LIJDLR

Volume III Issue IV

SOVEREIGNTY AND RIGHTS: CHALLENGES OF DIGITAL CONSTITUTIONALISM FOR INDIA IN THE AGE OF GLOBAL INTERNET GOVERNANCE, WITH COMPARATIVE INSIGHTS FROM FRANCE

Volume III Issue IV /

SOVEREIGNTY AND RIGHTS: CHALLENGES OF DIGITAL CONSTITUTIONALISM FOR INDIA IN THE AGE OF GLOBAL INTERNET GOVERNANCE, WITH COMPARATIVE INSIGHTS FROM FRANCE Rushikesh Suresh Belagali, Student of LLM (IP) At Amity Law school, Amity University, Noida, Uttar Pradesh (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.156 The conflict between constitutional rights and national sovereignty has escalated due to the rise of global internet governance, posing serious concerns for India’s digital future. Transnational platforms, data flows, and algorithmic regulation present issues for India’s constitutional structure, which is based on democratic principles. On the one hand, the state uses policies like data localization, platform responsibility, and content restriction to try and establish digital sovereignty. On the other hand, it is required by the constitution to defend fundamental rights like equality, free speech, and privacy in a digital world that is becoming more and more influenced by private actors and international norms. This dual goal highlights the vulnerability of India’s digital constitutionalism, where rights-based strategies seem to undermine state authority while sovereignty-driven policies run the risk of restricting rights. A comparative perspective on France provides insightful information. The European Union’s French constitutional tradition serves as an example of how supranational government and rights protection can coexist. France strikes a balance between national authority and the enforcement of collective rights through independent regulators, constitutional courts, and EU-level structures. This comparison highlights the need for institutional innovation in India. In order to achieve a hybrid paradigm of digital constitutionalism, the study contends that India must transcend the dichotomy of sovereignty vs rights. A model like this would safeguard cultural and political sovereignty, uphold democratic principles online, and position India as a global leader in fair, rights‑based internet governance. The increasing complexity of global digital governance demands that India navigate both international pressures and domestic constitutional guarantees. As global internet frameworks continue to evolve, India’s digital constitutionalism faces a critical crossroad: balancing national interests with global standards. India’s approach must embrace technological innovation while ensuring fundamental rights are not compromised in the pursuit of sovereignty. The challenge lies in crafting policies that respect both state autonomy and the protection of individual freedoms in an interconnected world.

SOVEREIGNTY AND RIGHTS: CHALLENGES OF DIGITAL CONSTITUTIONALISM FOR INDIA IN THE AGE OF GLOBAL INTERNET GOVERNANCE, WITH COMPARATIVE INSIGHTS FROM FRANCE Read More »

AN ANALYSIS OF GUARDIAN OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS FOR STREET VENDORS OF DELHI

Volume III Issue IV /

AN ANALYSIS OF GUARDIAN OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS FOR STREET VENDORS OF DELHI Pralika Chakraborty, LLM (IP)/ 1st Year/ 1st semester Amity Law School, Amity University Uttar Pradesh, Noida (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.155 In India’s urban economy, street vendors play a crucial role by providing reasonably priced items and services that sustain millions of people’s livelihoods.  Despite the Supreme Court’s and Parliament’s recognition of the constitutional value of the right to livelihood and the subsequent enactment of a statutory system (the Street Vendors Act, 2014), it is still difficult to put protections into practice, particularly in crowded cities like Delhi.  This study looks at how Delhi’s street vendors’ fundamental rights are “guarded” by law and jurisprudence, evaluates the institutional arrangements made (Town Vending Committees, vending surveys, vending certificates, hawking zones), finds policy and enforcement gaps, and makes comparative and useful suggestions to improve vendors’ protection and dignity. Statutes, Supreme Court precedent, Delhi regulations and plans, empirical research, official policy documents, and secondary literature are all used in the analysis. In addition to the statutory framework, various judicial precedents, particularly the Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation case, have further entrenched the recognition of the right to livelihood under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. This case highlighted the importance of ensuring that no individual is deprived of their livelihood without following a fair and just process, a principle that laid the groundwork for the legislative measures that followed. These legal foundations form the basis for the Street Vendors Act, which sought to regulate street vending and provide street vendors with legal recognition and protection. Despite these advancements, challenges remain in their application, especially in cities like Delhi, where urban congestion, competing interests, and bureaucratic inefficiencies complicate the enforcement of these protections. The presence of informal sectors, which often operate outside the bounds of formal city planning, further exacerbates the struggle for vendors to claim their legal entitlements. This paper seeks to explore how these gaps in legal implementation manifest on the ground and assesses the extent to which Delhi’s governance structures are aligned with the legislative intent behind the Street Vendors Act. Moreover, it aims to offer actionable recommendations to bridge these gaps by leveraging comparative insights from other Indian cities and international examples. Through this, the study aims to provide a holistic view of the regulatory framework and the real-world hurdles faced by street vendors.

