 2005 for lease of ISRO’s two communication satellite for 12 years to provide multimedia services to mobile platforms. However, soon the deal turned sour when then Government, already spooked by 2G scam in 2011, ultimately cancelled the deal alleging conflict of interest and corruption accompanied by several investigations launched against the company. The government lost the case when international tribunal held the annulling of contract with Devas to be an “expropriation” with an award of $1.2B payable to Devas. The mighty Government of India responded by having a ‘winding up’ application filed against Devas before NCLT alleging grave irregularities and fraud.

Recently, the Parliament passed the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Bill, 2021 originally promulgated as an ordinance, which empowers the courts to grant an ‘unconditional stay’ under Section 36 to the enforcement of an arbitral award if the court is of the prima facie view that such award obtained was induced by ‘fraud’ or ‘corruption’ and was made effective retrospectively w.e.f 2015. This effectively creates a situation where an ‘automatic stay’ might be imposed on enforcement of awards at behest of the losing party alleging fraud, thereby, delaying the process which was not possible earlier. The intention behind bringing in such amendment as indicated by the Law Minister then was the foreign arbitral tribunals rulings in Vodafone tax dispute against the exchequer induced by fraud, adversely affecting the sovereign’s right to tax. The government is of the view that the above award was borne out of dispute concerning an offshore transaction intended to defraud the exchequer and is unfair in spirit. Furthermore, the definition of ‘fraud’ itself has not been provided under this amendment and is open to interpretation inviting further court litigation and additional costs defeating the purpose of alternate dispute resolution.

Tackling the problem

Businesses love certainty in regulations, a stable taxation structure and policy making. The government has assured the investors not to raise legacy tax demands if not revocation of retrospective tax amendment. However, promise of a stable policy regime independent of political factors and sovereign bias might be a challenge.

The solution to this problem is an expensive and surely a painful process. Certain steps like setting up of ‘Commercial Courts’ were carried out through Commercial Courts Act, 2015 but recent study suggests poor implementation by States and respective High Courts where even mandated timelines and processes are being ignored.

However, tremendous improvement can be made by ensuring the quality infrastructure with workforce specialized to handle commercial disputes. Access to quality information by setting utilities.

Efforts are also needed to create general awareness among small businesses about contract negotiation and its enforceability and finding new avenues for out of court settlements. Digitization of legal records and processes can ensure transparency and can also go a long way in ensuring enforcement of contracts. Unconditional acceptance of foreign arbitral awards and adherence to international law by all the stakeholders. The real challenge will be setting accountability which has historically been extremely difficult in the country’s judicial system.

India, as we know, is a land of diversity and culture which as per the mythological readings, places a high status on women by considering them as a reincarnation of a Goddess. They are also regarded as a savior of customs, traditions and beliefs which can be evidently seen in the case when a mother passes on moral education and learnings to the next generation. But, are we really abiding and upholding the value system imbibed in us by the scriptures that dictate major portions and events of our lives?

This dog-eat-dog world that we live in, is full of obstacles with a continuum of issues disturbing the peace of everyone and/or disrupting social order (Crowell, 2013). At such a point, discussions pertaining to deviance and crime arise. Society is predominantly known for its ever evolving and adapting nature alongside the passage of time. Owing to this dynamic nature, the values and beliefs held also go through a makeshift change from time to time. When people fail to adapt to these changes, the problem arises. Terms like deviance and crime are often considered to be highly subjective and vary from the viewpoint of one society to another.

Deviance can be explained as any behavior or act that departs from social norms. In other words, that which goes against the values, norms or beliefs held by the society in question; while crime, on the other hand, is any action which violates the law of the land (Siegel, 2006). Both, deviance and crime, to a considerable extent serve as a mirror of the society as it exemplifies the thought processes and frameworks in which that society is constructed (Coomber, Donnermeyer, McElrath, & Scott, 2014).

Every crime constitutes a victim as well as a perpetrator. We are often surrounded by instances where a female victim has been subjected to a ruthless male offender; which is also supported by statistical data records. However, it does not negate the fact that females too can commit crimes. It can be factually seen that serious offences like murder are usually committed by men, whereas minor crimes like substance abuse or cheating can be committed by both men and women, alike. The degree, intensity and extent of violence severely differs in men and women (epg pathshala, n.d.). There are various disciplines which have made a conscious effort to understand female criminality, better, namely: criminology, psychology and sociology among others.

