Author: PRASANNASRI26092001

DIGITAL WELFARE AND MIGRANT VULNERABILITY: ASSESSING TECHNOLOGICAL GOVERNANCE, PRIVACY, AND INEQUALITY IN POST-PANDEMIC INDIA

AUTHOR – ABHINAV VISWANATH* & KRUTHA JANANI**

* ASSISTANT PROFESSOR AT SASTRA UNIVERSITY

** STUDENT AT SASTRA UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – ABHINAV VISWANATH & KRUTHA JANANI, DIGITAL WELFARE AND MIGRANT VULNERABILITY: ASSESSING TECHNOLOGICAL GOVERNANCE, PRIVACY, AND INEQUALITY IN POST-PANDEMIC INDIA, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (8) OF 2026, PG. 354-368, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed deep structural vulnerabilities within India’s migrant labour economy, revealing significant gaps in welfare delivery and institutional preparedness. In response, the State increasingly adopted technology-driven governance mechanisms, including platforms such as the National Migrant Information System (NMIS), Aarogya Setu, and the e-Shram portal, to facilitate welfare delivery and data-driven policy interventions. This paper critically examines the effectiveness and constitutional implications of such digital welfare frameworks in the post-pandemic period (2020–2026).

Adopting a doctrinal and socio-legal methodology, the study evaluates digital welfare through the lens of digital equality, analysing how disparities in access to digital infrastructure, literacy, and identification systems affect migrant workers’ ability to benefit from these platforms. It argues that while digital governance enhances administrative efficiency and scalability, it simultaneously risks reinforcing structural inequalities by excluding those who lack digital access.

The paper further interrogates the constitutional dimensions of data-driven governance, particularly the right to privacy as articulated in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, and examines the regulatory framework established under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 and the 2025 Rules. It highlights tensions between welfare objectives and privacy safeguards, especially in contexts involving large-scale data collection and algorithmic decision-making.

The study concludes that digital welfare systems must be restructured to ensure inclusivity, transparency, and accountability. It advocates for hybrid delivery models, strengthened data protection safeguards, and regulatory oversight of algorithmic governance to align technological innovation with constitutional principles of equality, dignity, and justice.

Keywords: Digital Governance; Migrant Labour; Digital Inequality; Data Privacy; Welfare State

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK AND CORPORATE ACCOUNTABILITY IN CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

AUTHOR – AISHWARYA VERMA* & DR. EKTA GUPTA**

* STUDENT AT AMITY LAW SCHOOL, AMITY UNIVERSITY, NOIDA

** ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR AT AMITY LAW SCHOOL, AMITY UNIVERSITY, NOIDA

BEST CITATION – AISHWARYA VERMA & DR. EKTA GUPTA, REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ANDCORPORATE ACCOUNTABILITY IN CORPORATE GOVERNANCE, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (8) OF 2026, PG. 348-353, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Abstract

The paper critically examines the regulatory regime of corporate governance in India, particularly scrutinizing its contribution to enhance corporate accountability and protect the rights of stakeholders. It examines the dynamics of compliance and governance going beyond compliance, involving social responsibility, environmental protection, and digital rights, through statutory provisions, regulatory oversight by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and judicial review. A range of doctrinal and procedural changes have been discussed, such as stakeholder engagement and innovations in the procedure, while important judicial decisions have reinforced transparency and ethical corporate behavior. The paper not only focuses on how the corporation can be instrumentally transformed to serve an inclusive and responsible development agenda, but also addresses concerns about the potential of regulatory overreach, and the need to maintain institutional balance. Landmark court decisions have really boosted transparency and pushed for better ethical behavior in companies. That part stands out because it shows how law can change business practices. The whole thing has potential to make development more inclusive and responsible. But there are worries about regulators going too far and messing up the balance between different institutions. I am not totally sure how to fix that yet.