AN ANALYSIS OF GUARDIAN OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS FOR STREET VENDORS OF DELHI Read More »

IMPRESSIONS TO ALGORITHMS: EVALUATING DEEP LEARNING METHODS FOR TOOLMARK MATCHING AND SOURCE ATTRIBUTION

Volume III Issue IV /

IMPRESSIONS TO ALGORITHMS: EVALUATING DEEP LEARNING METHODS FOR TOOLMARK MATCHING AND SOURCE ATTRIBUTION Sakthi Priyadharshini. K, 2nd Year LL.M (Crime and Forensic law), The Tamilnadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, The School of Excellence in Law, Chennai (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.154 Forensic science has historically relied heavily on tool mark analysis, which links tools to trace evidence by examining impression imprints. However, traditional methods continue to rely on examiner-driven visual comparison, which raises ongoing questions about reproducibility, transparency, and the validity of evidence in court. New advances in computer vision and deep learning are changing this field by providing unbiased, data-driven methods for source identification and tool mark categorization. With a focus on convolutional and contrastive architectures, this study explores the potential of advanced neural network models for automated similarity evaluation, classification, and likelihood ratio estimation in forensic tool mark evidence. The investigation demonstrates that multivariate neural networks routinely outperform conventional correlation-based and statistical approaches, producing higher accuracy and lower error rates, using carefully selected datasets of consecutively made tools and fired cartridge cases. Extensive data augmentation and interpretability frameworks minimize key technical issues, such as feature extraction under varying angles and substrates and dataset restrictions. According to benchmarking data, deep learning significantly improves the ability to distinguish between impressions from the same source and those from distinct sources, achieving over 95% sensitivity and specificity. Beyond performance, the study outlines paths for digital traceability and explainable AI integration, emphasizing the significance of algorithmic transparency, validation standards, and trial admissibility. The results provide useful suggestions for forensic professionals, legislators, and developers, advancing the transition from subjective examiner assessments to repeatable, algorithm-driven attribution. In the end, this work establishes the foundation for tool mark analysis in contemporary forensic practice that is more dependable, systematic, and legally defendable.

IMPRESSIONS TO ALGORITHMS: EVALUATING DEEP LEARNING METHODS FOR TOOLMARK MATCHING AND SOURCE ATTRIBUTION Read More »

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TRADITIONAL AND MODERN TECHNIQUES IN TOOLMARKS: A FORENSIC SCIENCE PERSPECTIVE