Prominent criminologists namely, Cesare Lombroso and William Ferrero authored, “The Female Offender”, 1895, which gives a deep insight about female criminality, in general. As stated in the book, they suggested that women are more likely to display the characteristics of an occasional criminal (Bhosle, 2009). Lombroso viewed the born female criminal have the criminal qualities of men and the worst ones of women; however, in India, criminality amongst women is attempted to understand as a result of social and economic scarcity as opposed to, certain biological throwbacks (Mili & Cherian, 2015). Freda Adler, in her book, “The Rise of the New Female Criminals”, 1975, attempts to explain the involvement of women in crimes against property by emphasizing on the masculinity behavior of females. The masculinization theory did however, receive criticisms owing to their male-centrism ideology of understanding female criminality (Islam, Banarjee, & Khatun, 2014).

From a psychological perspective, female offenders are known to be devoid of emotional stability and more prone to insecurity, rejection and frustration. Unbearable living conditions, societal pressure, stress, family concerns, financial dependence, social status, etc. may compel women to subdue their inner most feelings and emotions, which may possibly be negatively channelized into unpredictable anger, which in certain cases may result in violence, too (Mili & Cherian, 2015). This can be theoretically backed up by the works of Meda-Chesney Lind in her book, “The Female Offender”, 1986 where she elaborately explains the marginalization theory. This theory states that the victimization or marginality (lower class position; low income; inadequate job; harassment by family) of a woman may provoke her to commit a crime in the modern society (Islam, Banarjee, & Khatun, 2014). Discussing psychological matters in India, is not well looked upon, aggravating the issue further.

Besides, a range of social factors may also influence our understanding of female criminality in India. Some of them being: inequality, poverty, lack of education, gender discrimination, strained relations with spouse or family, denial of basic needs of life or social oppression may also serve as motivating factors (Pattanaik & Mishra, 2001).

The supposed association between poverty and female criminality has been adequately emphasized in certain judicial judgements like: in the case of Shreerangyee v. State of Madras 1972, the accused was a hardworking but unfortunate woman who was deserted by her husband. She had five children and was unable to support them due to lack of adequate earning. Her financial position further worsened when her youngest child was diagnosed with a severe illness and the doctor demanded for money for the treatment. She tried to raise the funds, but in vain. Having exhausted all the legitimate means to earn a living, she, in exasperation, killed all her five children by drowning them and then herself jumped into the well. She was, however, rescued and convicted, under Section 302 IPC for killing her children. The Court in this case also ruled out poverty as an excuse for the murder of innocent children and attempt to suicide (Ghosh, n.d.).

Among the different types of crime committed by women, the one gaining tremendous amount of attention is that of false accusations, i.e. wrongly accusing a person to have committed a crime. If an individual is correctly accused of an offense, it serves them right to face the consequences that follow its path; however the flip side of it lies in cases where a person is falsely accused of a wrongdoing, that results in a huge toll on their reputation, putting them through a severe emotional turmoil and can also negatively impact their personal as well as professional lives.

This could be in the case of dowry, rape, molestation, casting couch, harassment, domestic violence or even cheating. This issue can be considered as an essential one to deal with, by criminologists as such women tend to take undue advantage of the law that strives to protect them, in totality. These nature of events have been noticed in more or less all sectors, be it household, corporate workplace, educational institutions or the media industry. A practical instance in support of the statements mentioned above, is in the form of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The section was introduced in the year 1983, with special regard to the increasing cruelty (use of verbal and/or physical abuse) towards married women on the hands of the husband and/or his family members and providing them with the requisite legal protection. However, over the years, with rising cases of this section being misused, the Supreme Court observed that it was being used as weapons rather than a shield by disgruntled wives. (Ray, 2018).

There are a number of cases that have circulated like wild fire featuring women who have falsely accused men on many grounds. One such case being that of Nisha Sharma and Munish Dalal in May, 2003 in Noida. Nisha had accused her to-be-groom and his family of demanding a sum of Rs. 12 lakh as dowry and a car; post which, Munish, his mother and paternal aunt were arrested, on the grounds of dowry harassment. They were unfortunately made to visit the Court for hearings, nearly 320 times and after a 10 year long ordeal, were finally acquitted from the false allegations made by the complainant (Vashishtha, 2012).

