Blog

Blog

JUDICIAL CREATIVITY IN ADDRESSING TRANSNATIONAL CYBERCRIME: A NEW FRONTIER FOR LAW AND JUSTICE

AUTHOR – MOHD TOUSEEF AIZAZ, STUDENT AT ICFAI UNIVERSITY DEHRADUN

BEST CITATION – MOHD TOUSEEF AIZAZ, JUDICIAL CREATIVITY IN ADDRESSING TRANSNATIONAL CYBERCRIME: A NEW FRONTIER FOR LAW AND JUSTICE, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 233-247, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

In the contemporary digital era, transnational cybercrime presents an unprecedented challenge to national legal systems and the international community. The rapid evolution of technology has outpaced traditional legal frameworks, creating significant gaps in the ability of courts and law enforcement agencies to effectively address cyber offenses that easily transcend geographical boundaries. This research explores the increasing necessity of judicial creativity as courts worldwide adapt, interpret, and extend existing legal principles to meet the demands posed by transnational cybercrime.

The paper begins by contextualizing cybercrime as a complex and multifaceted criminal phenomenon, encompassing activities such as hacking, data theft, identity fraud, cyberterrorism, and other forms of unauthorized access perpetrated across borders. The borderless and anonymous nature of cyber offenses complicates jurisdictional determinations and evidentiary procedures, highlighting limitations inherent in extant legal regimes. Traditional statutory provisions often lack clear definitions for emerging cyber offenses, while international treaties have struggled to keep pace with technological advances and the sophistication of cybercriminal tactics. As a result, the principle of legality suffers from normative ambiguity, which risks either under-criminalization of harmful conduct or undue overreach by law enforcement authorities.

Against this backdrop, judicial creativity emerges as a crucial mechanism for bridging legislative lacunae. Judicial creativity involves the innovative interpretation of laws, the harmonization of conflicting jurisdictional claims, and the adaptation of fundamental rights and procedural safeguards to new digital realities. Rather than departing from the rule of law, courts utilize principles of equity, proportionality, and legal reasoning to develop doctrines and standards that address questions unanticipated by lawmakers. This proactive judicial role is indispensable in protecting both public order and individual rights in the cyberspace context.[1]

The study analyzes landmark judicial decisions from India and other jurisdictions to illustrate how courts have employed creative reasoning to confront novel cybercrime challenges. For instance, Indian courts have expanded the scope of statutory terms such as “communication device” under the Information Technology Act to include evolving technologies, thereby broadening prosecutorial reach. Courts have applied traditional laws governing defamation, privacy, and evidence to digital platforms like social media, setting important precedents for protecting vulnerable populations from online harms. Furthermore, by invoking international mutual legal assistance treaties (MLATs), courts have facilitated cross-border access to electronic evidence, fostering cooperation despite jurisdictional complexities.

Internationally, courts have adopted doctrines such as universal jurisdiction and the “effects doctrine” to assert extraterritorial authority over cyber offenses when acts committed abroad materially impact domestic interests. Such judicial innovations reflect a growing recognition that cyberspace requires transcending conventional territorial limits in legal adjudication.

Emerging legal principles shaped by judicial interventions include refined mens rea standards to deal with the intricacies of intent in cyber offenses, enhanced due process norms to balance investigative powers against privacy concerns, and modernized evidentiary frameworks that authenticate and preserve the integrity of digital evidence. These doctrinal developments are critical in managing the speed, anonymity, and complexity of cyber investigations.

The judiciary has also played an instrumental role in fostering international cooperation and harmonization. Courts have enforced foreign judgments and extradition requests by interpreting laws expansively and applying equitable considerations, even absent explicit statutory mandates. Such judicial activism underscores the vital role courts play in closing gaps in international law and promoting mutual trust among states. Finally, the incorporation of advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence within judicial processes marks a new frontier in legal modernization. AI tools aid judges in managing voluminous digital evidence, conducting risk assessments, and enhancing decision-making. Judicial training programs now emphasize understanding technological opportunities and challenges, positioning courts as central actors in evolving cyber jurisprudence.


[1] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5001545

Blog

CASE COMMENT:  K.P. TAMILMARAN V. STATE BY DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (2025)

AUTHOR – DR. WASIM RAZA, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR AT EXCELLENT LAW COLLEGE, BORABAS, KOTA, RAJASTHAN

BEST CITATION – DR. WASIM RAZA, CASE COMMENT:  K.P. TAMILMARAN V. STATE BY DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (2025), INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 229-232, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/JLNX1042

ABSTRACT

CITATION: 2025 SCC INSC 576

BENCH: JUSTICE SUDHANSHU DHULIA.