BEYOND THE GAMBLING SHADOW: RETHINKING THE LEGAL STATUS OF PROFESSIONAL E-SPORTS IN INDIA THROUGH A SUI GENERIS REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

AUTHOR – NAMIT GUPTA, BBA LLB (HONOURS) CANDIDATE, SCHOOL OF LAW, CHRIST (DEEMED TO BE UNIVERSITY), PUNE LAVASA CAMPUS

BEST CITATION – NAMIT GUPTA,BEYOND THE GAMBLING SHADOW: RETHINKING THE LEGAL STATUS OF PROFESSIONAL E-SPORTS IN INDIA THROUGH A SUI GENERIS REGULATORY FRAMEWORK, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (8) OF 2026, PG. 327-335, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/IJLRV6I832

ABSTRACT

India’s professional e-sports industry — commanding over 500 million gamers and generating billions in annual revenue — remains ensnared in a nineteenth-century gambling law framework never designed to regulate it. This paper critically examines the structural mismatch between the Public Gambling Act, 1867’s ‘Skill vs. Chance’ Predominance Test and the cognitive, psychomotor, and strategic demands of modern competitive e-sports. Drawing on doctrinal analysis of landmark Indian jurisprudence — from State of Bombay v. R.M.D. Chamarbaugwala (1957) to the contested Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025 (PROGA) — and a comparative survey of governance models in South Korea, Germany, and France, this paper argues that the continued application of gambling law to competitive e-sports constitutes a ‘category error’ that suppresses constitutional rights, denies player welfare protections, and undermines India’s geopolitical interests in the global digital economy. The paper proposes the adoption of a sui generis ‘Code of Conduct’ framework anchored in a dedicated E-Sports Act, establishing a National E-Sports Governing Authority (NEGA) with statutory powers over tournament licensing, player welfare standards, and integrity enforcement. This framework is argued to be not merely desirable but constitutionally required under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution of India.

Keywords: E-sports regulation, Skill vs. Chance doctrine, Public Gambling Act 1867, PROGA 2025, sui generis framework, player welfare, NEGA, Indian gaming jurisprudence, competitive gaming, sports law.

“A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY OF JUDICIAL APPROACHES TO RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN SEVENTH SCHEDULE MATTERS”

AUTHOR – GOKULRAJ A, LL.M (CONSTITUTIONAL LAW AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW), GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, VELLORE, AFFILIATED WITH TAMIL NADU DR. AMBEDKAR LAW UNIVERSITY, TAMIL NADU.

BEST CITATION – GOKULRAJ A, “A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY OF JUDICIAL APPROACHES TO RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN SEVENTH SCHEDULE MATTERS”, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (8) OF 2026, PG. 311-326, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

The Seventh Schedule’s allocation of legislative fields are rooted in the Government of India Act, 1935 and refined by the Constituent Assembly, which establishes a three-list framework that balances national unity with State autonomy through Union, State, and Concurrent Lists under Articles 246–255. The constitutional design elevates parliamentary primacy on Union subjects and provides a repugnancy rule for Concurrent matters, while preserving State exclusivity subject to harmonious construction and pith and substance analysis to manage overlaps. Historically, centralization increased during nation-building and through shifts like the 42nd Amendment, even as States retained core local competencies.

Judicial doctrine has stabilized this terrain, courts separate general regulatory heads from taxation entries, insist on ancillary encroachment only where proportionate, and deploy repugnancy and occupied field controls sparingly, keeping Article 254 as a last resort. Recent jurisprudence underscores these guardrails are maintaining State fiscal space in areas like mineral rights taxation subject to parliamentary limits, and policing attempts to expand non-tax entries into de facto taxes. The amendment process itself safeguards federal balance, as seen in limits on altering State List domains without State ratification.