Such cases do being along with them a series of problems for the wrongly accused member or members of a family: loss of existing job, difficulty in finding a new one, immense stigma and labels attached, loss of respect within the community, psychological concerns: loss of appetite, insomnia, anxiety, depression, and in extreme cases also end their lives in the aftermath of these baseless accusations. The excessive misuse of the anti-dowry law to threaten the groom and his family, has compelled the Supreme Court to term such conduct as “legal terrorism”.

As of August 23, 2015, Jasleen Kaur, a student of St. Stephen’s College, New Delhi, accused a man, Sarvjeet Singh, for passing lewd comments and molesting her, while she was volunteering to control the traffic at a nearby signal. The former’s post on her Facebook handle, caused a lot of stir resulting in the arrest of Singh. Within no time, Kaur became popular and was praised by both the common masses as well as those in authority, for her courageous stand. Soon, the tables turned and on questioning, an eyewitness validated Sarvjeet’s innocence and testified against Jasleen for misbehaving and abusing the man (Surendran, 2016).

An infamous case that sadly did not reach the masses was that of a 22 year old Aman Baisla, based in Delhi, in October 2020. He committed suicide, as he was threatened with false allegation of rape. He posted a live video on Facebook and Instagram to explain how a girl had taken about 12.5 lakhs and when he asked to return, she threatened him of false rape charges and asked for more money instead. This shocking incident caused outrage among the public, however, no media aired this on any news channels.

As a criminologist, it is significant to consider all prospects and more importantly, acknowledge the contribution of social media in shaping society’s perception about a case. The most recent example being that on March 9, 2021 of the Zomato delivery man, named Kamaraj and a girl, named Hitesha Chandranee, who is a Bengaluru-based content creator and model.

Please read concluding on thedailyguardian.com

She resorted to Instagram and posted a video accusing the delivery in-charge of physical assault, insult and criminal intimidation. In a series of investigation, it was concluded she had falsely accused Kamaraj and an FIR was filed against her, under Section 355, 504 and 506 of the IPC (Jagran News Desk, 2021).

The media landscape, be it in the form of print, audio-visual, or even digital for that matter, is in a state of constant flux. Media is often regarded as the fourth pillar of democracy and can play a significant role in creating awareness of the laws and the consequences of filing fake cases against the innocent who is accused. They can considerably help in combating this menace by bringing to light, the cases of people involved in such acts, improve literacy among the masses, in this specific arena and in turn, open space for a stream like investigative journalism, to flourish, as well.

All in all, tackling cases of false accusations is undoubtedly the need of the hour which can be substantiated by the rising number of cases in India. This increasing hazard, which can harm society’s fabric and abuse of law for different purposes, needs to be regulated early. It becomes highly crucial to identify, rectify and moreover, spread awareness about this matter so as to not punish an innocent person. The idea that policy recommendations may be focused on inaccurate data does also present a challenge, since such data could contribute to needless or mistaken criminal justice changes (Rawat Rani & Maharshi, 2020). It is high time that we tackle this issue effectively, because in the course of these false claims, the genuine victims may have a hard time trying to seek justice.

References:

Bhosle, S. (2009). Female Crime in India and Theoretical Perspectives of Crime. Kalpaz Publications. Retrieved March 2021, from https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Female_Crime_in_India_and_Theoretical_Pe/v22H2izsiHUC?hl=en&gbpv=0

Coomber, R., Donnermeyer, J. F., McElrath, K., & Scott, J. (2014). Key Concepts in Crime and Society. SAGE Publications. Retrieved March 2021, from https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Key_Concepts_in_Crime_and_Society/6JXgBQAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=key+concepts+in+crime+and+society&printsec=frontcover

Crowell, E. L. (2013, March). Sociological Theories of Deviance: Definitions and Theoretical Perspectives. Retrieved March 2021, from www.study.com: https://study.com/academy/lesson/sociological-theories-of-deviance-definitions-and-theoretical-perspectives.html

epg pathshala. (n.d.). Gender related crime. Retrieved March 2021, from www.epgp.inflibnet.ac.in: https://epgp.inflibnet.ac.in/Home/ViewSubject?catid=1608

Ghosh, P. (n.d.). Essay on ‘Criticism of Konger’s Theory’. Retrieved March 2021, from www.shareyouressays.com: https://www.shareyouressays.com/essays/essay-on-criticism-of-kongers-theory-1816-words/121488

Jagran News Desk. (2021, March). Zomato delivery boy Kamaraj files case against Hitesha Chandranee for false accusation. Retrieved March 2021, from www.english.jagran.com: https://english.jagran.com/india/zomato-delivery-boy-kamaraj-files-case-against-bengaluru-woman-hitesha-chandranee-for-false-accusation-10024516#:~:text=The%20alleged%20incident%20happened%20on,punching%20her%20on%20the%20nose.

