LIJDLR

Volume IV Issue I

THE DARK SIDE OF AI: CRYPTOCURRENCY AND CYBERCRIME: REGULATORY GAPS IN DIGITAL ASSET TRACING

Volume IV Issue I /

THE DARK SIDE OF AI: CRYPTOCURRENCY AND CYBERCRIME: REGULATORY GAPS IN DIGITAL ASSET TRACING Vishwajeet Singh, LLB 3rd year (6th semester) Student at Amity Law School, Lucknow Campus (India) Dr. Mudra Singh, Assistant Professor at Amity Law School, Lucknow Campus (India). Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.55 This paper examines how artificial intelligence is reshaping cryptocurrency-enabled cybercrime and why Indian regulatory architecture still struggles to trace, freeze, and prosecute virtual digital asset flows at speed. It maps the modern crime stack, from AI-assisted phishing and social engineering to ransomware, pig butchering, mixer use, and cross-chain laundering. It then evaluates India’s compliance perimeter under the PMLA notification covering VDA service activities, FIU-IND reporting obligations, CERT-In incident directions, and the evidentiary demands for electronic records under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 and procedural safeguards under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The analysis identifies persistent gaps: inconsistent Travel Rule implementation, weak governance for unhosted wallets and DeFi control points, uneven forensic readiness across platforms, and cross-border delays that allow rapid dissipation of value. The paper argues for traceability as infrastructure, not paperwork, and proposes a reform roadmap that combines minimum technical standards for logs and attribution artefacts, risk-tiered controls for high-risk transfers, stronger supervisory testing, and faster international cooperation mechanisms. The goal is a rights-respecting model that improves recovery for victims while preserving due process and data protection. It also situates these reforms within FATF standards and comparative models to ensure interoperability, predictability, and resilient prosecutions across jurisdictions globally.

THE DARK SIDE OF AI: CRYPTOCURRENCY AND CYBERCRIME: REGULATORY GAPS IN DIGITAL ASSET TRACING Read More »

INTERMEDIARY LIABILITY IN INDIA POST 2021 RULES: A CONSTITUTIONAL BALANCE OF FREE SPEECH AND REGULATORY ACCOUNTABILITY

Volume IV Issue I /

INTERMEDIARY LIABILITY IN INDIA POST 2021 RULES: A CONSTITUTIONAL BALANCE OF FREE SPEECH AND REGULATORY ACCOUNTABILITY Madhumitha Gopinath, Author is an Advocate at Bar Council of Tamilnadu and Puducherry, (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.54 The rapid expansion of digital communication platforms has significantly transformed democratic discourse in India, raising complex regulatory and constitutional questions regarding the liability of online intermediaries. Public expression is now increasingly mediated through digital intermediaries, particularly social media platforms, which has generated complex legal and constitutional questions regarding their regulation. An original protection of intermediaries under the Information Technology Act, 2000, Section 79, although conditional, was the protection of the so-called safe harbour by intermediaries. But with introduction of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, due diligence has been increased particularly among Significant Social Media Intermediaries. The question that is addressed in this paper is whether the post-2021 regulatory framework is a recalibration of intermediary responsibility as per Article 19(1)(a) of the constitution of India. Based on the successful case law in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, the paper examines the application of constitutional precepts of proportionality, procedural protection and reasonable restriction in the digital context based on Article 19(2). Instead of considering the regulatory change as a break with the protection of free speech, this study assesses whether the changing frame indicates an effort at balancing between innovation, accountability, and constitutional freedoms. The paper concludes that the viability of intermediary regulation may be ultimately based on the balanced implementation, transparency, and reiteration of judicial control to make sure that digital regulation keeps in tune with the constitutional values.

INTERMEDIARY LIABILITY IN INDIA POST 2021 RULES: A CONSTITUTIONAL BALANCE OF FREE SPEECH AND REGULATORY ACCOUNTABILITY Read More »