This paper deals with the contemporary challenges that arise from emerging subjects like digital economy, environmental federalism, and complex supply chains, where entry ambiguity can spur intergovernmental friction, prompting calls for periodic review and rationalization of entries while respecting cooperative federalism. Today’s issues therefore center on calibrating national uniformity with local variation, clarifying concurrency without eroding autonomy, and updating the Schedule to contemporary governance needs without unsettling the Constitution’s unitary tilt with federal safeguards.

Key words:  Cooperative Federalism, Harmonious construction, Pith and substance, Repugnancy, Residuary power etc.

BLENDED PEDAGOGY AND REFLEXIVE LEARNING: RE‑IMAGINING THE LECTURE AND DISCUSSION METHODS IN LEGAL EDUCATION 

AUTHOR – GOKULRAJ A, LL.M (CONSTITUTIONAL LAW AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW), GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, VELLORE, AFFILIATED WITH TAMIL NADU DR. AMBEDKAR LAW UNIVERSITY, TAMIL NADU.

BEST CITATION – GOKULRAJ A, BLENDED PEDAGOGY AND REFLEXIVE LEARNING: RE‑IMAGINING THE LECTURE AND DISCUSSION METHODS IN LEGAL EDUCATION, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (8) OF 2026, PG. 253-261, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Abstract

“Education must begin with the solution of the teacher‑student contradiction, by reconciling the poles of the contradiction so that both are simultaneously teachers and students.”

Paulo Freire^[1]

Legal education has traditionally oscillated between the lecture method, which emphasizes structured doctrinal delivery, and the discussion method, which fosters dialogical engagement and critical reasoning. While each approach offers distinct pedagogical strengths, their exclusive use often results in either passive absorption of knowledge or fragmented debate lacking coherence. This article explores the concept of blended pedagogy as a means of integrating lectures and discussions to cultivate reflexive learning, a process through which students critically reconstruct legal knowledge within broader social and professional contexts.

Drawing on historical developments, comparative practices in leading law schools, and theoretical insights from educational thinkers, the study examines the suitability, scope, and impact of blended pedagogy in legal education. It highlights how this integrative model enhances doctrinal clarity, analytical skills, and adaptability, while also overlapping with and extending beyond the case study method. The article argues that blended pedagogy provides a more inclusive and transformative framework for legal teaching, capable of addressing contemporary challenges in professional training.

By re‑imagining lecture and discussion in tandem, the study proposes a reflexive model of legal education that balances precision with critical engagement, thereby preparing students for the complexities of modern legal practice. 

Key words: Blended Pedagogy, Reflexive Learning, Legal Education, Lecture vs. Discussion, Case Method Evolution

---

^[1] Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Continuum, New York, 1970, p. 72.

TAX GOVERNANCE IN MSMES: ROLE OF BOARD OVERSIGHT IN PREVENTING REGULATORY NON-COMPLIANCE

AUTHOR – SIDHESWAR JENA, PHD SCHOLAR (LAW), VIVEKANANDA GLOBAL UNIVERSITY, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN, INDIA

ORCID: HTTPS://ORCID.ORG/0009-0009-0234-5831            

RESEARCH GATE: HTTPS://WWW.RESEARCHGATE.NET/PROFILE/SIDHESWAR-JENA

BEST CITATION – SIDHESWAR JENA,TAX GOVERNANCE IN MSMES: ROLE OF BOARD OVERSIGHT IN PREVENTING REGULATORY NON-COMPLIANCE INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (8) OF 2026, PG. 292-310, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/IJLRV6I830

ABSTRACT

Indias Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) constitute the backbone of the national economy, contributing approximately 30% to GDP, 45% of exports, and employing over 110 million people. Despite their economic significance, MSMEs continue to face persistent challenges with tax regulatory compliance particularly under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime introduced in 2017. This paper examines the role of board oversight mechanisms in preventing GST compliance failures and other forms of regulatory non-compliance among Indian MSMEs. Grounded in Agency Theory (Jensen & Meckling, 1976) and Stakeholder Theory (Freeman, 1984), the paper undertakes a doctrinal and analytical inquiry into the intersection of corporate governance and tax compliance in the MSME context.^[1][2]

