ARE LLM MODELS BIASED REGARDING CASTE STEREOTYPES IN THE INDIAN CONTEXT? – AN EMPIRICAL REVIEW AND TECHNO-LEGAL ANALYSIS OF AI BIAS MITIGATION FRAMEWORKS

AUTHOR – VISTAAR SINGH, STUDENT AT ATAL BIHARI VAJPAYEE SCHOOL OF LEGAL STUDIES, CSJM UNIVERSITY, KANPUR

BEST CITATION – VISTAAR SINGH, ARE LLM MODELS BIASED REGARDING CASTE STEREOTYPES IN THE INDIAN CONTEXT? – AN EMPIRICAL REVIEW AND TECHNO-LEGAL ANALYSIS OF AI BIAS MITIGATION FRAMEWORKS, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (5) OF 2026, PG. 01-05, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

Though banned by law, old rankings based on birth still shape who gets what in daily life across India. Trained on uneven data, artificial systems quietly mirror these inherited divides. Instead of questioning fairness, many tools accept biased inputs as normal. One inquiry probes whether machines treat people differently due to caste while using local tongues. Evidence gathered from peer-reviewed work and policy texts, current through early 2026, shows repeated links between low-status names and negative traits. High-caste labels tend to cluster around words like skillful or authoritative. These associations do not appear randomly; they echo historical power imbalances baked into digital forms. Regulatory efforts exist, yet their real-world impact remains limited so far. What appears neutral often carries forward long-standing exclusions. As the discussion winds down, attention turns to the necessity of binding regulations, external monitoring, context-specific protections, along with joint initiatives, so artificial intelligence does not deepen historical inequalities tied to caste across India.

ABOUR LAW AND THE RIGHT TO LIVELIHOOD UNDER CONSTITUTION

AUTHOR – ARTHI K, STUDENT AT SCHOOL OF EXCELLENCE IN LAW, THE TAMIL NADU DR AMBEDKAR LAW UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – ARTHI K, LABOUR LAW AND THE RIGHT TO LIVELIHOOD UNDER CONSTITUTION, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (5) OF 2026, PG. 01-05, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

One of the key aspects of human dignity and a pillar of socio-economic justice in the Indian constitution is the right to livelihood. Even though it is not stated as a fundamental right, judiciary has broadly applied the provisions of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution to include the right to livelihood and this has made it a constitutionally guaranteed right. This paper is a critical analysis of the cross-section of labour law and constitutional requirements with a special focus on the translation of constitutional guarantees into effective rights by statutory regimes. It does a doctrinal review of landmark judicial statements such as Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation, which solidly anchored livelihood as a right to life.

Moreover, the research assesses how important labour laws contribute towards ensuring employment security, equitable pay, and decent working conditions. It deals also with modern issues like the pre-eminence of the informal sector, the contractualization of labor and the emergence of platforms in the gig economy, which challenge the sufficiency of current legal frameworks. The paper finds that constitutionalization of livelihood rights is a big step but to make it work, strong enforcement, legal changes and a rights-based approach to labour regulation in the fast-changing economy are all that is needed.

KEYWORDS

Socio-Economic Rights,Judicial Activism,Informal Sector,Gig Economy, Employment Rights,Social Justice.

A STUDY ON CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (CSR) UNDER INDIAN LAW: EFFECTIVENESS AND CHALLENGES

AUTHOR – GODHAWARI P & DR. S.M. AZIZUNNISAA BEGUM

ASSISTANT PROFESSORS AT SCHOOL OF LAW, VISTAS, CHENNAI

BEST CITATION – GODHAWARI P & DR. S.M. AZIZUNNISAA BEGUM, A STUDY ON CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (CSR) UNDER INDIAN LAW: EFFECTIVENESS AND CHALLENGES, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (5) OF 2026, PG. 801-805, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

                This study examines Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) under the Companies Act, 2013, focusing on its effectiveness and challenges. India stands out for mandating CSR through Section 135, requiring eligible companies to spend 2% of their average net profits on social initiatives. While this framework has increased corporate contributions to sectors like education, healthcare, and environmental sustainability, questions remain regarding its true impact. The research evaluates whether CSR is driven by genuine commitment or mere compliance, highlighting concerns such as CSR-washing, regional disparities, and lack of transparency. By analysing legal provisions and practical outcomes, the study explores CSR’s role in enhancing corporate reputation, stakeholder trust, and sustainable development. It concludes by suggesting improvements to ensure CSR becomes a strategic, impactful tool for both business growth and societal welfare.

