Author: PRASANNASRI26092001

ADDRESSING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: LEGAL PERSPECTIVES

AUTHOR – GAURI NIRAJ MISHRA, STUDENT AT M.K.E.S. COLLEGE OF LAW

BEST CITATION – GAURI NIRAJ MISHRA, ADDRESSING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: LEGAL PERSPECTIVES, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (2) OF 2025, PG. 83-85, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

This article is published in the collaborated special issue of M.K.E.S. College of Law and the Institute of Legal Education (ILE), titled “Current Trends in Indian Legal Frameworks: A Special Edition” (ISBN: 978-81-968842-8-4).

ABSTRACT

The Domestic Violence Act, introduced in 2005, is a landmark initiative in India aimed at identifying domestic violence as a criminal act. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDVA) in Section 3 articulates the definition of domestic violence and identifies various forms of abuse. Domestic violence in India is a complex issue influenced by various social, economic, cultural, and psychological factors. Addressing domestic violence in India requires stronger law enforcement, education, economic empowerment of women, and a shift in societal attitudes toward gender equality.

Keywords: Domestic violence, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, forms of abuse covered in Domestic violence, reason of domestic violence

THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK SURROUNDING SOLITARY CONFINEMENT IN INDIA

AUTHOR – KANAK S. UPADHYAY, STUDENT AT M.K.E.S. COLLEGE OF LAW

BEST CITATION – KANAK S. UPADHYAY, THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK SURROUNDING SOLITARY CONFINEMENT IN INDIA, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (2) OF 2025, PG. 77-82, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

This article is published in the collaborated special issue of M.K.E.S. College of Law and the Institute of Legal Education (ILE), titled “Current Trends in Indian Legal Frameworks: A Special Edition” (ISBN: 978-81-968842-8-4).

ABSTRACT

Solitary Confinement means keeping a person thoroughly isolated from any kind of contact from outside world. Solitary Confinement as a practice owes its origin to the United States. In 1787, Quaker Dr. Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin and several Quaker leaders founded the Philadelphia Society for alleviating the miseries of public prisons. They believed that total isolation and silence would lead to penitence and the offender may not repeat the crime again. Sections 73 And 74 of the IPC (Section 11 And 12 of BNS) deals with the provisions for Solitary Confinement. Under Section 73^[1] (Section 11 of BNS)^[2], Solitary Confinement can be awarded for offences under IPC (Now BNS). The Prisons Act, 1894 is India’s first prison regulation legislation. The legislation focuses mainly on the rehabilitation of inmates in relation to the rights of inmates. Section 29 and 30 of The Prisons Act, 1894 deals with Solitary Confinement. The Solitary Confinement has many consequences. A large body of research shows that Solitary Confinement causes adverse psychological , physical, and neurological effects and increases the risk of serious harm to individuals who experience it, often lasting well beyond one’s time in Confinement.

Keywords: Solitary confinement, origin of Solitary confinement, law related to Solitary confinement, the Prisoners Act, 1984, effect of Solitary confinement

---

[1] Section 73 of Indian Penal Code,1860.

[2] Section 11 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,2023.

INDIAN EXCEPTIONALISM: CULTURAL RIGHTS AND MINORITY PROTECTIONS IN A DIVERSE SOCIETY

AUTHOR – ARVI GIRASE, LLM SCHOLAR AT GUJARAT NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, GANDHINAGAR. SILVASSA

BEST CITATION – ARVI GIRASE, INDIAN EXCEPTIONALISM: CULTURAL RIGHTS AND MINORITY PROTECTIONS IN A DIVERSE SOCIETY, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (1) OF 2025, PG. 277-288, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

While sometimes overshadowed by civil, political, and economic rights, cultural rights are essential to human dignity and social justice. Article 29 of the Indian Constitution provides for the protection of cultural rights, particularly those of minorities. However, globalization has created both opportunities and challenges for protecting these rights. This research paper will investigate the unique position of cultural rights within India’s legal framework, focusing on their relevance, problems, and shifting interpretations in the light of globalization.

The study will outline the historical and international perspective on cultural rights, emphasizing their marginalization in human rights rhetoric. It then looks into the Indian legal landscape, examining how constitutional provisions and court interpretations have influenced the protection of cultural identities. The paper will also compares India’s approach to worldwide standards, answering questions about the adequacy of current regulations.

