Category: Volume 5 and Issue 13 of 2025

THE ROLE OF FORENSIC EXPERTS IN PROVIDING TESTIMONY IN TOOL MARK AND TRACK EVIDENCE IN INDIA

AUTHOR – MAHALAKSHMI V, STUDENT AT TAMIL NADU DR. AMBEDKAR LAW UNIVERSITY, SCHOOL OF EXCELLENCE IN LAW

BEST CITATION – MAHALAKSHMI V, THE ROLE OF FORENSIC EXPERTS IN PROVIDING TESTIMONY IN TOOL MARK AND TRACK EVIDENCE IN INDIA, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 314-326, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Chapter – I

Introduction and Research Design

1.1. Introduction to Tool Mark and Track Evidence

Tool mark and track evidence belong to the category of physical and trace evidence. Tool marks are typically classified as either impression marks (created when a tool is pressed into a softer surface) or striation marks (created when a tool slides or scrapes across a surface). Track evidence, particularly footwear and tire impressions, similarly captures the unique physical details of the object that created the impression.^[1] The underlying scientific justification for their use is rooted in the core tenets of forensic science: Locard’s Exchange Principle and the Principle of Individuality.^[2] The expert’s task is to analyse these marks, determine their origin, and link them to a specific known tool or object, thereby providing objective scientific data to aid the court in establishing facts.^[3]

---

[1] R. Menon, Trace Evidence: A Guide for Investigators (Global Press 2015).

[2] Edmond Locard, L’Enquête Criminelle et les Méthodes Scientifiques (Ernest Flammarion 1920) (foundational exchange principle), available at https://criminocorpus.org/fr/ref/113/2555/ (last accessed Nov. 28, 2025).

[3] V. P. Singh, Delays in Forensic Reporting: A Barrier to Timely Justice in India, 8 Nat’l J. Forensic Sci. 45, 45-58 (2019).

EXPLORING ACCESS TO JUSTICE THROUGH THE FUNCTIONING OF LEGAL AID SERVICES AUTHORITIES IN INDIA

AUTHOR – ANUJ WANKHADE, RESEARCH SCHOLAR AT VISHWAKARMA UNIVERSITY, PUNE

BEST CITATION – ANUJ WANKHADE, EXPLORING ACCESS TO JUSTICE THROUGH THE FUNCTIONING OF LEGAL AID SERVICES AUTHORITIES IN INDIA, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 298-313, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/YLFM5109

Abstract

Access to justice, recognised as a fundamental human right and guaranteed under Articles 14, 21, and 39A of the Constitution of India, is key to maintaining a democratic and rule-based society. However, India continues to face significant challenges in providing equitable access to its legal system for a population exceeding 1.21 billion. NJDG records show nearly 44.7 million pending cases before District and Taluka courts, indicating that only about four per cent of the population interacts with the justice system at any time. Socio-economic barriers, low legal awareness, high litigation costs, and poor quality of legal representation remain critical obstacles preventing marginalised and vulnerable groups from receiving timely and effective remedies. The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, aims to fill these gaps by creating a multi-level network of legal aid institutions at the national, state, district, and taluka levels. Through mechanisms such as Lok Adalats and specialised programs for disaster victims, human trafficking survivors, acid attack victims, undertrial prisoners, senior citizens, and women, the Act encourages accessible and affordable justice. Judicial recognition, notably in Anita Kushwaha v. Pushpa Sudan (2016), further reinforces the constitutional obligation of access to justice. Despite these efforts, numerous challenges, geographical barriers, bureaucratic delays, socio-economic disadvantages, low legal literacy, and inconsistent quality of legal aid continue to impede effective implementation. This research investigates the functioning, impact, and limitations of legal aid authorities in India, assesses their capacity to realise the goal of “Access to Justice for All,” and suggests reforms to strengthen the legal aid system.