The study maps the current GST compliance framework, analyses the personal liability of directors under Section 89 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017, and interrogates the governance responsibilities imposed on company directors under the Companies Act, 2013. Through a structured analysis of governance failures and compliance risk patterns, the paper identifies critical structural deficits in MSME boards including weak audit infrastructure, the absence of independent directors, and low director-level tax literacy that systemically heighten exposure to regulatory non-compliance. The paper culminates in a proposed Tax Governance Framework tailored for Indian MSMEs, encompassing compliance infrastructure, management-level monitoring, and board-level oversight mechanisms. Policy implications are drawn for regulators, including the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA), the GST Council, and the MSME Ministry, with recommendations toward a formal Tax Governance Code for MSMEs.^[3]

Keywords: MSMEs, GST compliance, board oversight, director liability, corporate governance, tax governance, India, CGST Act, Section 89, compliance failures

---

[1] Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360. The seminal paper establishing principal-agent theory as the foundation of corporate governance. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X

[2] Ministry of MSME (2024). Annual Report 2023-24. Government of India. MSMEs contribute ~30% to GDP, ~45% to merchandise exports, and employ over 110 million persons. https://msme.gov.in/sites/default/files/MSME-AR-2023-24-Eng.pdf

[3] Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, No. 12 of 2017. Section 89 establishes joint and several personal liability of directors of private companies for unrecovered GST dues. Available at the official legislative portal: https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/2050/1/201712.pdf

INPUT TAX CREDIT (ITC) AND BLOCKED CREDITS UNDER GST: EXPLAINED SIMPLY

AUTHOR – JISHU DAS, STUDENT AT NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, TRIPURA

BEST CITATION – JISHU DAS, INPUT TAX CREDIT (ITC) AND BLOCKED CREDITS UNDER GST: EXPLAINED SIMPLY, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (8) OF 2026, PG. 289-291, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Imagine you are running a small business. Every time you buy raw materials or services, you pay GST to your supplier. When you sell your product, you collect GST from your customer. Without any relief, you would end up paying tax on tax — which is unfair and increases the final price for everyone.

The Input Tax Credit (ITC) mechanism solves this problem. It lets you subtract the GST you paid on your purchases (inputs) from the GST you collect on your sales (outputs). You pay tax to the government only on the value you actually added. This is the heart of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) system in India.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE PUBLIC POLICY AND FRAUD: RETHINKING ENFORCEMENT UNDER THE NEW YORK CONVENTION

AUTHOR – SHAHIDA PARWEEN, STUDENT AT LAW COLLEGE DEHRADUN FACULTY OF UTTARANCHAL UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – SHAHIDA PARWEEN,ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE PUBLIC POLICY AND FRAUD: RETHINKING ENFORCEMENT UNDER THE NEW YORK CONVENTION, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (8) OF 2026, PG. 281-288, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/IJLRV6I828

ABSTRACT

As it guarantees the acceptance and enforcement of foreign arbitral rulings, the New York Convention, 1958 continues to be the cornerstone of international commercial arbitration. But the public policy exception under Article V(2)(b) has consistently led to doctrinal ambiguity, especially when combined with fraud accusations. Differentiating between strategic, meritbased arguments masquerading as enforcement objections and actual violations of fundamental public policy remains a challenge for courts throughout jurisdictions. This paper critically analyses how public policy and fraud are interpreted in many important jurisdictions, such as Singapore, the United States, the United Kingdom, India, and Switzerland. It contends that the pro-enforcement goal of the Convention is weakened and arbitral finality is compromised by inconsistent judicial procedures.