JUDGEMENT: April 28, 2025

In the areas of “honour killings,” police accountability, caste-based violence, and evidentiary jurisprudence in India, the Supreme Court’s ruling in k.p. tamilmaran v. state by deputy superintendent of police[1] are a significant ruling. It shows the Court’s strong stance against crimes motivated by caste, its stress on strict investigation standards, and its reaffirmation of changing principles of evidence (particularly with regard to hostile and related witnesses). At least three intersecting domains are affected by the ruling:

  • Criminal accountability of public servants (especially police officers) in caste atrocity cases;
  •  Evidentiary doctrine regarding hostile/related witnesses and judicial powers under CrPC s. 311/Evidence Act s. 165; and
  • Police duty to register FIRs suo motu and investigate cognisable offenses without prejudice, particularly in cases involving members of Scheduled Castes.

Keywords: Honour Killings, Cast Based–Violence, CrPc section 311, evidentiary jurisprudence


[1] 2025 SCC INSC 576

Blog

SAFEGUARDING CHILD ONLINE- AN EMPIRICAL STUDY FROM CAUSE TO EFFECT

AUTHOR- DR. NEELAM SANJAY DIGHE, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF LAW, MODERN LAW COLLEGE, PUNE

BEST CITATION – DR. NEELAM SANJAY DIGHE, SAFEGUARDING CHILD ONLINE- AN EMPIRICAL STUDY FROM CAUSE TO EFFECT, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 222-228, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/CENE6715

Abstract

An empirical study on protecting children online is presented in this paper, which traces the reasons behind their susceptibility to the consequences of being exposed to threats online. It uses a mixed-methods approach that combines qualitative interviews with parents, caregivers, and child protection specialists with quantitative surveys of children between the ages of 10 and 17. The study investigates children’s use of the internet, their encounters with hazardous content, grooming, and cyberbullying, as well as parental knowledge and preventative measures. It evaluates the efficacy of existing safety precautions and identifies deficiencies in protective frameworks and digital literacy. The results are intended to help stakeholders, educators, and legislators increase children’s online safety through evidence-based interventions and better digital environment legislation.

Keywords- Child, Online, Cyber bullying, CRC,POCSO

Blog

BATTLE OF HEIR OVER PROPERTY IN HINDUS

AUTHOR – AISHWARYA NAYAK & SANIA AKTARI

STUDENTS OF BIRLA SCHOOL OF LAW, BIRLA GLOBAL UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – AISHWARYA NAYAK & SANIA AKTARI, BATTLE OF HEIR OVER PROPERTY IN HINDUS, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 214-221, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344

ABSTRACT :-

In every courtroom where families fight over inheritance, the walls echo not with the language of law, but with the silence of broken bonds.

Legal battles over inheritance are not merely disputes over property; they are deeply human conflicts woven with emotions, expectations, and a yearning for justice. Despite progressive legislation such as the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, which promised gender equality and fairness in succession, Indian families continue to be entangled in prolonged and painful property disputes. These conflicts often stem from a clash between traditional values and modern legal ideals — where cultural conditioning, emotional attachment, and a lack of awareness undermine the spirit of equality enshrined in law.

This study seeks to explore how inheritance battles reflect the tension between law and life, rights and relationships. It examines why heirs, even when armed with equal legal rights, often resort to adversarial litigation rather than amicable resolution. The paper delves into the limitations of existing legal remedies, the social psychology of ownership, and the emotional cost of justice delayed. Ultimately, it argues that resolving inheritance disputes requires more than legal reform — it calls for empathy, education, and a collective awakening that values relationships over possessions. For in the pursuit of property, families often lose what no court can restore: peace, trust, and the very fabric of kinship.

Key words :- Hindu succession , trust , possession , heirs

Blog

CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGES IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ONLINE GOVERNANCE

AUTHOR – MEGHA, LLM (IP) STUDENT AT AMITY UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – MEGHA, CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGES IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ONLINE GOVERNANCE, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 202-213, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344