Volume III Issue IV /

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TRADITIONAL AND MODERN TECHNIQUES IN TOOLMARKS: A FORENSIC SCIENCE PERSPECTIVE Aswathy N C, LLM, Crime and Forensic Law, The Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University, School of Excellence in Law, Chennai (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.153 Toolmark examination has been a mainstay of forensic research for more than a century, developing from simple visual inspection methods to sophisticated, technologically assisted analytical procedures. This study offers a thorough comparative analysis of both conventional and contemporary methods for toolmark identification, highlighting their practical usefulness in contemporary forensic investigations, methodological underpinnings, accuracy parameters, and inherent difficulties. Modern analytical techniques include advanced imaging technologies, 3D surface analysis, statistical modeling, and automated comparison systems to improve objectivity and reproducibility, whereas traditional methods mostly rely on the examiner’s skill and visual comparison using microscopes. The study emphasizes that rather than substituting one for the other, the most dependable results in forensic toolmark analysis come from combining traditional knowledge with contemporary technology developments. By strengthening accuracy, efficiency, and judicial dependability, this hybrid approach creates a more scientifically sound foundation for forensic toolmark analysis in the twenty-first century.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TRADITIONAL AND MODERN TECHNIQUES IN TOOLMARKS: A FORENSIC SCIENCE PERSPECTIVE Read More »

ROLE OF TOOLMARK EVIDENCE IN LINKING SUSPECTS TO CRIME SCENE

Volume III Issue IV /

ROLE OF TOOLMARK EVIDENCE IN LINKING SUSPECTS TO CRIME SCENE Lavael Selsiya A, The Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University, School of Excellence in Law, Chennai (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.152 This paper examines the forensic significance of toolmark evidence in establishing definitive physical links between perpetrators, their instruments, and criminal acts. Toolmarks classified as striations or impressions are created when a tool’s working surface alters a softer material, such as during a forced entry, wire cutting, or firearm discharge. The central principle of toolmark analysis is individualization: microscopic manufacturing defects and subsequent wear patterns on a tool create a unique, reproducible “toolmark signature.” Forensic examiners apply comparison microscopy to precisely analyze and compare the unique features found on the evidence mark (from the crime scene) with test marks generated by a suspect’s recovered tool. A positive match provides powerful corroborative evidence, directly linking a specific tool and by extension, its owner to the scene of the crime or to a series of connected incidents. Despite inherent challenges, modern techniques, including 3D profilometry and digital analysis, continually enhance the objectivity and reliability of this discipline. Ultimately, toolmark evidence plays a pivotal role in criminal investigations, often providing the crucial, non-circumstantial proof required to secure convictions and resolve cases.

ROLE OF TOOLMARK EVIDENCE IN LINKING SUSPECTS TO CRIME SCENE Read More »

ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ODR) AND ACCESS TO JUSTICE IN INDIA

Volume III Issue IV /

ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ODR) AND ACCESS TO JUSTICE IN INDIA Dr. Madhuri D. Kharat, Assistant Professor, School of Law, The NorthCap University, Gurugram (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.151 Another revolutionary tool that can reinvent the access to justice contours in India is Online Dispute Resolution (ODR). ODR is a technologically viable and scalable alternative to judicial pendency, which in a country where traditional courts continue to be plagued by procedural backlog, geographical access, and litigation prohibitiveness, is out of proportion with over five crore cases case pendency. The fast growth of digital infrastructure, which occurs due to such efforts as Digital India, the spread of fintech services, and the development of e-commerce, has caused an increase in the number of conflicts that have to be effectively resolved in a short period of time. It is against this background that ODR can democratise the process of justice especially in matters of small value claims, consumer disputes, MSME conflicts, and cross border transactions. Nevertheless, ODR in India is at its inception. The lack of a specific statutory framework, unequal digital literacy, privacy and data protection concerns, a lack of standardisation of the processes and the digital gap still hamper its acceptance. The importance of ODR has been recognized in judicial pronouncements, reports on government policies, and institutional pilots, but more formal methods of integrating it with formal justice systems are suggested to be necessary. New legal contexts are forming with the introduction of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, and the continued institutional transformation, which require the attention of scholars. This research paper is a critical review of how ODR is associated with access to justice in India. It discusses the development, models, institutional growth, regulatory issues and world practices. Moreover, it reviews the implication of AI-based dispute resolution and whether ODR can address traditional adjudication in any meaningful way, or replace or change it. The paper ends with solid suggestions to be addressed to make ODR a valid, safe, and inclusive justice dispensing tool. These findings indicate that although ODR cannot substitute courts, it can very well supplement the justice system should they be backed by sound legal and technological systems.

ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ODR) AND ACCESS TO JUSTICE IN INDIA Read More »

FROM CLASSROOM TO COURTROOM: THE LEGAL DUTY OF LAW SCHOOLS TO DELIVER ACCESS TO JUSTICE IN THE PHILIPPINES

Volume III Issue IV /

FROM CLASSROOM TO COURTROOM: THE LEGAL DUTY OF LAW SCHOOLS TO DELIVER ACCESS TO JUSTICE IN THE PHILIPPINES Darren Javier Gonzales, Associate Professor, John Wesley School of Law and Governance, Wesleyan University-Philippines Reena Clarisse Aviñante Carlos, Associate Professor, Graduate School, Wesleyan University-Philippines Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.150 Access to justice is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy and an enduring challenge in societies marked by structural inequality. In the Philippines, where the cost of legal services remains prohibitive for many citizens, law schools have become critical sites for extending justice beyond the courtroom. This study examines the doctrinal foundations of the Clinical Legal Education Program (CLEP) and argues that the obligation of law schools to provide supervised legal aid is not merely pedagogical or voluntary but a binding legal duty derived from constitutional, statutory, and judicial authority. Using the doctrinal method, the research systematically analyzes the hierarchy of legal norms that underpin this obligation. It interprets the constitutional guarantee of access to justice under Articles II and XIII of the 1987 Constitution in conjunction with the Supreme Court’s regulatory power under Article VIII, Section 5(5). These constitutional principles are operationalized through Republic Act No. 7662 (Legal Education Reform Act of 1993), Rule 138-A of the Rules of Court, and Administrative Matter No. 19-03-24-SC, which institutionalizes CLEP as a prerequisite for Bar admission. The 2023 Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA) further reinforces this framework by embedding access to justice as an ethical and professional obligation. The study concludes that clinical legal education in the Philippines represents a juridically complete model where education, ethics, and justice delivery converge. It situates law schools as constitutional actors in democratizing access to justice and shaping socially responsible lawyers. By grounding social responsibility in enforceable legal norms, the Philippine CLEP offers a replicable model for developing democracies seeking to align legal education with constitutional commitments to equality and justice.

FROM CLASSROOM TO COURTROOM: THE LEGAL DUTY OF LAW SCHOOLS TO DELIVER ACCESS TO JUSTICE IN THE PHILIPPINES Read More »

MONEY IN POLITICS AND THE PURSUIT OF TRANSPARENCY: ADR V. UNION OF INDIA

Volume III Issue IV /

MONEY IN POLITICS AND THE PURSUIT OF TRANSPARENCY: ADR V. UNION OF INDIA Mohan Sainanda Reddy Koduri, 5th semester, BA LL.B Student at Dr. B. R. Ambedkar College of Law, Andhra University (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.149 The Supreme Court decision in Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India (2024) marks a turning point in Indian constitutional jurisprudence around electoral transparency and the RTI. The case contested the constitutionality of the Electoral Bonds Scheme, 2018, which allowed corporate contributions to political parties without any limit but anonymously. The scheme was found unconstitutional by a five-judge Constitution Bench unanimously because it infringed Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution by robbing citizens of the necessary information on political funding. The Court once again confirmed that the freedom of speech and expression is inseparable from the right to know the origin of political funding, as it is essential to democratic involvement. It struck down amendments to the Representation of the People Act, the Income Tax Act, and the Companies Act that had legitimized electoral secrecy in sources and expenditures of electoral funds. It pointed out that corporate entities are not citizens and thus they cannot enjoy the same political rights, and that pure corporate power is a wrongful interpretation of democratic equality. Based on an analysis of proportionality, the Court overturned the government’s claim that the anonymity of a donor was a protection of free speech and stated that transparency was a constitutional requirement. The decision redefined electoral responsibility and furthered the principle of informational democracy by recovering political access to information on political donations and establishing and making them available through disclosure via the Election Commission. It highlights that the secret in political finance is contrary to constitutional government, and democracy can only flourish when citizens cast their vote fully knowing the financial forces behind the electoral processes.

MONEY IN POLITICS AND THE PURSUIT OF TRANSPARENCY: ADR V. UNION OF INDIA Read More »

THE DEATH PENALTY UNDER BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA: JUSTICE, RETRIBUTION, OR AN OUTDATED PRACTICE?

Volume III Issue IV /

THE DEATH PENALTY UNDER BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA: JUSTICE, RETRIBUTION, OR AN OUTDATED PRACTICE? Khushi Sharma, 3rd semester B.A.LL.B(H) Student Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.148 “Justice is not found in punishment alone, but in understanding the value of human life.” The death penalty remains one of the most debated aspects of India’s criminal jurisprudence. With the enactment of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), replacing the colonial-era Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), the discussion has resurfaced over whether the death penalty aligns with modern constitutional morality. This paper explores the legal, moral, and philosophical dimensions of capital punishment in India under the BNS framework. Through an examination of historical evolution, constitutional principles, and landmark as well as recent judicial decisions, it assesses whether the death penalty today represents justice, retribution, or an outdated practice. The analysis maintains a neutral stance, emphasizing that the debate must reconcile justice with humanity in an evolving legal order. In continuation of this discourse, the introduction of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 has renewed national attention on whether capital punishment remains an effective and ethically defensible component of India’s criminal justice system. The persistence of the death penalty under the BNS, despite global shifts toward abolition, highlights the tension between societal expectations of retribution and the constitutional commitment to human dignity, fairness, and proportionality. This paper therefore extends the discussion by examining not only the legal foundations of capital punishment under the BNS but also the broader ethical, social, and global considerations that shape its contemporary relevance. The expanded analysis aims to contribute to an informed and balanced understanding of whether the death penalty today serves the true purpose of justice or represents a vestige of an older penal philosophy.

THE DEATH PENALTY UNDER BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA: JUSTICE, RETRIBUTION, OR AN OUTDATED PRACTICE? Read More »

KESAVANANDA BHARATI V. STATE OF KERALA: A LANDMARK IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF INDIA’S JUDICIAL PROCESS

Volume III Issue IV /

KESAVANANDA BHARATI V. STATE OF KERALA: A LANDMARK IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF INDIA’S JUDICIAL PROCESS Akansha Barua , LL.M. (Cyber Law), IILM University, Greater Noida (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.147 The judgment in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) is widely regarded as a turning point in India’s judicial and constitutional history. Delivered by a thirteen-judge bench of the Supreme Court, this case addressed the scope of Parliament’s amending power under Article 368 of the Constitution. The central issue was whether Parliament’s authority extended to altering the very foundation and identity of the Constitution. By a narrow margin of 7:6, the Court propounded the Basic Structure Doctrine, which held that while Parliament has extensive amending powers, it cannot destroy or abrogate the essential features that form the Constitution’s identity. These include the supremacy of the Constitution, the rule of law, judicial review, democracy, secularism, separation of powers, and fundamental rights. This doctrine preserved the sanctity of the Constitution and redefined the relationship between the legislature and the judiciary by establishing the latter as the ultimate guardian of constitutional principles. The judgment was particularly significant during the Emergency period (1975–77), when democratic values and fundamental rights were under threat. It prevented the concentration of absolute power in the hands of transient parliamentary majorities, thereby safeguarding India’s democratic framework. Thus, the Kesavananda Bharati judgment not only curtailed the risks of authoritarianism but also reaffirmed the Constitution as a living document that is flexible yet firmly anchored in its core principles. It remains the cornerstone of Indian constitutional jurisprudence and the defining moment that shaped the future of judicial review and constitutionalism in India.

KESAVANANDA BHARATI V. STATE OF KERALA: A LANDMARK IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF INDIA’S JUDICIAL PROCESS Read More »