The study’s main focus will be on the influence of globalization, which, while promoting cultural interaction and acknowledgment, also threatens local traditions through homogenization. The study critically assesses India’s response to these concerns, focusing on historic cases and laws aimed at protecting cultural diversity. It also investigates how international human rights instruments like the ICCPR and ICESCR have influenced India’s position on cultural rights.

The study aims to highlight the need for a more robust and adaptable legislative framework to balance modernization and cultural preservation. Recognizing cultural rights as “empowering rights,” which are necessary for participation, identity, and self-expression, the report proposes for stronger enforcement mechanisms, policy reforms, and expanded worldwide collaboration. Finally, it emphasizes that defending cultural rights entails not only preserving traditions, but also building inclusive and peaceful societies in a moment of fast change.

Keywords- Cultural Rights, Minority Rights, Globalization and Culture, Fundamental Rights, Social Justice, Indian Constitution

INDIA’S INDIGENOUS STRUGGLE

AUTHOR – SHRUTI VASAVE, LLM SCHOLAR AT GUJARAT NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, GANDHINAGAR. SILVASSA

BEST CITATION – SHRUTI VASAVE, INDIA’S INDIGENOUS STRUGGLE, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (1) OF 2025, PG. 269-276, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

Recognition is an individual’s identity that is asserted and granted rights based on it. Human beings have inherent rights, independent of nationality, colour, gender, religion, or other characteristics. Recognition shapes an individual’s identity and the privileges that come with it. In society, identity is extremely important for a variety of reasons, and being recognised and acknowledged by others is as important. This recognition helps to promote several factors, including social inclusion. Individual rights are also internationally recognised. However, because of their lack of status as Indigenous in their native country, Indian Indigenous people face difficulties in obtaining international acknowledgement of their rights. India supports the UN Declaration on Indigenous Peoples’ Rights but argues that all Indians are indigenous, not just Adivasi peoples, so the declaration doesn’t apply. Also, India hasn’t agreed to the International Labor Organization Convention 169, making it tough for Adivasi people to have their internationally recognized rights, including religious freedoms, protected in India. This violates their internationally barred rights and they are barred from using the same. This also leads to differential treatment and denial of rights as compared to the other indigenous people of the world. This paper addresses the critical issue of Adivasi peoples in India lacking internationally recognized indigenous status, which has resulted in systematic neglect of their rights. This lack of recognition impedes their ability to maintain their Indigenous identity, as they are compelled to align themselves with the other people of India thereby eroding their indigenous cultural heritage. This paper addresses how Indigenous people’s absence of status affects their rights internationally and limits their legal protection. It explores how this impacted the rights not adequately acknowledged under the current framework. The paper highlights the challenges Indian indigenous face, including differential treatment and equality outlined in the UNDRIP, due to the absence of a lack of status as indigenous. The paper will commence with an introductory overview, followed by a historical exploration of the subject matter. It will then delve into a comparative analysis of indigenous status across different nations, scrutinizing India’s stance on indigenous rights within the framework of international regulations. The challenges confronting indigenous populations will also be a focal point of the research. Through case studies, it examines the need for indigenous status for Adivasi in India and analyses how this lack of status contributes to individuals facing deprivation of their rights.  The paper focuses on the indigenous status of Adivasi people in India internationally

Keywords: Recognition, Indigenous, UNDRIP, Scheduled Tribes, Rights

BURDEN OF PROOF VS. STANDARD OF PROOF: CLEARING THE CONFUSION

AUTHOR – JASH SHAH*, STUDENT AT O.P. JINDAL GLOBAL UNIVERSITY

*jashshah2512@gmail.com & LinkedIn Profile – http://www.linkedin.com/in/jashshah2512

BEST CITATION – JASH SHAH, BURDEN OF PROOF VS. STANDARD OF PROOF: CLEARING THE CONFUSION, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (1) OF 2025, PG. 265-268, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Introduction ‘

Burden of Proof’ and ‘Standard of Proof’ are two extremely critical aspects in the legal world which are essential in guiding and evaluating how evidence is presented in court. These are two different legal terms which serve different purposes, yet, even those familiar with the legal system tend to sometimes get confused between the two. Briefly, burden of proof determines who is responsible for proving a fact, whereas standard of proof specifies the criteria and standard of fact that can be used convincingly as evidence. Burden of Proof and Standard of Proof play a pivotal role in ensuring that a fair outcome prevails at the end of trial. This blog aims to explore these two concepts in detail, clarifying their roles in legal context, clearing the confusion related to these two concepts and explaining how these two operate together to uphold justice in a fair manner.

