LIJDLR

Volume III Issue III

JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE UNDER POLITICAL PRESSURE: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF INDIA AND THE UNITED STATES

Volume III Issue III /

JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE UNDER POLITICAL PRESSURE: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF INDIA AND THE UNITED STATES Jyotiranjan Yadav, LLM Student at Lovely Professional University (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.103 Judicial independence is the cornerstone of the overall working. It ensures that the judicial officers deliver judgments free from any external pressure or influence. It forms an essential part of the democracy and governance. It safeguards the fundamental principles of the rule of law. However, political influence has often posed challenges to the autonomy of the judicial working across different jurisdictions. This research paper draws comparison between the framework in India and the United States. It will help in analysing how is the judicial independence is sometimes compromised under political pressure. In both of nation the tenure or term served by any judge is fixed. The aim behind this fixing of tenure is to make institution or judiciary free from executive and legislative pressure. In India, debates surrounding judicial appointments through the collegium system, executive interference, and recent controversies highlight the tension between the judiciary and political branches. On the other hand, in the United States, the politically charged process of judicial appointments, life tenure of Supreme Court judges, and instances of ideological polarization reflects a significant struggle. The paper aims to highlight strengths, weaknesses, and lessons each jurisdiction can draw from the other, reinforcing the need for a robust judiciary capable of maintaining independence amidst growing political contestations. By comparing these two nations, the paper tries to explore how structural safeguards, constitutional principles, and judicial traditions either insulate or expose the judiciary to external interference. The analysis and conclusion aim to contribute to a broader understanding of judicial independence under political pressure and its significance for democratic stability.

JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE UNDER POLITICAL PRESSURE: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF INDIA AND THE UNITED STATES Read More »

THE SCOPE FOR EQUITABLE RELIEFS IN ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS

Volume III Issue III /

THE SCOPE FOR EQUITABLE RELIEFS IN ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS Deepti, BALLB, 7th semester student at MERI Professional and Law Institute (India) Khushi Dubey, BALLB, 7th semester student at MERI Professional and Law Institute (India). Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.102 Arbitration has gone on to become a favourite dispute resolution mechanism that is fast, confidential, and flexible in contrast to the traditional litigation. nevertheless, it is its contractual structure that tends to restrain tribunals to the explicit content of agreements, and does not allow much consideration with regard to fairness. This essay focuses on the increasing trend towards equitable forms of relief (including injunctions, specific performance, rectification and rescission) in arbitration, specifically in the context of international commercial dispute. It relies on the references made to Indian and international practice to emphasise that equity can fall between the inflexible legalities and justice in more complicated dealings. The analysis includes statutory provisions in the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, case law interception of decisions as in the case of Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. NEPC India ltd., and comparative approaches of jurisdiction as in UK, US and Singapore. It also takes into consultation the issue of enforceability, jurisdictional gaps and lack of standardized precedents. After all, the paper concludes that fair remedies ceased being a sideshow; they are gradually becoming legitimate in arbitral practice. They make sure that arbitration is not only a tool of fast resolving a dispute but also it can produce the results that are based on the conscience, fairness, and substance of justice.

THE SCOPE FOR EQUITABLE RELIEFS IN ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS Read More »

THE PHILOSOPHY OF KARMA: EXPLORING THE PARALLELS WITH MODERN LEGAL SYSTEM

Volume III Issue III /

THE PHILOSOPHY OF KARMA: EXPLORING THE PARALLELS WITH MODERN LEGAL SYSTEM Raj Patel, BBA LL.B (H), School of Law, ITM University, Naya Raipur (C.G.), India Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.101 The philosophy of Karma is a universal and timeless concept rooted in ancient Indian traditions, indexing the principles of action, intention, and consequence, which lay the foundation for the justice system. This paper examines the philosophy of Karma as a moral framework of action, intention, and consequence, and explores its parallels with the modern legal justice system. The research aims to examine how the Karmic notion of accountability and impartial justice aligns with constitutional principles, including equality before the law, natural justice, and reformative punishment. Methodologically, the paper adopts a doctrinal approach, relying on primary sources from Vedic literature and judicial decisions, along with secondary commentary from legal scholarship. The study finds that while Karma operates as a universal and moral law of causation, its principles are reflected in the corrective, restorative, and retributive functions of modern legal systems. Case law analysis, including Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, Mohd. Giasuddin v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Brown v. Board of Education demonstrate how courts embody the spirit of karmic justice by ensuring fairness, accountability, and opportunities for redemption. The paper concludes that integrating karmic philosophy into legal discourse can enrich contemporary jurisprudence by aligning law with ethical responsibility and universal values.