Keywords: Access to Justice, Human Rights, Constitution of India, Legal Services Authorities Act, Lok Adalats, Human Trafficking, Undertrial Prisoners

DISCHARGE OF SURETY

AUTHOR – CHANAKYA DESAI, STUDENT AT SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL, NOIDA SIU

BEST CITATION – CHANAKYA DESAI, DISCHARGE OF SURETY, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 293-297, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

INTRODUCTION

Contract of indemnity and contract of guarantee, both are specific contracts and motive of these both is to protect the plaintiff or any other person from loss. In indemnity, indemnifier himself or any third party will recover the loss there is no obligations; but in guarantee, surety should had obligations to recover loss. The main function in the guarantee is to recover the loss or payment of debt etc; will be paid by surety to the creditor, which should have been given by principal debtor. This duty of the surety can also be discharged. Discharge of the surety means discharging of the surety from his obligations, when by any variance made without the surety consent, in terms of the contract between principal debtor and the creditor. Not only that but there are many other ways to discharge the surety which is mentioned in Indian contract act, 1872 from section 133 – 139.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND AUTHORSHIP: RETHINKING COPYRIGHT LAW IN INDIA

AUTHOR – DIKSHA KUMARI & SUDHANSHU KUMAR

STUDENTS AT AMITY UNIVERSITY, PATNA

BEST CITATION – DIKSHA KUMARI & SUDHANSHU KUMAR, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND AUTHORSHIP: RETHINKING COPYRIGHT LAW IN INDIA, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 282-292, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

The rapid evolution of Artificial Intelligence (AI), especially generative AI systems capable of producing literature, music, art, and software code, has fundamentally challenged traditional copyright norms premised on human creativity and original expression. The Indian Copyright Act, 1957, drafted in a pre-algorithmic era, presupposes the existence of a human author as the source of intellectual labour and creativity. With AI now autonomously generating complex works, the Indian copyright regime faces a doctrinal vacuum regarding the status of such works and the attribution of authorship. This article examines whether AI can or should be considered an author within the meaning of Section 2(d) of the Act, drawing upon comparative jurisprudence from the United States, United Kingdom, European Union, and Australia. It discusses foundational concepts of originality, fixation, human authorship, and the incentive theory underpinning copyright law. The article critically evaluates the limited Indian jurisprudence and the brief recognition (and subsequent withdrawal) of an AI system as a copyright author by the Indian Copyright Office. It further explores the competing models of ownership, including programmer-centric, user-centric, corporate-centric, and public-domain approaches, and their policy implications. Finally, it proposes a structured framework for legislative reform, advocating for a hybrid model that recognises the human role in AI-generated works while preventing over-monopolisation of creative outputs. The study concludes that India must modernise its copyright framework by acknowledging AI’s growing role in creative production while preserving the foundational values of authorship, originality, and public interest.

DEVELOPMENT OF SUI GENERIS SYSTEMS IN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW

AUTHOR – WAQUI ANWAR &JAYESH KUMAR

STUDENTS AT AMITY UNIVERSITY, PATNA

BEST CITATION – WAQUI ANWAR &JAYESH KUMAR, DEVELOPMENT OF SUI GENERIS SYSTEMS IN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 274-277, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Abstract

Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) have evolved from a traditional framework of patents, copyrights, trademarks, and industrial designs to include a spectrum of rights recognized through sui generis protections. The term sui generis, meaning “of its own kind”, refers to legal mechanisms designed specifically to safeguard subject matters that do not fit neatly within the contours of classical IPR regimes. The proliferation of new technologies, the recognition of indigenous knowledge, biodiversity concerns, plant varieties, semiconductor chips, and databases have necessitated specialized legal structures. This research paper examines the conceptual foundation and historical development of sui generis systems, their necessity in modern intellectual property discourse, and their interaction with global norms, especially under the TRIPS Agreement. The paper explores the evolution of sui generis protection mechanisms in multiple domains, evaluates their strengths and limitations, and analyses how diverse jurisdictions—including India, the United States, and the European Union—have crafted distinct approaches. It further highlights contemporary debates around data governance, artificial intelligence innovations, bio-digital genetic resources, and the challenges of harmonization. Ultimately, the paper demonstrates that sui generis systems reflect the dynamism of intellectual property law and serve as a crucial bridge between traditional legal instruments and emerging socio-economic realities

SMART CONTRACTS & LEGAL VALIDITY IN INDIA:   A TICKING TIME BOMB FOR TRADITIONAL AGREEMENTS!