HEARSAY: EXCEPTIONS AND APPLICATIONS IN MODERN TRIALS

AUTHOR – REWA SHARMA*, STUDENT AT O.P. JINDAL GLOBAL UNIVERSITY

* sharmarewa257@gmail.com & LinkedIn Profile – https://www.linkedin.com/in/rewa-sharma-b463062b8

BEST CITATION – REWA SHARMA, HEARSAY: EXCEPTIONS AND APPLICATIONS IN MODERN TRIALS, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (1) OF 2025, PG. 261-264, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Information you have heard but are known to be true
Although the term “hearsay” may sound technical, it’s something we all encounter in our everyday lives—whether it’s a rumour, gossip, or something we’ve “heard on the grapevine.” In the context of law, however, hearsay has a very specific meaning: it refers to statements made outside of court, which are presented in court to prove the truth of the matter asserted. While we might casually share or hear such information in daily conversation, the rules of evidence in a courtroom are much stricter. Hearsay evidence is generally excluded from trials because it lacks the reliability and trustworthiness that come from direct testimony and cross- examination. That said, hearsay isn’t entirely shut out of the legal process—it’s governed by a set of exceptions that allow certain statements to be admitted, depending on their context and the circumstances under which they were made. Understanding hearsay and its exceptions is crucial for both legal practitioners and anyone who finds themselves involved in a trial, as these rules can significantly impact the outcome of a case.

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF BENEFIT PLANS FOR EMPLOYEES IN INDIA AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

AUTHORS – REWA SHARMA* & JASH SHAH**, STUDENTS AT O.P. JINDAL GLOBAL UNIVERSITY

* sharmarewa257@gmail.com & LinkedIn Profile – https://www.linkedin.com/in/rewa-sharma-b463062b8

**jashshah2512@gmail.com & LinkedIn Profile – http://www.linkedin.com/in/jashshah2512

BEST CITATION – REWA SHARMA & JASH SHAH, COMPARATIVE STUDY OF BENEFIT PLANS FOR EMPLOYEES IN INDIA AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (1) OF 2025, PG. 249-260, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

What are Employee Benefits?

Employee benefits are employee compensation packages that include extras such as health insurance, retirement saving plans, paid vacation to list some out of the many. The primary purpose of employee benefits is to hire and retain top talent and increase the productivity and efficiency of working which is in turn beneficial to the company. Employee benefit plans are an integral part of the overall compensation package as a lot of studies and surveys have concluded that employees who feel valued at their place of work turn out to be more productive and motivated to work and also, benefit plans are one of the most important factor that employees take into consideration when they have to decide whether or not to stay with the current employer. For example, a recent survey conducted by the Society for Human Resource Management found that 90% of the people surveyed feel that healthcare benefits are an extremely crucial employee benefit and 83% said that flexible work time is very important.^[1] A study by the International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans concluded that companies with high level of productivity and engagement offer benefits such as paid vacation, healthcare benefits, flexible time, etc. to the employees.

---

[1] Forbes Advisor, Employee Benefits In 2024: The Ultimate Guide, https://www.forbes.com/advisor/business/employee-benefits/#what_are_employee_benefits_section.

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK FOR COMBATTING CYBERSTALKING AND ONLINE HARASSMENT

AUTHORS – DHWANI VRAJESH VYAS* & RAJ ARVIND SHAH**, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR AT SEVA MANDAL EDUCATION SOCIETY’S SMT. KAMALABEN GAMBHIRCHAND SHAH LAW SCHOOL* & ASSISTANT PROFESSOR AT M.K.E.S COLLEGE OF LAW**

BEST CITATION – DHWANI VRAJESH VYAS & RAJ ARVIND SHAH, REGULATORY FRAMEWORK FOR COMBATTING CYBERSTALKING AND ONLINE HARASSMENT, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (2) OF 2025, PG. 74-76, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

This article is published in the collaborated special issue of M.K.E.S. College of Law and the Institute of Legal Education (ILE), titled “Current Trends in Indian Legal Frameworks: A Special Edition” (ISBN: 978-81-968842-8-4).