THE PHILOSOPHY OF KARMA: EXPLORING THE PARALLELS WITH MODERN LEGAL SYSTEM Read More »

CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL RECOGNITION OF DELIVERY WORKERS: COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVES FROM INDIA AND SPAIN

Volume III Issue III /

CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL RECOGNITION OF DELIVERY WORKERS: COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVES FROM INDIA AND SPAIN Jaskamal Kaur, LL.M. Student, School of Law, Lovely Professional University, Punjab (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.100 Gone were the days when people had to travel a hundred kilometres to buy even small goods or commodities. But in today’s era of technological advancement and digitalisation, life has become much easier. From food items and home essentials to stationery and business materials, everything is made available at our doorstep, and that too with just a click of a button. The expeditious expansion of the gig economy has completely transformed the nature of work, particularly for ‘Delivery Workers’ who operate within platform-based models. This paper critically evaluates how two distinct legal frameworks, that is, India and Spain, address the vulnerabilities faced and safeguard the rights of delivery workers. It highlights Spain’s Constitutional provisions and the decision passed by the Supreme Court in the landmark case of Glovo.[1], which laid the foundation for presuming an employment relationship. In contrast, India’s Constitution, through Articles 21, 39, 41, and 43[2], offers a wide range of socio-economic guarantees. However, gig workers remain outside the ambit of traditional labour laws. They are recognised only as “platform workers” with limited social security benefits. Through comparative socio-legal analysis, this paper identifies challenges that the delivery workers face. It argues that while Spain provides stronger statutory recognition. But still, it struggles for strict enforcement and implementation. Whereas India suffers from partial recognition and weak enforcement. The study concludes by proposing valuable recommendations and suggests that the law should adopt a more sustainable pathway for protecting delivery workers in the ever-evolving digital sphere.

CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL RECOGNITION OF DELIVERY WORKERS: COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVES FROM INDIA AND SPAIN Read More »

SHEELA BARSE V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA: EXPANDING HORIZONS OF PRISONERS’ RIGHTS UNDER ARTICLE 21

Volume III Issue III /

SHEELA BARSE V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA: EXPANDING HORIZONS OF PRISONERS’ RIGHTS UNDER ARTICLE 21 Adv. Akshay Fand, LLM (Criminal Law), Advocate at District and session court Buldhana (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.99 Before D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, the Supreme Court, in the landmark judgment Sheela Barse v. State of Maharashtra, safeguarded the rights of women prisoners and reinforced the mandate of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. While working as a journalist, Sheela Barse sent a letter to the Supreme Court depicting gruesome custodial violence against female inmates. The apex court decision in this case introduced systemic reforms in prison administration and expanded the scope of public interest litigation. The apex court, while dealing with the case, gave directions to form separate lockups for female inmates, provide them with proper medical care, and provide them with proper legal representation with prompt inspections from the concerned magistrate. It shifts state obligations towards the vulnerable groups in custody. The following paper undertakes a doctrinal analysis of the case and introspects its jurisprudential underpinnings and its linkage with Articles 14, 21, and 39A of the Indian Constitution. The landmark decision in this case plays a vital role in shaping the course of justice in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal and Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa. Supreme Court decisions and direction were progressive, but the critical analysis exposed persistent gaps and problems of implementation at the actual ground level. The judgment throws light on the contemporary issue of custodial torture and prison reforms. The apex court judgment is in line with international human rights standards and recent custodial death statistics. This study reaffirms that Sheela Barse is still both a beacon of constitutional morality and a reminder of the incomplete promise of dignified detention in India.

SHEELA BARSE V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA: EXPANDING HORIZONS OF PRISONERS’ RIGHTS UNDER ARTICLE 21 Read More »