LAWS TO CURB CRIMES AGAINST WOMEN IN INDIA

Volume IV Issue I /

LAWS TO CURB CRIMES AGAINST WOMEN IN INDIA Vanshika, 10th semester B.A.LL.B (H) Student at Amity Law School, Lucknow Campus (India) Dr. Srijan Mishra, Assistant Professor at Amity Law School, Lucknow Campus (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.53 Crimes against women are still a serious social and legal issue in India and a serious human rights violation. Despite constitutional guarantees of fairness, respect, and personal freedom, women are subjected to a wide range of forms of brutality, involving domestic abuse, sexual assaults, harassment, cruelty related to dowries, trafficking in persons, and cybercrimes. The Indian legal system has created a comprehensive structure that includes judicial interventions, special laws, punitive measures, and constitutional safeguards in response to these enduring issues. India has made an effort to modernize its criminal justice system while maintaining and strengthening laws intended to protect women from assault, through the enactment of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, which has replaced the Indian Penal Code, 1860. In addition to special protective laws like the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, and laws addressing sexual violence and child protection, this research paper looks at the development and extent of laws passed to prevent crimes against women, with a focus on offenses under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The research paper also examines how judiciary has advanced women’s rights via significant rulings and progressive interpretations. Despite the seeming strength of the legal structure, there remain significant gaps in societal attitudes, implementation, and enforcement remain. The paper concludes that effective protection of women requires not only strong laws but also institutional accountability, gender sensitization, awareness, and victim-centric justice mechanisms.

LAWS TO CURB CRIMES AGAINST WOMEN IN INDIA Read More »

RESTORING JUSTICE THROUGH COMMUNITY SERVICE UNDER CRIMINAL LAWS: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF INDIA AND SOUTH AFRICA

Volume IV Issue I /

RESTORING JUSTICE THROUGH COMMUNITY SERVICE UNDER CRIMINAL LAWS: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF INDIA AND SOUTH AFRICA Arya Raj, 3rd Year B.A. LLB Student at CHRIST (Deemed to be University) (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.52 This doctrinal research paper undertakes a comparative analysis of community service as a restorative sentencing mechanism in the criminal justice systems of India and South Africa. The study examines the legal foundations, institutional frameworks, and practical implementation of community service as a non-custodial sanction designed to reconcile punitive justice with rehabilitative and restorative objectives. Using a doctrinal research methodology, the paper analyses constitutional provisions, statutory frameworks, and judicial decisions from both jurisdictions, along with relevant academic literature and policy reports. The research traces the historical evolution of community service within modern penological thought and evaluates its emergence as an alternative to incarceration aimed at reducing prison overcrowding while promoting offender accountability and reintegration. Particular attention is given to recent legislative developments in India, especially the recognition of community service under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and these developments are compared with South Africa’s comparatively well-established framework under the Criminal Procedure Act, 1977 and its constitutionally grounded sentencing principles. The findings suggest that while both jurisdictions recognise the rehabilitative potential of community service, South Africa possesses a more structured institutional and supervisory system that facilitates its consistent application. In contrast, India’s framework, though recently strengthened by statutory recognition, continues to rely significantly on judicial discretion and lacks detailed implementation mechanisms. The paper argues that effective community service programmes can contribute to prison decongestion, offender rehabilitation, and community participation in justice processes. It concludes by proposing reforms aimed at strengthening sentencing guidelines, institutional supervision, and restorative practices in both jurisdictions, thereby enhancing the effectiveness of community service as a restorative criminal justice mechanism.

RESTORING JUSTICE THROUGH COMMUNITY SERVICE UNDER CRIMINAL LAWS: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF INDIA AND SOUTH AFRICA Read More »

CASE COMMENT: SULTHAN SAID IBRAHIM v. PRAKASAN & ORS., 2025 INSC 767

Volume IV Issue I /

CASE COMMENT: SULTHAN SAID IBRAHIM v. PRAKASAN & ORS., 2025 INSC 767 Saatvik, VI Semester Student pursuing BBA LLB (H.) at Vivekananda School of Law & Legal Studies, VIPS (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.51 This case comment analyses the decision of the Supreme Court of India in Sulthan Said Ibrahim v. Prakasan & Ors., 2025 INSC 767, which addresses significant procedural questions concerning impleadment of parties, the doctrine of res judicata, and the consequences of decrees for specific performance. The dispute arose from a suit seeking specific performance of an agreement to sell immovable property. After prolonged litigation across multiple judicial forums, the controversy before the Supreme Court primarily concerned whether a party impleaded as a legal representative under Order XXII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 could subsequently seek deletion from the array of parties under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC, and whether such an application would be barred by the principle of res judicata. The Court examined the procedural history of the dispute, including the execution proceedings and applications for rescission of the contract under the Specific Relief Act, 1963. It reaffirmed that objections relating to impleadment must be raised at the earliest possible stage, and failure to do so may attract the bar of constructive res judicata. The judgment also clarified that where a decree for specific performance is granted in respect of immovable property held in exclusive possession of the defendant, delivery of possession may follow as an implied consequence of the decree even if not expressly granted. The ruling reinforces the importance of procedural finality and discourages litigants from raising belated objections aimed at delaying execution proceedings. By reaffirming established jurisprudence on res judicata and the scope of impleadment under the Code of Civil Procedure, the decision contributes to the broader objective of ensuring certainty and efficiency in civil litigation.