Abstract

The state governance through the digital turn, has presented some intricate constitutional problems in India that have challenged the breathing of the fundamental rights and the breathing of the state. This article demonstrates the conundra in the constitutional order of India in dealing with the issue of control of the internet in terms of free speech and privacy and due process over the internet. Indian digital governance history and legal history We give a cursory overview of the history of Indian digital governance (i.e. IT Act 2000) and then discuss constitutional values as they are challenged. We examine applicable statutes and policies (IT Act, the intermediary rules previously, DPDPA 2023 13[14]) and significant Supreme Court jurisprudence (eg Shreya Singhal v.). UOI (2015), Puttaswamy v. UOI (2017), Anuradha Bhasin v. UO10I (2010) ([11]) in an attempt to figure out how courts strike a balance between rights and regulation. We cross-border leverage theory and cross-border education as well, like Lessig’s codelaw (code is law), we have the architecture of the network governs behavior ([2]) or Balkin’s idea of information fiduciaries of social media sites having a duty to safeguard user data ([3]). A reflection on the history of the digital sphere of India is also presented, albeit empirically based (e.g., rise in the number of internet jection4 and the largest number of State-imposed Internet shutdowns7). These comparisons may even in the short-term take the shape: approach in India verses US /EU (e.g. GDPR verses new law on India data 16, Sec 230 verses intermediary rules 17). It has been analyzed that even the Constitution of India, which had been written earlier when digital rights had no context whatsoever has actually been used as a reference to protect the digital rights in fact, but there are perhaps some gaps. The Article predicts that digital governance is an era of internet constitutionalism an implementation of normative principles that offers a check on executive authority in the digital space, but interpreting and filling internet constitutionalism is a continuing project of the Indian legal order.

Keywords Digital constitutionalism; free speech; privacy; Indian Constitution; online governance; IT Act; data protection.

Blog

ASSIGNMENT AND LICENSING UNDER THE INDIAN COPYRIGHT ACT, 1957: A DETAILED RESEARCH STUDY

AUTHOR – ANJALI & TISTA RANJAN

ADVOCATES, AMITY UNIVERSITY PATNA

BEST CITATION – ANJALI & TISTA RANJAN, ASSIGNMENT AND LICENSING UNDER THE INDIAN COPYRIGHT ACT, 1957: A DETAILED RESEARCH STUDY, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 197-201, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344

ABSTRACT

The rapid modernization of creative industries has heightened the importance of effective copyright management systems, specifically assignment and licensing mechanisms. The

Indian Copyright Act, 1957, forms the backbone of India’s copyright framework, governing how creators may transfer or authorize the use of their works. This research article provides an extensive doctrinal and analytical study of assignment and licensing under the Act, discussing statutory provisions, judicial interpretations, technological challenges, comparative international norms, and economic implications. The article also delves into issues that arise with digital dissemination, streaming platforms, AI-generated works, and contractual inequities between creators and commercial entities. Through legal analysis and an evaluation of policy developments, the paper aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the strengths and shortcomings of current copyright transfer mechanisms.

Blog

PATENT PROTECTION AS A CRUCIAL CATALYST FOR INNOVATION IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL SECTOR

AUTHOR – KUMARI VANDANA SINHA & AAKRITI SINHA

STUDENTS AT AMITY UNIVERSITY, PATNA

BEST CITATION – KUMARI VANDANA SINHA & AAKRITI SINHA, PATENT PROTECTION AS A CRUCIAL CATALYST FOR INNOVATION IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL SECTOR, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 182-196, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344

ABSTRACT

Patent protection constitutes one of the most significant legal mechanisms driving pharmaceutical innovation. It provides exclusive rights to inventors, thereby
enabling the recovery of substantial research and development (R&D) investments
in a sector characterized by high costs, regulatory scrutiny, and extended approval
timelines. By ensuring temporary market exclusivity, patent law creates a
framework that incentivizes pharmaceutical companies to engage in continuous
technological advancement and drug discovery.

From a legal standpoint, patent protection embodies the delicate balance between
private rights and public welfare, a principle deeply embedded in intellectual
property jurisprudence. However, the same system that rewards innovation can also
perpetuate monopolistic pricing and limited accessibility to life-saving medicines.

The global harmonization of patent standards through the Agreement on Trade-

Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) has intensified debates on how far patent law should protect commercial interests without undermining the
right to health, recognized under various international human rights instruments.

This paper critically examines the juridical role of patent protection as both an
incentive for innovation and a potential barrier to equitable healthcare. It analyzes
the interpretation of patent rights by courts, the legislative frameworks governing
pharmaceutical patents across jurisdictions, and the policy tools— such as
compulsory licensing, patent pools, and parallel importation— designed to mediate
between exclusivity and accessibility.

Through doctrinal and comparative analysis, the paper argues that while strong
patent protection remains essential for sustaining pharmaceutical progress, the
legal framework must evolve toward a balanced and socially responsive model. A
recalibrated approach— grounded in public interest, transparency, and global
cooperation— is imperative to ensure that the legal protection of innovation
simultaneously upholds the ethical imperatives of justice, equity, and public health.

Keywords – Patent protection; Pharmaceutical innovation; Intellectual property rights, (IPRs); Research and development (R&D); TRIPS Agreement; Market exclusivity; Access to medicines; Compulsory licensing; Right to health; Knowledge-based economy; Public health policy; Innovation incentives; Pharmaceutical patents; Intellectual property law; Global trade regulations.