KEYWORDS

 CSR – Company – Transparency – Eradication of poverty – Sustainable Development

CYBERCRIME AND SECURITY CHALLENGES IN INDIA; A CRITICAL LEGAL ANALYSIS

AUTHOR – SHWETANK SINGH* & DR. ANUPRIYA YADAV**

* STUDENT AT AMITY UNIVERSITY LUCKNOW

** PROFESSOR AT AMITY UNIVERSITY LUCKNOW

BEST CITATION – SHWETANK SINGH & DR. ANUPRIYA YADAV, CYBERCRIME AND SECURITY CHALLENGES IN INDIA; A CRITICAL LEGAL ANALYSIS INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (5) OF 2026, PG. 790-800, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Abstract

The digital revolution has fundamentally transformed India, positioning it among the largest internet user bases in the world. While digital connectivity has catalysed economic growth, social interaction, and governance efficiency, it has simultaneously created an expanded attack surface for cybercriminals. The rapid adoption of online platforms, digital payment systems, cloud storage, and emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and deepfakes has heightened the risks of cybercrime, exposing individuals, businesses, and critical infrastructure to sophisticated cyber threats. This research paper undertakes a critical analysis of cybercrime in India, examining its evolution, typologies, and contemporary trends. Employing a doctrinal methodology, the study explores the legal and institutional frameworks designed to address cyber threats, including the Information Technology Act, 2000, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, and relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code. It evaluates the effectiveness of these laws in criminalizing cyber offences, regulating intermediaries, and providing mechanisms for investigation, adjudication, and redressal. The paper identifies persistent challenges in the Indian cybersecurity ecosystem, such as jurisdictional complexities in cross-border cybercrime, evidentiary difficulties in digital investigations, inadequate law enforcement capacity, and tensions between encryption and lawful access. Moreover, it highlights accountability gaps in intermediary liability, limited digital literacy among citizens, and evolving threats that outpace current legislative provisions. Institutional responses, including initiatives by CERT-In, NCIIPC, and I4C, are critically examined, emphasizing the need for capacity building, coordination, and proactive threat mitigation. Based on this analysis, the study proposes a set of reforms aimed at strengthening India’s cybercrime response and cybersecurity posture. Recommendations include legislative updates to address emerging technologies, enhanced enforcement and investigative mechanisms, improved public-private partnerships, citizen awareness programs, and greater international cooperation. The paper argues that only a holistic approach, integrating legal, technical, and institutional measures, can ensure a secure digital environment while upholding privacy, accountability, and the rule of law.

Keywords

Cybercrime, cybersecurity, Information Technology Act, digital security, India, legal challenges

BALANCING SARFAESI AND IBC: JUDICIAL RESPONSE TO MORATORIUM ABUSE – A DOCTRINAL ANALYSIS

AUTHOR – SUPRATIM RAY, STUDENT AT NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, TRIPURA

BEST CITATION – SUPRATIM RAY, BALANCING SARFAESI AND IBC: JUDICIAL RESPONSE TO MORATORIUM ABUSE – A DOCTRINAL ANALYSIS, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (5) OF 2026, PG. 786-789, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

INTRODUCTION

The SARFAESI Act, 2002, and the IBC Act, 2016, create two pillars of the Indian debt recovery and resolution framework. Let us look at a SARFAESI v/s IBC analysis of these two Acts. The provisions of SARFAESI allow the secured creditor mostly banks and financial Institutions to enforce a security interest in the property of the Borrower without the intervention of a court and the focus is mainly asset recovery by taking possession and sale/ auction of the asset as per section 13. The provisions of IBC focus on the resolution of stress assets in a collective manner as per CIRP (Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process) or to go for liquidation and the section 14 moratorium is mainly for protecting the estate of the corporate debtor for the benefit of all across and not to take any action against people until the resolution plan is approved.They have always been in a delicate balance. SARFAESI ensures quick measures for secured creditors whereas IBC provides equitable distribution and revival. Nonetheless, this duality has created differences, especially on the moratorium that may defuse SARFAESI actions. By the year 2025, the jurisprudence has evolved sharply. In recent times, the Supreme Court, NCLAT, NCLT, and High Courts have perceived the IBC moratorium as not merely a “shield” for honest resolution seekers but also a possible “sword” for chronic defaulters. The landmark decision of the Bombay High Court (March 2026) in Rozina Firoz Hajiani & Ors. v. The Union of India v. Ors. have made very clear lines against misuse.

REHABILITATION VS PUNISHMENT: THE FUTURE OF JUVENILE JUSTICE IN INDIA

AUTHOR – JANVI SHUKLA, STUDENT AT AMITY UNIVERSITY LUCKNOW AMITY UNIVERSITY LUCKNOW

BEST CITATION – JANVI SHUKLA, REHABILITATION VS PUNISHMENT: THE FUTURE OF JUVENILE JUSTICE IN INDIA, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (5) OF 2026, PG. 779-785, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/V6I583

Abstract

The long-running argument between rehabilitation and punishment has been difficult for the juvenile justice system to resolve recently. While punishment in juvenile justice investigates the foundations of the theory in retributive justice and deterrence, rehabilitation programs seek to address the underlying causes of delinquent behaviour. After evaluating how well rehabilitation programs work to lower recidivism rates and promote favourable outcomes for youth offenders. this paper further examines the difficulties in carrying out these initiatives, such as the lack of resources and the necessity of interagency cooperation. Prioritizing the rehabilitation and welfare of juvenile offenders, a balanced approach to juvenile justice is required that incorporates elements of both punishment and rehabilitation. The rehabilitation model has become more well-known in recent years as societies have come to understand the shortcomings of punitive methods and the need for more compassionate, practical, and long-term approaches to dealing with crime and criminal behaviour. Rehabilitation helps the child in overcoming the trauma and addiction through counselling, therapy and education which prevents the child from repeating the same offences. It can bring a long term transformation in a child to reintegrate into the society. A major turning point in this was the Nirbhaya case which led to the debate across India that whether the juvenile should not be treated leniently for a heinous crime done by them and the age alone should not be the factor to determine the degree of punishment to a juvenile. One of the major changes introduced was the juvenile justice (care and protection of children) Act 2015 which shifted the focus towards accountability focused approach.

The study critically analyses the challenges faced in the rehabilitative approach over punitive measures and whether such approach is better for the society. The research emphasis on the legislative reform which introduced the provisions that juvenile between the age of 16 to 18 years should be tried as adults for heinous crimes done by them. The study studies statutory provisions, court rulings, and legal principles using a doctrinal and analytical technique. The paper argues that the societal demand for punitive approach risk the transformation of a juvenile into a better person and reintegrate into the society. 

Keywords – Crime, Child Rights, Counselling, Criminal Justice System, Development, Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015, Juvenile justice, Juveniles in Conflict with Law, Legal System, Nirbhaya Case, Punishment, Punitive Measures, Rehabilitation, Recidivism, Youth offender.

MENS REA AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND CRIMINAL LIABILITY IN AI-DRIVEN OFFENCES

AUTHOR – ANAMIKA PATEL, STUDENT AT AMITY UNIVERSITY NOIDA, UTTAR PRADESH

BEST CITATION – ANAMIKA PATEL, MENS REA AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND CRIMINAL LIABILITY IN AI-DRIVEN OFFENCES, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (5) OF 2026, PG. 771-7779, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

The rapid rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is reshaping how decisions are made across governance, business, healthcare, and daily life, bringing with it new challenges for Indian criminal law. Traditional legal frameworks, such as the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, are built on the assumption of human action, intention, and mens rea—the “guilty mind”—to determine criminal responsibility. But AI systems act autonomously and sometimes unpredictably, making it difficult to pinpoint responsibility or prove intent in the conventional sense.

This paper examines how AI affects liability and accountability, highlighting the spread of responsibility across developers, operators, corporations, and end-users. It explores why traditional concepts like mens rea may not apply to non-human actors and suggests adopting hybrid legal models that blend fault-based liability with objective standards, including negligence, recklessness, foreseeability, and strict liability, particularly in high-risk areas. The study also addresses the challenges posed by opaque AI decision-making, emphasizing the need for transparency, explainability, and robust evidence under laws like the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam.

Drawing on judicial precedents and international comparisons, the paper proposes reforms that strike a balance between encouraging innovation and ensuring justice. By updating criminal law to reflect the realities of AI, India can create a legal framework that protects public safety, holds the right parties accountable, and stays relevant in a rapidly evolving technological landscape.