MULTILATERAL AND MINILATERAL PERSPECTIVES ON PIRACY AND ARMED ROBBERY AT SEA

Volume III Issue III /

MULTILATERAL AND MINILATERAL PERSPECTIVES ON PIRACY AND ARMED ROBBERY AT SEA Jyothi Sharma, L.M (Pursuing), Lovely Professional University (India). Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.98 Piracy and armed robbery at sea remain persistent threats to international shipping and coastal security. Under international law, piracy is defined in UNCLOS Article 101 as violent acts at sea outside any State’s jurisdiction, whereas “armed robbery against ships” refers to similar crimes within a State’s waters. This paper examines how the global community (multilateral) and regional groups (minilateral) address these crimes, with an emphasis on Indian law and policy. The analysis first outlines the international legal framework (UNCLOS, IMO, UN Security Council resolutions, the Contact Group on Somali piracy) that obliges states to cooperate in suppression of piracy. It then surveys multilateral institutions and operations (UNODC, IMO codes, EU NAVFOR “Atalanta”, NATO Ocean Shield, Combined Task Forces, etc.) that implement counter-piracy measures. Next, it reviews regional/minilateral initiatives: in the Indo-Pacific (the ReCAAP information‐sharing centre in Singapore, the Malacca Straits Coordinated Patrols (MALSINDO), and the Indonesia-Malaysia-Philippines Trilateral Cooperative Arrangement), in the East African/Indian Ocean (Djibouti Code of Conduct 2009, Jeddah Amendment 2017, regional fusion centres), and in West/Central Africa (Yaoundé Code of Conduct 2013, bilateral patrols like Nigeria-Benin “Operation Prosperity”, Gulf of Guinea information-sharing centers). The paper highlights India’s role – noting that until recently Indian courts lacked jurisdiction over pirates beyond 12 NM, which led to the Maritime Anti-Piracy Act, 2022. This law criminalizes piracy on the high seas and extends Indian jurisdiction to the EEZ, aligning domestic law with UNCLOS obligations. The analysis finds that multilateral frameworks provide comprehensive legal norms and broad coordination but often lack enforcement on the ground; minilateral/regional cooperation (e.g. joint patrols, intelligence‐sharing) has been more agile in specific waters. However, gaps remain in capacity and implementation. The paper concludes with recommendations to strengthen information-sharing, harmonize national laws (as India has done), build coastal state capacity, and deepen both global and regional partnerships to suppress maritime crime effectively.

MULTILATERAL AND MINILATERAL PERSPECTIVES ON PIRACY AND ARMED ROBBERY AT SEA Read More »

MISALIGNED MANDATES: HARMONISING SEBI AND FEMA IN INDIA’S EVOLVING CRYPTO ECONOMY

Volume III Issue III /

MISALIGNED MANDATES: HARMONISING SEBI AND FEMA IN INDIA’S EVOLVING CRYPTO ECONOMY Siddharth Pariani, 5th Semester, Student at Symbiosis Law School, Pune (India). Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.97 This article uncovers a profound constitutional tension afflicting India’s burgeoning crypto ecosystem, where the Securities and Exchange Board of India’s 2025 algorithmic trading rules and the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA)’s capital‑control regime converge to impose untenable compliance trilemmas on corporate directors, thereby breaching their fiduciary duties of care. Drawing on never‑before‑published board minutes from penalised exchanges, whistleblower interviews, and Financial Intelligence Unit enforcement data, it demonstrates how this regulatory schizophrenia has driven compliance costs to surge, exacerbated insolvency risks, and chilled cross‑border investment. Through a three‑fold constitutional diagnosis, under Article 14’s intelligible differentia test (State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar), Article 19(1)(g)’s proportionality standard (Indian Medical Association v. Reserve Bank of India), and Article 21’s due process guarantees, the article situates India’s predicament within a global context of regulatory fragmentation, from MiCA to the SEC-CFTC “penalty federalism.” It then prescribes targeted legislative surgery, including clause‑level amendments to FEMA § 2(n) and the creation of a GSTN-inspired compliance portal to automate regulatory harmonisation, offering concrete mechanisms to reconcile investor protection with monetary sovereignty. By bridging corporate governance, constitutional law, and financial regulation, this work provides a definitive roadmap for resolving India’s most urgent business-law conflict.

MISALIGNED MANDATES: HARMONISING SEBI AND FEMA IN INDIA’S EVOLVING CRYPTO ECONOMY Read More »

SHADOW BANKS AND DIRTY MONEY: INVESTIGATING THE USE OF NBFCS IN MONEY LAUNDERING AND FINANCIAL CRIMES

Volume III Issue III /

SHADOW BANKS AND DIRTY MONEY: INVESTIGATING THE USE OF NBFCS IN MONEY LAUNDERING AND FINANCIAL CRIMES Sudiksha Dhungel, B.Com. LL. B (Hons), Institute of Legal Studies and Research, GLA University (India). Suyash Upadhyay, B. Com (Hons), Shri Ram College of Commerce, University of Delhi (India). Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.96 This paper examines how, despite their role in providing access to financial services, Non-Banking Financial Companies (NBFCs) have emerged as significant facilitators of money laundering in India. This is brought on by legal loopholes, lax enforcement of anti-money laundering regulations, and a lack of systemic openness. Using a qualitative doctrinal approach, augmented by a small amount of quantitative data, and by looking at actual instances of high-profile financial crimes like the PMC-HDIL fraud and the Chinese lending app scam, the paper dissects money laundering techniques like shell companies, round-tripping, hawala operations, and fake loans. The regulatory frameworks of banks and NBFCs are thoroughly compared, compliance with RBI and PMLA standards is assessed, and potential regulatory adjustments are delineated. The findings demonstrate that the NBFC sector is now more exposed due to inadequate monitoring, uneven enforcement of KYC/AML regulations, and a lack of agency cooperation. The study is limited, though, in that it only uses secondary sources; field interviews, direct data collecting, and access to internal compliance records are not included. The study comes to the conclusion that until India moves toward centralized risk intelligence and predictive, technology-integrated regulation, NBFCs will remain high-risk facilitators of illicit funding.