Blog

THE IMPORTANCE OF COMPARATIVE LAW IN PROMOTING UNIFORMITY IN LEGAL SYSTEMS

AUTHOR – RANA ADITYA PRATAP SINGH, STUDENT AT AMITY UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – RANA ADITYA PRATAP SINGH, THE IMPORTANCE OF COMPARATIVE LAW IN PROMOTING UNIFORMITY IN LEGAL SYSTEMS, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 175-181, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/HIJK2080

ABSTRACT

Comparative law serves as a fundamental tool in promoting uniformity and harmonization across diverse legal systems worldwide. This research paper examines the critical role of comparative law in facilitating legal convergence while respecting cultural and jurisdictional differences. The study explores how comparative legal analysis enables lawmakers, judges, and legal scholars to identify common principles, adopt best practices, and develop model laws that transcend national boundaries. Through systematic examination of different legal traditions and methodologies, comparative law contributes to the standardization of international legal frameworks, particularly in areas such as commercial law, intellectual property, human rights, and international trade. The paper discusses the mechanisms through which comparative law promotes uniformity, including legal transplantation, harmonization initiatives by international organizations, and judicial cross-referencing. It also addresses the challenges inherent in achieving legal uniformity, such as cultural resistance, differences in legal traditions, and national sovereignty concerns. The research concludes that while complete uniformity may neither be achievable nor desirable, comparative law provides essential tools for creating compatible legal systems that facilitate international cooperation, economic integration, and the protection of fundamental rights across borders.

Blog

CORPORATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 AND BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA: AN OVERLAPPING JURISDICTION?

AUTHOR – LEKSHMI KRISHNA, ATHIRARAJ & PRAVEEN KUMAR S

STUDENTS AT CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF TAMILNADU

BEST CITATION – LEKSHMI KRISHNA, ATHIRARAJ & PRAVEEN KUMAR S, CORPORATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 AND BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA: AN OVERLAPPING JURISDICTION?, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 170-174, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Abstract

Corporate criminal liability has become an essential element in modern legal systems, as corporations increasingly exert influence in economic, social and political spheres. In India, the Companies Act, 2013 provides a detailed framework for determining criminal liability for corporate actions. It provides legal liability for violations of law such as fraud, wrongful termination and non-compliance by corporate entities and their officers. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) has now been enacted. It amends the Indian Penal Code, 1860, raising new questions – how corporations are included in the general criminal law. This paper examines the jurisdictional overlap when transferring corporate criminal conduct using the Companies Act and the BNS. Through a doctrinal analysis, the conceptual foundations of corporate liability, several legal frameworks, their specific possibilities, and similar trends from the UK and the USA are also examined.  “The confusion between specific laws and general laws, competition, integration, and duplication exist. This calls for harmonization of enforcement and liability principles, as well as ensuring legal justice and corporate responsibility.”

Keywords: Corporate Criminal Liability, Companies Act, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Overlapping Jurisdiction, Corporate.

Blog

INDIAN COURTS CANNOT APPOINT ARBITRATORS IN FOREIGN-SEATED ARBITRATION: A COMMENTARY ON THE 2025 SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT

AUTHOR – DR.VANDITA CHAHAR, ASST.PROFESSOR AT JAIPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – DR.VANDITA CHAHAR, INDIAN COURTS CANNOT APPOINT ARBITRATORS IN FOREIGN-SEATED ARBITRATION: A COMMENTARY ON THE 2025 SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 163-169, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Case Title:
Balaji Steel Trade v. Fludor Benin S.A. & Ors.

Judges: Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha & Justice Atul S. Chandurkar

Date:21 November 2025

Citation: 2025 INSC 1342

Court: Supreme Court of India

Introduction

In this case, the Supreme Court dismissed a petition filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking the constitution of an arbitral tribunal in India. The petitioner, Balaji Steel Trade, had entered into a Buyer-Seller Agreement (BSA) with Fludor Benin S.A. The BSA and its addendum provided that arbitration would take place in Benin and that Benin law would govern disputes. Subsequent contracts (Sales Contracts and High Sea Sale Agreements) were held to be ancillary and not capable of altering the main dispute-resolution clause in the BSA. The Court reaffirmed its earlier jurisprudence (e.g., in BALCO, Mankastu, BGS SGS SOMA JV, PASL Wind Solutions) that where the parties have deliberately chosen a foreign seat and foreign curial law, Part I of the Indian Arbitration Act (which includes Section 11) does not apply, and hence Indian courts have no jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator.