LIJDLR

Volume III Issue III

BIOTECHNOLOGY AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN INDIA: LEGAL FRAMEWORK, CHALLENGES AND EMERGING JURISPRUDENCE

Volume III Issue III /

BIOTECHNOLOGY AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN INDIA: LEGAL FRAMEWORK, CHALLENGES AND EMERGING JURISPRUDENCE Anandhi A, LLM(IPR), Government law college, Trichy (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.107 This article examines the evolving relationship between biotechnology and intellectual property rights (IPRs) in India, highlighting legal, ethical, and global perspectives. It traces the development of Indian patent law from the exclusion of living organisms to the recognition of biotechnological inventions, shaped significantly by cases like Dimminaco AG v. Controller of Patents and amendments aligning with the TRIPS Agreement. The study explores patent eligibility criteria under the Patents Act, 1970, with emphasis on exclusions under Section 3, and the challenges of proving novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability in biotechnology. It compares approaches in the United States, European Union, and India, analyzing judicial interpretations and ethical frameworks concerning patents on microorganisms, plants, animals, and human genetic material. While U.S. and European systems adopt broader protection, India maintains stricter exclusions influenced by cultural and moral values. The article also discusses emerging issues such as gene editing, AI-driven biotechnology, green biomanufacturing, and personalized medicine, underlining their legal and ethical implications. It concludes that while biotechnology patents are essential for innovation and societal benefit, they must coexist with ethical safeguards and balanced regulation to ensure progress without compromising human dignity, environmental sustainability, or traditional values.

BIOTECHNOLOGY AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN INDIA: LEGAL FRAMEWORK, CHALLENGES AND EMERGING JURISPRUDENCE Read More »

JUSTICE BEHIND BARS: A CRITICAL STUDY ON CUSTODIAL DEATHS AND THE CRISIS OF TRANSPARENCY IN INDIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT

Volume III Issue III /

JUSTICE BEHIND BARS: A CRITICAL STUDY ON CUSTODIAL DEATHS AND THE CRISIS OF TRANSPARENCY IN INDIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT Sonal Singh, 3rd Year, BA.LLB, Student at Asian Law College, Noida (India) Devishi Madaan, 3rd Year, BA.LLB, Student at Asian Law College, Noida (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.106 “Custodial deaths” are one the most serious human rights problems in India, showing a very thin line between state power and constitutional respect. Despite having many legal safeguards, judicial pronouncements, and international obligations, the happening of deaths in police and judicial custody shows that there is a failure in our system. This research paper will investigate the crisis of transparency that surrounds custodial deaths, exploring how institutional secrecy, poor enforcement, and cultures of impunity undermines the constitutional guarantee of Article 21. Through the judicial interpretation from Nilabati Behera to D.K. Basu and many other cases, the analysis underscores the evolving jurisprudence that transformed compensation, and procedural safeguards into enforceable rights. The paper further demonstrates India’s reluctance to adopt the UN Convention Against Torture within the larger contradiction of constitutional guarantee without legislative commitment. The analysis emphasizes the structural flaws like overcrowded prisons, poor medical treatment, skewed investigations, and disproportionate targeting of marginalized groups which exacerbate the problem even more. While there are several protocols and reliefs has prescribed by the National Human Rights Commission but its limited mandate and reliance on state authorities often undermine its accountability to monetary compensation than deterrence. In respond to these enduring gaps, the article calls for an integrated reform agenda, passing a specific anti-torture law, enhancing independent oversight, responsibly utilizing technology, guaranteeing medical transparency, and prioritizing victims’ rights. Justice behind bars, thus, is not just about averting fatalities but about upholding the State’s constitutional duty to maintain dignity, transparency, and faith in the rule of law.