AUTHOR- YUVRAJ SINGH* & ANISHA SHAIKH**

* STUDENT AT BHARATI VIDYAPEETH (DEEMED TO BE UNIVERSITY) NEW LAW COLLEGE, PUNE

** PROFESSOR AT BHARATI VIDYAPEETH (DEEMED TO BE UNIVERSITY) NEW LAW COLLEGE, PUNE

BEST CITATION – YUVRAJ SINGH & ANISHA SHAIKH, SMART CONTRACTS & LEGAL VALIDITY IN INDIA:   A TICKING TIME BOMB FOR TRADITIONAL AGREEMENTS!, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 257-262, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/EVYM9839

Abstract

The arrival of contracts which are smart has brought a pattern shift in the way agreements are carried off in terms of their performance as well as their implementation. Basically, the smart contracts run on a block chain type of codes, which means that they can also be called as a self-executing contracts because they emerge up with promising features of being efficient, transparent, and most importantly they reduce the dependency on intermediaries. However, in India there are certain growing issues in terms of the adoption of such smart contracts leading to legal and regulatory questions arising.

Now, obviously when smart contracts come up with such efficient automated code driven contracts so talking about the traditional agreements which are long governed by well-established legal framework, definitely may face certain challenges in terms of their interpretation, enforceability and also the comparison with the contracts which are smart. This article focuses and explores the legal validity of smart contracts in India, also diving deep and examining their true potential to break the common practices of traditional agreements and try to fill up the regulatory gaps that exist. Now, by analyzing the current legal scenario and expected future challenges, it aims to provide awareness into whether smart contracts are truly a revolutionary tool or a ticking time bomb for the traditional agreements.

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

THE INTERNATIONAL TREATIES & CONVENTION IN RELATION WITH TRADEMARKS

AUTHOR- ATIYA SHAINA, AMITY LAW SCHOOL, AMITY UNIVERSITY, PATNA

BEST CITATION – ATIYA SHAINA, THE INTERNATIONAL TREATIES & CONVENTION IN RELATION WITH TRADEMARKS, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 63-66, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

This work investigates the evolution, scope, and impact of the major international conventions and treaties governing trademarks in the context of globalization, dynamic trade practices, and intellectual property law harmonization. The research highlights how the expansion of cross-border commerce and information technology has necessitated the development of an extensive international legal framework for trademark protection. Beginning with bilateral arrangements, the historical trajectory of trademark law quickly shifted towards comprehensive multilateral agreements to ensure uniformity and procedural efficiency.

Central to the study are foundational treaties such as the Paris Convention of 1883, which introduced principles of national treatment, right of priority, and independence of trademark rights among member states. The Madrid Agreement (1891) and Madrid Protocol (1989) revolutionized trademark registration, enabling owners to secure protection in more than one hundred countries through a unified application system administered by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). The Nice Agreement (1957) and Vienna Agreement (1973) standardized the classification of goods, services, and figurative elements, paving the way for more consistent international filings. The Nairobi Treaty (1981), the Trademark Law Treaty (1994), and the Singapore Treaty (2006) further harmonized legal standards, registration, and renewal procedures, reducing administrative complexity for international applicants.

Significantly, the study explores the role of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) under the World Trade Organization (WTO), which binds member states to minimum standards of trademark protection and robust enforcement mechanisms. The research also analyses India’s progression in adapting its domestic law to comply with international conventions, particularly since becoming a party to the Madrid Protocol and TRIPS Agreement.