Mili, P., & Cherian, N. S. (2015). Female Criminality in India: Prevalence, Causes and Preventive Measures. International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences, 12. Retrieved March 2021, from https://www.sascv.org/ijcjs/pdfs/milietalijcjs2015vol10issue1.pdf

Pattanaik, J. K., & Mishra, N. N. (2001, September). Social Change and Female Criminality in India. Retrieved March 2021, from www.researchgate.net: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258185546_Social_change_and_female_criminality_in_India

Rawat Rani, A., & Maharshi, D. A. (2020). A Study on Rising Amount of Fake Rape Cases in India. PalArch’s Journal of Archaeology of Egypt/ Egyptology. Retrieved March 2021, from https://www.archives.palarch.nl/index.php/jae/article/download/5923/5893

Siegel, L. J. (2006). Criminology- Theories, Patterns and Typologies (Ninth ed.). Thomson Wadsworth. Retrieved from https://books.google.co.in/books?id=umgEFec4U4YC&pg=PR1&dq=criminology+by+larry+j+siegel+ninth+edition&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjNjcX-hLTpAhXVxzgGHY4tCPMQ6AEIMDAB#v=onepage&q=criminology%20by%20larry%20j%20siegel%20ninth%20edition&f=false

Islam, M. J., Banarjee, S., & Khatun, N. (2014). Theories of Female Criminality: A Criminological Analysis. International Journal of Criminology and Sociological Theory. Retrieved March 2021, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334113027_Theories_of_Female_Criminality_A_criminological_analysis

Ray, K. A. (2018, October). Section 498A Of IPC: A Weapon Or A Shield? – Supreme Court Of India. Retrieved April 2021, from www.mondaq.com: https://www.mondaq.com/india/crime/743068/section-498a-of-ipc-a-weapon-or-a-shield-supreme-court-of-india

Surendran, V. (2016, November). Remember Jasleen Kaur case? Accused Sarvjeet Singh talks about how false complaints ruin men’s lives in India. Retrieved April 2021, from www.indiatoday.in: https://www.indiatoday.in/fyi/story/jasleen-kaur-sarvjeet-singh-kundan-srivastava-false-accusation-354200-2016-11-27

Colleges and educational institutions have been reopening in numerous parts of the state after the disruption of the novel coronavirus as a pandemic throughout the world. The educational institutions have been closed since March 2021 to ensure security and well-being of the students. Most of the students have been excited and exhilarated about the opportunity to be back at the campus after almost 1 year. Colleges and educational institutions have also been preparing SOPs that would be mandatory and a pre – requisite for every student to maintain to prevent the disruption of Novel Corona Virus in the campus.

Colleges and Educational Institutions ensure learning to the youth in the greatest amount and using the maximum exposure. However, it is to take into consideration that the students of a university or state educational institution are first the subjects of the state and the respectful citizens of the country. Irrespective of teaching and making the future better of students, most of the educational institutions fail to ignore that they need to be provided with basic rights and necessities as the prospective subjects of the state and not because they enjoy any special rights or have any other liabilities, unless expressly mentioned, by the university or state educational institutions.

This manuscript not only throws light upon the wrongs that are inflicted upon students in the name of “due process of the institution” but also talks about prospective rights that the student has and can claim as the respectable citizen of this nation. It is pertinent to note that it is high time now that the “due process” of educational institutions needs to be changed in order to be respected, and be in consonance with today’s everchanging rights.

UNFOLDING THE HARMS INFLICTED UPON STUDENTS

Students are firstly the subjects of the state, them being a part of any financial institution is secondary. Therefore, they are worthy and should be granted all the constitutional safeguards and are also in the dominion to file for a law suit against any atrocity inflicted upon them.

The On – Set of Novel Corona Virus has resulted in mass disruption of offline classes and a paradigm shift from offline – to – online. One of such harms inflicted to the students post COVID – era is not opening of their educational institutions, therefore, in furtherance of same, the students of Aligarh Muslim University conducted a protest to demand the reopening of college because it had been closed since the outbreak of protests of CAA – NRC.2 However, as our Hon’ble Prime Minister Narendra Modi has said in one of his speeches, “The population of India should adapt and live with the virus”, It is high time now that the educational institutions have been closed halting the learning of the future youth of the nation.