KEY WORDS

Artificial Intelligence, Liability, Accountability, Mens Rea, Strict Liability

LABOUR LAW AND THE RIGHT TO LIVELIHOOD UNDER CONSTITUTION

AUTHOR – THANESH N, STUDENT AT SCHOOL OF EXCELLENCE IN LAW, THE TAMIL NADU DR AMBEDKAR LAW UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – THANESH N, LABOUR LAW AND THE RIGHT TO LIVELIHOOD UNDER CONSTITUTION, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (5) OF 2026, PG. 762-770, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

One of the key aspects of human dignity and a pillar of socio-economic justice in the Indian constitution is the right to livelihood. Even though it is not stated as a fundamental right, judiciary has broadly applied the provisions of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution to include the right to livelihood and this has made it a constitutionally guaranteed right. This paper is a critical analysis of the cross-section of labour law and constitutional requirements with a special focus on the translation of constitutional guarantees into effective rights by statutory regimes. It does a doctrinal review of landmark judicial statements such as Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation, which solidly anchored livelihood as a right to life.

Moreover, the research assesses how important labour laws contribute towards ensuring employment security, equitable pay, and decent working conditions. It deals also with modern issues like the pre-eminence of the informal sector, the contractualization of labor and the emergence of platforms in the gig economy, which challenge the sufficiency of current legal frameworks. The paper finds that constitutionalization of livelihood rights is a big step but to make it work, strong enforcement, legal changes and a rights-based approach to labour regulation in the fast-changing economy are all that is needed.

KEYWORDS

Socio-Economic Rights,Judicial Activism,Informal Sector,Gig Economy, Employment Rights,Social Justice.

“LIFE IMPRISONMENT IN INDIA: LACK OF CLARITY AND THE NEED FOR STATUTORY DEFINITION”

AUTHOR – PRABHMEET KAUR, STUDENT AT AMITY UNIVERSITY NOIDA

BEST CITATION – PRABHMEET KAUR, “LIFE IMPRISONMENT IN INDIA: LACK OF CLARITY AND THE NEED FOR STATUTORY DEFINITION”, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (5) OF 2026, PG. 591-600, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

1.CONSTITUTIONAL DIMENSIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS CONCERNS

1.1 Article 14 – Equality and Arbitrariness

Article 14 of the Constitution of India guarantees the principle of equality before the law and equal protection of the laws. It represents one of the most fundamental values of the Indian constitutional framework and acts as a safeguard against arbitrary state action. Within the criminal justice system, Article 14 plays a crucial role in ensuring fairness, particularly in matters relating to sentencing and remission.

The concept of equality under Article 14 does not mean that the law must treat all individuals in exactly the same way. Rather, it requires that individuals placed in similar circumstances should be treated alike. Any differentiation must be based on reasonable classification and must have a rational connection with the objective sought to be achieved. Over time, the Supreme Court has expanded the interpretation of Article 14 and held that arbitrariness itself is contrary to the idea of equality.^[1]

In the context of life imprisonment, issues relating to sentencing discretion and remission policies often raise concerns regarding unequal treatment. Courts exercise discretion while determining the appropriate sentence, and executive authorities exercise discretion when granting remission or premature release. While such discretion is necessary for the functioning of the justice system, it must be exercised in a fair, reasonable, and non-arbitrary manner to comply with the constitutional mandate of equality.

Two important areas where Article 14 becomes particularly relevant are discretionary sentencing and the unequal application of remission policies.

---

[1] E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu – The Supreme Court held that arbitrariness is antithetical to equality under Article 14.

MATERNITY BENEFIT REFORMS UNDER SOCIAL SECURITY CODE 2020: SME COMPLIANCE AND JUDICIAL GAPS

AUTHOR – JANANI, STUDENT AT SCHOOL OF EXCELLENCE IN LAW, THE TAMIL NADU DR AMBEDKAR LAW UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – JANANI,, MATERNITY BENEFIT REFORMS UNDER SOCIAL SECURITY CODE 2020: SME COMPLIANCE AND JUDICIAL GAPS, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (5) OF 2026, PG. 751-761, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION

            India’s small and medium enterprises (SMEs) form the backbone of its economy, numbering over 63 million and accounting for nearly 30% of the national GDP while employing more than 110 million workers. Yet, these vital engines of growth face mounting pressures from evolving labor regulations, particularly the enhanced maternity benefits introduced under the Code on Social Security, 2020^[1]. With women comprising a significant portion of the SME workforce—especially in sectors like textiles and apparel in regions such as Tamil Nadu—this reform promises greater gender equity but raises critical questions about affordability and enforceability for resource-constrained businesses. The tension between empowering working mothers and sustaining SME viability underscores the urgency of examining these reforms.

---

[1] Code on Social Security, No. 36 of 2020