Drawing on primary sources, treaty texts, and recent academic commentary, this work concludes that international conventions and treaties have meaningfully advanced the protection, registration, and enforcement of trademarks. They have fostered economic growth, innovation, and consumer trust by establishing consistent legal frameworks adaptable to changing market realities. Nevertheless, challenges remain in practical enforcement and in harmonizing standards across diverse jurisdictions. The findings underscore the continuing necessity of cooperative international legal frameworks as commerce becomes increasingly global and digital.[1][2][3][4][5]

Keywords- International,” “Intellectual,” “Property,” “Rights,” “Country,” “Protection,” “Jurisdiction,” and “Law”.

“EVOLUTION OF THE INTERNATIONAL PATENT SYSTEM”

AUTHOR – FAHAD ALAM, AMITY LAW SCHOOL, AMITY UNIVERSITY, PATNA

BEST CITATION – FAHAD ALAM, “EVOLUTION OF THE INTERNATIONAL PATENT SYSTEM”, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 72-75, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

The evolution of the international patent system has been a complex and multifaceted process, shaped by technological advances, economic imperatives, and political conflicts since the late nineteenth century. Initially emerging during the industrial revolution in Europe, the patent system was born out of a surge in inventive activity but was not directly aligned with economic development or innovation. In fact, during the mid-nineteenth century, opposition to patents grew in response to concerns about monopolies stifling national economies and international trade. For instance, the Netherlands abolished its patent system in 1869, only to reintroduce it decades later, while other European nations adopted protectionist laws disadvantageous to foreign competition.

Early patent grants, such as those in Renaissance Italy and the Venetian Patent Act of 1474, primarily honoured inventors rather than conferring exclusive economic rights. The Statute of Monopolies (1623) in England marked a shift, laying the foundation for modern patent law by recognizing inventors’ rights primarily for the benefit of society rather than the individual. By the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the system spread to continental Europe, the United States, and Latin America, each adapting patent laws to promote local industries and industrialization.

A significant turning point came with the increased internationalization of trade and innovation in the late nineteenth century. Despite widespread adoption, the “patent controversy” of this era revealed tensions between expanding inventors’ rights and fears of monopolistic abuses. This controversy influenced international efforts, culminating in the Paris Convention of 1883, which established essential principles- national treatment, right of priority, and working requirements—each designed to harmonize and facilitate global patent protection.

Throughout the twentieth century, a series of revision conferences refined the system, gradually shifting focus from local working and revocation towards compulsory licensing, and ultimately reducing the regulatory autonomy of less developed countries. These changes increasingly favored the interests of industrialized nations, particularly with the advent of global agreements like TRIPS. Overall, the development of the international patent system has reflected a recurring struggle between rewarding individual innovation, advancing societal interests, and balancing disparities between developed and developing nations.

Keywords- Patent, Monopoly, Innovation, Compulsory Licensing, Industrial Revolution.

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ILO CONVENTIONS VS. NATIONAL OSH LAWS: GAPS AND IMPLEMENTATION CHALLENGES

AUTHOR – AMIT RANAWAT, STUDENT AT CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF TAMIL NADU

BEST CITATION – AMIT RANAWAT, COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ILO CONVENTIONS VS. NATIONAL OSH LAWS: GAPS AND IMPLEMENTATION CHALLENGES, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 67-71, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Abstract

The International Labour Organization (ILO) has promulgated key conventions to provide a global standard for occupational safety and health (OSH), notably Convention No. 155 (Occupational Safety and Health, 1981) and Convention No. 187 (Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health, 2006). This paper presents a comparative analysis of these ILO conventions and national OSH laws across selected countries, highlighting gaps between the international normative framework and domestic legislation, as well as implementation challenges. Drawing on the ILO LEGOSH database, national legal texts, and published literature, the study employs a qualitative gap analysis methodology. Findings reveal significant divergence in ratification, policy adoption, inspection systems, and preventive culture. Key obstacles include limited ratification, resource constraints, weak tripartite governance, insufficient enforcement, and lack of alignment with ILO’s fundamental principles. The paper discusses how these gaps hinder effective OSH governance, and offers recommendations for strengthening national frameworks a crucial step toward achieving safer work environments worldwide.

Keywords: ILO; Convention 155; Convention 187; Occupational Safety and Health; national OSH laws; implementation gaps; legal alignment