CASE COMMENT: SULTHAN SAID IBRAHIM v. PRAKASAN & ORS., 2025 INSC 767 Read More »

PLATFORM LIABILITY AND DEEPFAKE PORNOGRAPHY: ARE INDIA’S INTERMEDIARY RULES FIT FOR THE AI AGE?

Volume IV Issue I /

PLATFORM LIABILITY AND DEEPFAKE PORNOGRAPHY: ARE INDIA’S INTERMEDIARY RULES FIT FOR THE AI AGE? Saloni Shashank Patil, Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj University, Panvel, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India Satya Prakash Mishra, Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj University, Panvel, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.50 The advent of deepfake pornography significantly changes the way digital sexual abuse can be carried out. Deepfake pornography is a method of identity distortion and a violation of the individuals’ dignity, privacy, and sexual autonomy rights, which are protected by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. It poses as a serious challenge to the constitutional adequacy of India’s intermediary liability framework. “The present regulatory framework under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 rests on assumptions of intermediary neutrality and notice-based takedown, reflecting a pre-AI model of online harm. This article maintains that the existing framework, which is primarily a reactive takedown one, is constitutionally inadequate in a context where algorithmic systems are used not only to fabricate but also rapidly amplify synthetic sexual content. Based on constitutional jurisprudence recognising dignity and privacy as integral components of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution, the paper argues that the State has a corresponding duty to recalibrate platform governance beyond mere passive safe-harbour protection. Thus, the article advocates that instead of reacting to a notice-and-takedown system, a dignity-centric framework should be implemented, which, among other things, recognises the structural responsibility of platforms for AI-enabled harm. The article employs doctrinal analysis of Indian constitutional jurisprudence and a comparative examination of emerging regulatory approaches particularly the European Union’s Digital Services Act and the United Kingdom’s Online Safety Act to demonstrate how algorithmic amplification undermines the legal fiction of platform neutrality. The article contributes to debates on digital governance and platform accountability by reinterpreting intermediary liability through a constitutional dignity framework in the age of artificial intelligence.

PLATFORM LIABILITY AND DEEPFAKE PORNOGRAPHY: ARE INDIA’S INTERMEDIARY RULES FIT FOR THE AI AGE? Read More »

COMPETITION LAW IN DIGITAL ECONOMY

Volume IV Issue I /

COMPETITION LAW IN DIGITAL ECONOMY Divyanshi, VIII semester student/ BA-LLB, Student at Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad (India) Prakriti Raghuvanshi, VIII semester student/ BA-LLB, Student at Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad (India). Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.49 India’s digital economy has rapidly transformed market structures, creating new opportunities while simultaneously raising complex competition law concerns. The Competition Act, 2002, originally designed for traditional industries, does not fully account for digital market characteristics such as network effects, platform ecosystems, and data-driven algorithms. This paper examines how the Competition Commission of India (CCI) applies the Act to digital marketplaces through case studies involving Amazon, Flipkart, Google, and WhatsApp. Using doctrinal and case-based analysis, the study evaluates the effectiveness of existing competition law tools in addressing platform dominance, self-preferencing, and data-driven market power. The findings indicate that while the Act has demonstrated interpretative flexibility, reliance solely on ex-post enforcement remains insufficient in rapidly evolving digital markets. The paper therefore argues for a balanced regulatory approach combining strengthened merger scrutiny, recognition of data as a source of market power, and targeted ex-ante obligations for dominant digital enterprises. Such a framework would help ensure fair competition, promote consumer welfare, and support sustainable innovation in India’s digital economy.