SHADOW BANKS AND DIRTY MONEY: INVESTIGATING THE USE OF NBFCS IN MONEY LAUNDERING AND FINANCIAL CRIMES Read More »

THE LEGISLATIVE ENSHRINEMENT OF CONSUMER PROTECTION IN TUNISIA: ANALYSIS OF THE LEGAL FOUNDATIONS AND CONTEMPORARY ADVANCES

Volume III Issue III /

THE LEGISLATIVE ENSHRINEMENT OF CONSUMER PROTECTION IN TUNISIA: ANALYSIS OF THE LEGAL FOUNDATIONS AND CONTEMPORARY ADVANCES Mokili Kiamodja Esther, bachelor’s degree in Private Law, Montplaisir University of Tunis, Tunisia; master’s degree in business and Corporate Law, Central University of Tunis, Tunisia; Assistant on first term at IBTP/Kisangani Bofoe Lokangu Starmans, Doctorate in Economic and Social Law, University of Kisangani Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.95 This article analyses the legislative enshrinement of consumer protection in Tunisia, following the normative and institutional development from 1992 to 2024. The study is based primarily on Law No. 92-117 of 7 December 1992, considered to be the founding text of consumer protection in Tunisia. It then examines the legislative additions that have consolidated it, as well as its recent adaptations to economic and technological developments. The research is based on a multidimensional legal methodology, combining analysis of the legislative and regulatory corpus, examination of Tunisian case law, and critical study of doctrine and institutional reports. It also provides a comparative perspective with international standards, in particular European directives and certain legislation adopted in Mediterranean countries. The results highlight a well-organised legal system that protects fundamental rights such as product safety, the right to information and legal guarantees. This system is also supported by mechanisms for recourse, mediation and sanctions, as well as specialised bodies. In practice, however, its effectiveness is limited by regulatory fragmentation, low consumer awareness and procedural delays. The study concludes that significant progress has been made, while emphasising the need for comprehensive codification of consumer law, strengthening of out-of-court dispute resolution mechanisms, development of consumer legal education, and continuous adaptation of legislation to new challenges, such as cross-border disputes and the repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic. These recommendations aim to ensure more effective, equitable and sustainable protection for Tunisian consumers in a constantly changing market environment.

THE LEGISLATIVE ENSHRINEMENT OF CONSUMER PROTECTION IN TUNISIA: ANALYSIS OF THE LEGAL FOUNDATIONS AND CONTEMPORARY ADVANCES Read More »

FEDERALISM IN FLUX: A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE UNION’S LEGISLATIVE DOMINANCE IN CONCURRENT LIST SUBJECTS

Volume III Issue III /

FEDERALISM IN FLUX: A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE UNION’S LEGISLATIVE DOMINANCE IN CONCURRENT LIST SUBJECTS Vishal Anand, 2nd Year, Research Scholar at Department of Law, Patna University, Patna (India). Pooja Kumari, Post-graduate in Law (LL.M.) from Chanakya National Law University, Patna (India). Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.94 Indian federalism, often described as ‘quasi-federal’ or ‘asymmetrical’, is characterized by a constitutional framework that leans towards the Union. A primary instrument of this centralizing tendency is the Concurrent List (List III) of the Seventh Schedule, which delineates subjects where both the Union and the States may legislate. This article critically assesses the functioning of legislative concurrency in India. It argues that the Concurrent List, originally envisioned as a domain for cooperative federalism and legislative harmonisation, has progressively become a mechanism for the Union to assert its legislative dominance, thereby eroding state autonomy. Through an analysis of the constitutional provisions, particularly Article 254, and its judicial interpretation, the article traces the evolution of the doctrine of repugnancy. It contends that the Union’s expansive interpretation of its powers, coupled with a judiciary that has often deferred to Parliament’s legislative intent, has tilted the federal balance significantly. The article examines specific case studies in agriculture, education, electricity, and criminal law to demonstrate how recent Union legislation has encroached upon domains traditionally managed by the states. This trend signifies a shift from cooperative to coercive federalism, raising profound concerns about the viability of India’s pluralistic governance structure. The article concludes by arguing that restoring federal balance requires specific interventions, including empowering the Inter-State Council to mediate legislative disputes, establishing a formal, non-negotiable process for state consent on key concurrent laws, and adopting a judicial review standard that presumes the validity of state autonomy, thereby ensuring the Concurrent List functions as a site of cooperation, not coercion.

FEDERALISM IN FLUX: A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE UNION’S LEGISLATIVE DOMINANCE IN CONCURRENT LIST SUBJECTS Read More »