JUSTICE BEHIND BARS: A CRITICAL STUDY ON CUSTODIAL DEATHS AND THE CRISIS OF TRANSPARENCY IN INDIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT Read More »

RIGHT TO WORK OF PERSONS WITH LOCOMOTOR DISABILITIES IN INDIA: A LEGAL ANALYSIS

Volume III Issue III /

RIGHT TO WORK OF PERSONS WITH LOCOMOTOR DISABILITIES IN INDIA: A LEGAL ANALYSIS Akanksha Singh, LL.M (Criminology and Criminal Law) (Postgraduate), Department of Law, Tezpur University, India Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.105 In the world more than one billion people are disabled. One of the main goals is that the disability rights movement is to give this group of people equal access to jobs and education. The development of human rights can be traced back from the 441 BC Sophocles play “Antigone” until the 1948 AD to Universal Declaration of Human Rights. On December 9, 1975, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Rights of Disabled Persons which marked the beginning of the campaign to safeguard the rights of disabled people. Due to the lack of jurisprudence on this topic, the obstacles to accomplishing this are worsening in underdeveloped countries. The most prominent of these obstacles is the definition of disability that is used in different jurisdictions which frequently emphasizes the medical model of disability above the social model. In India, one significant piece of legislation that attempts to advance and defend the rights of people with disabilities. The Act aims to give people with disabilities a thorough framework for mainstreaming and inclusion in society, guaranteeing their equal access to opportunities and participation, right to reasonable accommodation. There are different types of disabilities which are present in today’s context this paper focuses on conceptualizing the concept of locomotor disabilities. The main cause of locomotor disabilities is stress. Moreover, the paper includes both International and Indian framework for recognition of these disabilities. Lastly, it concludes by offering suggestions for strengthening the legal framework and promoting inclusive employment practices which can contribute to the ongoing discourse on disability rights and inclusive employment in India.

RIGHT TO WORK OF PERSONS WITH LOCOMOTOR DISABILITIES IN INDIA: A LEGAL ANALYSIS Read More »

DIVINE INTERVENTIONS OR DENIED CARE: EXAMINING THE LEGAL AND HEALTH IMPLICATIONS OF PSYCHOTIC DISORDERS TREATED THROUGH SUPERNATURAL MEANS IN INDIA

Volume III Issue III /

DIVINE INTERVENTIONS OR DENIED CARE: EXAMINING THE LEGAL AND HEALTH IMPLICATIONS OF PSYCHOTIC DISORDERS TREATED THROUGH SUPERNATURAL MEANS IN INDIA Vaishali Gupta, PhD Research Scholar, Amity Law School, Amity University Uttar Pradesh (India) Dr. Bhavna Batra, Associate Professor, Amity Law School, Amity University Uttar Pradesh (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.104 “The right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution includes the right to live with human dignity and the right to health. Denial of medical care, whether through neglecor misguided interventions, is a violation of this sacred right.” — Justice P. N. Bhagwati, Indian Supreme Court. Psychotic disorders, including schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorders, require timely and evidence-based psychiatric intervention to prevent deterioration of mental health and protect patients’ well-being. In India, however, families frequently forgo medical treatment in favor of faith-based or supernatural interventions, such as divine healing practices or rituals performed by godmen. This research investigates the consequences of such practices, emphasizing the intersection of mental health, legal rights, and socio-cultural beliefs. Individuals who are subjected to these interventions frequently experience secondary trauma, delayed recovery, and worsening symptoms, which effectively render them victims of systemic neglect. The study underscores that the right to health, dignity, and timely treatment are all fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, and that the substitution of medical care with supernatural remedies is a violation of these rights. The paper employs a doctrinal methodology, examining primary sources such as constitutional provisions, mental health statutes, and judicial precedents, as well as secondary literature, including scholarly articles, reports, and case studies on cultural practices and mental health. The research examines the extent to which traditional beliefs and family-led supernatural “treatments” conflict with medical ethics and legal protections, and evaluates the effectiveness of current laws in protecting patients’ rights. Comparative insights from international jurisdictions illustrate the most effective methods for balancing clinical care, legal accountability, and cultural sensitivity. The results emphasize the pressing necessity for legal reforms, policy interventions, and community awareness programs that guarantee that psychiatric care is culturally informed, accessible, and respectful of human rights. The study advocates for an integrated approach that integrates legal safeguards, mental health services, and ethical family intervention strategies by representing patients as victims of both mental illness and societal misconceptions. The objective of this framework is to safeguard the health and rights of patients while simultaneously addressing cultural practices that inadvertently perpetuate harm. 

DIVINE INTERVENTIONS OR DENIED CARE: EXAMINING THE LEGAL AND HEALTH IMPLICATIONS OF PSYCHOTIC DISORDERS TREATED THROUGH SUPERNATURAL MEANS IN INDIA Read More »

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 »