Students of Sikkim Government College have been protesting against the poor infrastructure being provided to them in by their public educational institutions.3 Meanwhile, on the other hand, students from Lady Shri Ram College have been protesting against the university’s hostel updated policies.4 Earlier, in 2019, it was observed that a majority of students protested against JNU for implementing hostel policies that implement strict curfews and in – times of hostels, and also dressing restrictions.

It is pertinent to note that it was observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court5 that deemed educational institutions are covered within the ambit of “State” mentioned under Article 12 of the Indian Constitution.6 Therefore, students as respectable citizens of this nation are entitled to file a Writ Petition under Article 32,7 and Article 226 to claim what is rightfully theirs.8

CONSTITUTIONAL SAFEGUARDS

Article 12

In the applications of the provisions of Fundamental Rights for Indian Citizens, the term ‘State’ has been used in a wide concept. To provide clarity to the term, Article 12 of the Indian Constitution defines it. The term ‘State’ has been used in a wider context to include all such agencies, actions of whose can challenged in the Supreme Court if they violate the any of the sacred fundamental rights. In Dr. Janet Jeyapaul v SRM University9, the question was whether a writ petition was maintainable against the SRM University, which is a “deemed University” within the meaning of S. 3 of the UGC Act10 (the petitioner had filed a writ petition complaining of unfair termination of services).

The Supreme Court held that the petition was maintainable under Article 22611 of the Constitution, since SRM University had been established for and was engaged in – performing a “public function”.

In the case of Sukhdev Singh v. Bhagat Ram, it was held that if any university has been formulated and wields within the purview of the UGC Act, then that particular university is classified as “other authorities” within the ambit of Article 12 of the Indian Constitution.12

RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSIONS

The importance of freedom of speech and expression together from the point of view of liberty of an individual and democratic form of government was laid down by Supreme Court in the case of Shreya Singhal v. Union of India13 in 2012. The Supreme Court held that freedom of speech and expression is of paramount importance under a democratic constitution which anticipates changes in the composition of legislature and government and thus must be preserved. This landmark judgement eliminated and repealed Section 66 (A) of Information Technology Act 200014 which imposed restrictions on the online speech of citizens. Though it took 5 years for the final verdict to come but it broadened a platform for citizens. However, overlooking the prospective of netizens and focusing on the students as the future of this nation, this case also failed to recognize their rights exclusively.

RIGHT TO INFORMATION

Supreme Court held that Right to Information is a facet of freedom of speech and expression mentioned in Article 19(1) (a) of the Constitution of India15 but this right is subject to reasonable restrictions in the interest of security of the State. This was held in the case of CBSE and Another v Aditya Bandopadhayay and Others16, where the right of students seeking answer sheets and verification of marks was violated by asking them a hefty fee of around Rs 1000 for answer sheets and verification of marks. After the order was passed the amount was reduced to Rs 10 as application fee and Rs 2 for copies and for students below poverty line no fee was charged but then too the students above poverty line had to pay the amount for seeing their own answer sheets.

CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS: REVAMPING THE NEED FOR SPECIAL LAWS TO PROTECT STUDENTS

Universities have been inflicting harms and tormenting the bright future of this country since immemorial times in the name of “due process”. However, while looking at the innumerable rules and procedures laid down for satisfying the whims and fancies of the educational institutions, a need for establishing a special law protecting the tormented and afflicted rights of the students is the need of the hour.

Even though a Writ Petition can be filed within Article 3217 and 22618 to the Supreme Court and High Court respectively, there is no express law in India that governs and recognizes the rights of the students and absence of such will always create an injustice to the students because their voices and opinions have been and are always suppressed by the college authorities.

The only act regulating universities and institutions is the UGC Act which states a set of guidelines which the institutions need to follow for co-ordination and maintaining standards but does this act prevents the unjustifiable behavior or the tiresome and annoying restrictions that they put on their students which are different for every institution and discriminate the students from different institutions. A proper act or rule still remains missing for safeguarding the students’ interest and preventing the same.

It is never too late to safeguard the rights of the citizens of the country and students being a major part of the country needs a protective cover so that the fear which the universities and institutions have incorporated in students in the name of due process can stop and the students know that they have a law protecting them from the harmful and tortious behavior.