ABSTRACT

The rapid proliferation of digital technologies has brought about unprecedented opportunities for communication and social interaction. However, this digital revolution has also ushered in a darker side, marked by the rise of cyberstalking and online harassment. These insidious behaviors, often facilitated by the anonymity and reach of the internet, can inflict severe emotional distress, reputational damage, and even physical harm on victims. This research article examines the evolving legal frameworks aimed at addressing cyberstalking and online harassment, exploring the challenges in defining and prosecuting these crimes, analyzing existing legislation across jurisdictions, and discussing the need for comprehensive and adaptive legal strategies to combat this growing menace.  It also considers the role of technology companies and social media platforms in mitigating online abuse.

Keywords: Cybercrime, cyberstalking, online harassment, Information Technology Act, 2000

DOCTRINE OF RES GESTAE : AN ANALYSIS

AUTHORS – SHAGUN TIWARI* & SARITA YADAV**, STUDENT* & ASSISTANT PROFESSOR** AT AMITY UNIVERSITY LUCKNOW CAMPUS

BEST CITATION – SHAGUN TIWARI & SARITA YADAV, DOCTRINE OF RES GESTAE : AN ANALYSIS, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (1) OF 2025, PG. 243-248, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

In any legal process, evidence can be provided either by oral evidence or by documentary evidence. Oral evidence means the statement of the witness and documentary evidence means the document submitted for review by the court in support of the application. The rule of best evidence laid down in the provision of the Bhartiya Saksya Adhiniyam is that the evidence must be that of the witness who claims to have full and complete knowledge of the fact in question. This provision is provided in section 55 of the law. This section prohibits the admission of evidence not directly related to the fact in question. The Bhartiya Saksya Adhiniyam also provides that hearsay evidence is not admissible, but section 4 is an exception to the hearsay rule. Section 4 provides that facts which are not in dispute may be relevant if they are part of the same transaction. The rule of the same transaction is provided by the English term res gestae. The facts to be proved must be different from the fact in question, but necessary to prove the fact in question. In any trial, not all evidence is admissible. Only facts that are related to the facts in question and relevant facts are admissible. Acceptability varies according to importance. All admissible facts are relevant, but not all relevant facts are admissible. According to the doctrine of res gestae, facts directly related to the facts in question that create a chain of circumstances are admissible only as evidence. In legal proceedings, only relevant facts are admissible. The law does not define what constitutes a relevant fact.  Keywords: Oral evidence, provision, admissible, res gestae, same transaction

SAFEGUARDING TRADITIONAL KNOWLWDGE: HARMONIZING LEGAL FRAMEWORK

AUTHOR – ROSEMARIA JOHNSON, LLM SCHOLAR AT INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW, CHRIST UNIVERSITY, BANGALORE
BEST CITATION – ROSEMARIA JOHNSON, SAFEGUARDING TRADITIONAL KNOWLWDGE: HARMONIZING LEGAL FRAMEWORK, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (1) OF 2025, PG. 232-242, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

Traditional Knowledge (TK), an intellectual heritage preserved and developed by local and traditional communities across generations, has emerged as a critical global concern. While historically confined within community practices, TK’s significance gained international attention following the TRIPs Agreement and increased commercialization, particularly regarding its connection to genetic resources. The past two decades have witnessed multinational corporations extensively exploiting TK for developing plant-based medicines, health products, and cosmetics. Critics argue that the current intellectual property framework has inadvertently facilitated bio-piracy, prompting developing nations and traditional communities to voice concerns about TK misappropriation globally.

TK protection encompasses both legal and ethical dimensions. Its holistic nature is intrinsically linked to community holders, representing their collective intellectual efforts, emotional bonds, and customary heritage. Though rooted in historical practices, TK continues to evolve with novel aspects. Given its substantial economic, cultural, and spiritual value, a comprehensive protection regime is essential to prevent illegal misappropriation and safeguard community interests.Various protective approaches have been proposed: integrating TK within existing TRIPs-compliant IP frameworks, modifying non-IP biodiversity conservation laws, or developing a sui-generis system that combines contemporary IP and non-IP elements while acknowledging customary rules.

India has taken a proactive stance in TRIPs-CBD negotiations, implementing both legislative and non-legislative measures to combat biopiracy. While these efforts, including the Indian Biological Diversity Act, 2002, have shown effectiveness, they primarily serve as defensive mechanisms without conferring specific rights to knowledge holders. This research evaluates the adequacy of India’s current TK protection measures and proposes a tailored sui-generis model for comprehensive TK protection in India.

Keywords: Traditional Knowledge Protection, Biopiracy Prevention, Sui-generis Regime, Intellectual Property Rights, Indigenous Community Rights