COMPETITION LAW IN DIGITAL ECONOMY Read More »

JUDGEMENT COMMENT: SUPRIYO CHAKRABORTY & ANR V. UOI

Volume IV Issue I /

JUDGEMENT COMMENT: SUPRIYO CHAKRABORTY & ANR V. UOI Saanjh Inuganti, Third Year B.A.LL. B student of Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies, Navi Mumbai (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.48 The present article critically examines the landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India in Supriyo Chakraborty & Anr v. Union of India (2023), which addressed the question of legal recognition of same-sex marriages in India. The case arose from petitions filed by several same-sex couples seeking recognition of their unions under existing statutory frameworks, particularly the Special Marriage Act, 1954, the Foreign Marriage Act, 1969, and the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The petitioners contended that the exclusion of same-sex couples from the institution of marriage violates fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India, including equality before the law, non-discrimination, personal liberty, and the right to dignity. The Union of India opposed the petitions, arguing that the existing statutory scheme governing marriage was designed to regulate heterosexual unions and that recognition of same-sex marriage would involve complex policy considerations affecting multiple legislations. It was further argued that such a socio-legal transformation falls within the legislative domain rather than the judicial sphere. A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court delivered a split verdict (3:2) on 17 October 2023, declining to recognize same-sex marriages under existing law. While the majority held that there is no fundamental right to marry and that any recognition of same-sex marriage must come through legislative action, the Court unanimously affirmed the constitutional rights and dignity of LGBTQIA+ individuals. The decision nevertheless left open the possibility of future legislative reform. This article analyses the competing constitutional arguments presented before the Court, evaluates the reasoning adopted in the majority and minority opinions, and offers critical observations on the implications of the judgment for the evolving discourse on marriage equality and LGBTQIA+ rights in India.

JUDGEMENT COMMENT: SUPRIYO CHAKRABORTY & ANR V. UOI Read More »

ADMONITION AND NON-CUSTODIAL SENTENCING IN INDIA AFTER THE NEW CRIMINAL LAWS – CONTINUITY, REFORM AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS

Volume IV Issue I /

ADMONITION AND NON-CUSTODIAL SENTENCING IN INDIA AFTER THE NEW CRIMINAL LAWS – CONTINUITY, REFORM AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS Swetketu Das, Asst. Professor, School of Legal Studies, The Neotia University (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.47 The transition from the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) marks a significant moment in India’s criminal justice reform. Yet, while procedural architecture has evolved, the foundational philosophy of non-custodial sentencing, particularly release after admonition and probation remains substantially rooted in the Probation of Offenders Act 1958 (POA). This article critically examines the concept of admonition as a sentencing response within Indian criminal law, tracing its philosophical, historical and statutory evolution. It analyses the present legal framework under the POA and BNSS, evaluates judicial trends, identifies structural and doctrinal lacunae, and situates admonition within contemporary debates on prison overcrowding, victim compensation and restorative justice. The article argues that although admonition remains normatively relevant in a reformative penal system, its practical marginalisation and institutional weaknesses undermine its transformative potential. It concludes with proposals for statutory harmonisation under BNSS, mandatory pre-sentence assessment mechanisms, integration with victim compensation schemes, and the institutional strengthening of probation services.

ADMONITION AND NON-CUSTODIAL SENTENCING IN INDIA AFTER THE NEW CRIMINAL LAWS – CONTINUITY, REFORM AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS Read More »

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: LEGAL AND ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS

Volume IV Issue I /

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: LEGAL AND ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS Nilisha Gupta, B.A L.L.B 3rd year 6th Semester at GLA University, Mathura (India) Shweta Singh, B.Com L.L.B 3rd year 6th Semester at GLA University, Mathura (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.46 Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming the landscape of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), raising fundamental questions regarding ownership, inventorship, and the adequacy of existing legal frameworks. Intellectual property rights have traditionally been designed to protect human creativity and innovation, ensuring economic benefits and incentivizing further research and development. However, the increasing autonomy of AI systems in generating inventions, artistic works, trademarks, and trade secrets challenges this human-centric structure. The study traces the evolution of IPR from early copyright and patent laws to international treaties and modern digital protection, demonstrating that legal systems have historically adapted to technological change. Yet AI introduces unprecedented complexities in determining originality, authorship, and enforceability. Several jurisdictions including the US, UK, and EU currently deny assigning IP rights directly to AI systems, though select legal decisions, such as the Australian DABUS ruling, suggest emerging flexibility. These inconsistencies highlight a growing global divide. Key concerns include whether AI-generated output meets originality standards under copyright law, how inventive contribution is assessed in AI-assisted patent filings, and the risk of widespread infringement where AI training uses copyrighted data without consent. Additionally, uncertainty persists surrounding economic impacts such as content devaluation and cross-border enforcement of digital works. The study emphasizes that while AI enhances innovation, efficient IP management, and market competition, it simultaneously threatens traditional creative industries if legal protections are not restructured. Ultimately, the document argues for adaptive global reforms that balance innovation incentives, public access, and ethical governance ensuring that both human and AI-driven creativity can coexist and thrive.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: LEGAL AND ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS Read More »