In this study, artificial intelligence (AI) is introduced as a judicial decision-support tool that can help courts uncover fraud-related risk patterns, identify baseless public policy arguments, and improve consistency in enforcement outcomes. The paper suggests a technologically informed, appropriate, and globally harmonized paradigm for enforcement review by incorporating AI-driven tools like Natural Language Processing (NLP), predictive analytics, and human-in-the-loop governance frameworks. The study comes to the conclusion that AI can greatly improve the legitimacy, effectiveness, and consistency of arbitral award enforcement under the New York Convention when used morally and as an auxiliary rather than adjudicatory instrument.

NON-CONSENSUAL INTIMATE IMAGE ABUSE AND THE LIMITS OF LAW: GENDER, TECHNOLOGY, AND REGULATION IN INDIA

AUTHOR – KHUSHI AWANA, STUDENT AT AMITY LAW SCHOOL, AMITY UNIVERSITY NOIDA

BEST CITATION – KHUSHI AWANA, NON-CONSENSUAL INTIMATE IMAGE ABUSE AND THE LIMITS OF LAW: GENDER, TECHNOLOGY, AND REGULATION IN INDIA, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (8) OF 2026, PG. 272-280, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

The increasing adoption of digital technologies has resulted in the creation of new ways through which people’s privacy can be violated, and one such way is known as Non-Consensual Intimate Image Abuse (NCIIA), which has come to prominence as an emerging threat. This essay explores what NCIIA means and its implications in India, viewing it as a complex form of digital sexual assault that goes well beyond the simplistic notion of “revenge pornography.” It also discusses the different aspects of NCIIA, such as non-consensual sharing, surreptitious filming, manipulation, and threats, with consent being a key aspect.

Moreover, the study goes further to look at the gender-based dimensions of NCIIA, considering that the deeply rooted norms of patriarchy and society’s attitude affect women and marginalized groups more. The paper analyses the psychosocial and economic impacts on the victimized individuals, emphasizing the lasting impact brought about by digital media’s permanency and viral nature.

Moreover, the paper evaluates the current efforts made by governments through various policies, such as reports, capacity building, cybercrime strategies, and the impact of digital intermediaries in moderating online content and preventing cybercrimes. Despite the developments that have been made, the paper notes several shortcomings.

In conclusion, the paper emphasizes the need for an inclusive and holistic strategy that involves legal measures, technology accountability, digital literacy, and social change in order to ensure that NCIIA is properly handled and that people’s dignity and autonomy are maintained.

Keywords: Non-Consensual Intimate Image Abuse (NCIIA); Digital Sexual Violence; Privacy and Autonomy; Gender-Based Violence; Cyber Law; Intermediary Liability; Psychological

“THE LEGAL PUZZLE: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, CREATIVITY, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS”

AUTHOR – SHIVENDRA SINGH, AMITY LAW SCHOOL NOIDA, UTTAR PRADESH

BEST CITATION – SHIVENDRA SINGH, “THE LEGAL PUZZLE: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, CREATIVITY, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS”, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (8) OF 2026, PG. 262-271, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/IJLRV6I826

ABSTRACT

Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) protect the creations of the human mind, granting inventors and creators exclusive rights over their innovations through mechanisms such as patents, trademarks, copyrights, geographical indications, and trade secrets. These rights serve a dual purpose: protecting the creator’s interests while enabling society to benefit from innovation through regulated use and commercialization.

The emergence of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has fundamentally challenged traditional IPR frameworks. AI systems now generate thousands of creative works daily—from artwork and music to written content and business solutions—raising critical questions about authorship, ownership, and legal protection. Unlike human creators, AI operates through algorithmic analysis of data patterns, learning autonomously and producing outputs that blur the lines between human and machine creativity.

This paper examines the intersection of AI and IPR in India, analyzing how current legal frameworks address AI-generated works, the challenges posed by autonomous creation, and the urgent need for legislative reform. As AI becomes integral to India’s innovative and economic growth, establishing clear IPR protections is essential for fostering continued investment and development in this transformative field.

Keywords: Artificial Intelligence (AI), Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), Copyright Law, Patent Law, Legal Reform, India.