LIJDLR

Volume IV Issue III

THE CONSTITUTIONAL JURISPRUDENCE OF ARREST IN INDIA: FROM THE POWER AND NECESSITY OF ARREST TO THE RIGHT TO KNOW THE GROUNDS OF ARREST

Volume IV Issue III /

THE CONSTITUTIONAL JURISPRUDENCE OF ARREST IN INDIA: FROM THE POWER AND NECESSITY OF ARREST TO THE RIGHT TO KNOW THE GROUNDS OF ARREST Adv. Rajendra Kedge, Practising in Bombay High Court / other High Courts and Supreme Court, (India) Adv. Sunil Yadav, Practising in Bombay High Court / other High Courts and Supreme Court, (India) Adv. Archana Kedge, Practising in Bombay High Court, (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.288 Arrest is among the most intrusive powers exercised by the State against the individual. Though legally distinct from guilt, arrest often produces consequences that extend beyond the criminal process, including reputational injury, social stigma, loss of employment, and impairment of personal and family relationships. These consequences become especially grave where proceedings ultimately end in discharge, acquittal, or exoneration. Indian constitutional jurisprudence has therefore increasingly treated arrest not merely as an investigative tool, but as a serious deprivation of personal liberty requiring constitutional justification. This paper examines the evolution of Indian arrest jurisprudence from the distinction between the power to arrest and the necessity to arrest, developed in Joginder Kumar and Arnesh Kumar, to the contemporary right of an arrested person to be informed of the grounds of arrest under Article 22(1). It analyses the relationship between Articles 14, 21 and 22(1), the statutory safeguards under the CrPC and the BNSS, and the developing distinction between ‘reasons for arrest’ and accused-specific ‘grounds of arrest’. Particular attention is given to Pankaj Bansal, Ram Kishor Arora, Prabir Purkayastha, Vihaan Kumar, Kasireddy Upender Reddy, Mihir Rajesh Shah, Karan Singh and Dr Rajinder Rajan. The central thesis is that Indian arrest law is moving from a power-centric model towards a constitutional accountability model consisting of four sequential safeguards: lawful power, demonstrable necessity, meaningful communication of grounds and effective judicial scrutiny. The paper’s distinctive contribution lies in its analysis of the temporal operation of the written-communication requirement, especially the expression ‘henceforth’ in Mihir Rajesh Shah. It argues that while Article 22(1) protected arrested persons before that decision, Mihir Rajesh Shah standardised the future procedural regime for written communication of grounds. This distinction is essential to evaluating non-compliance in both pre-Mihir and post-Mihir arrests.

THE CONSTITUTIONAL JURISPRUDENCE OF ARREST IN INDIA: FROM THE POWER AND NECESSITY OF ARREST TO THE RIGHT TO KNOW THE GROUNDS OF ARREST Read More »

FROM ADR TO ODR: EXAMINING ONLINE ARBITRATION, LEGAL CHALLENGES, AND DATA PROTECTION CONCERNS IN THE DIGITAL ERA

Volume IV Issue III /

FROM ADR TO ODR: EXAMINING ONLINE ARBITRATION, LEGAL CHALLENGES, AND DATA PROTECTION CONCERNS IN THE DIGITAL ERA Shruchi Prasad, 4th year BA.LLB. (Hons.) Student, Christ (Deemed to be University), Delhi NCR (India) Prerna Kumari, 4th year BA.LLB. (Hons.) Student, Christ (Deemed to be University), Delhi NCR (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.287 “When will mankind be convinced and agree to settle their difficulties by arbitration?” by Benjamin Franklin. ODR websites have become an unavoidable tool within the modern online environment, as it is necessitated to enable risky conflict management within the online business and international transactions setting. ODR combines the classical Alternative Disputes Resolution (ADR) practices such as arbitration, mediation and negotiation with high-tech innovation. In this script, ADR is examined and the development of ADR into ODR is explored with a specific focus on online arbitration. Even though the process of digitalization has significant advantages to the arbitration process, it also presents an extensive array of complex challenges that requires careful consideration. Major concerns include weak cybersecurity, data confidentiality, procedural fairness, technological access difference between disagreeing parties, enforceability of arbitration decisions, and lack of face-to-face communication. The paper explores the issue of data protection in the digital environment, clarifying the basic concepts of data protection and the issues that appear due to the current enforcement systems in the domain of online arbitration. It also reflects on how applicable rules like the GDPR are to an arbitration process, especially in international disputes relating to the cross-border cases where jurisdictional and compliance facts are often raised. This paper will discuss the process in which the legal systems of the EU, India and US are moving toward online disputes resolution (ODR) and online arbitration by comparing the three legal systems. It outlines defensive safeguards to the safety of party data and achieving equitable results, and offers remedies to enhance confidence, transparency, and efficiency in technology-driven procedures that do not reduce the fundamentals of arbitration in the age of technology.

FROM ADR TO ODR: EXAMINING ONLINE ARBITRATION, LEGAL CHALLENGES, AND DATA PROTECTION CONCERNS IN THE DIGITAL ERA Read More »

DEEPFAKES AND GENERATIVE AI IN INDIA: RETHINKING THE LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR DIGITAL GOVERNANCE

Volume IV Issue III /

DEEPFAKES AND GENERATIVE AI IN INDIA: RETHINKING THE LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR DIGITAL GOVERNANCE Omkar Acharya, LLM, 2nd Semester,Fakir Mohan University, PG Department of Law, Odisha, (India) Shibanee Acharya, LLM, 2nd Semester,Fakir Mohan University, PG Department of Law, Odisha, (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.286 The rapid development of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) has transformed digital innovation while raising complex legal and constitutional concerns. Among its most disruptive manifestations is deepfake technology, which enables the creation of realistic synthetic audio, video and images capable of blurring the distinction between fact and fabrication. In India, the misuse of deepfakes has raised serious concerns relating to privacy, misinformation, electoral integrity, cybercrime, defamation, intellectual property, national security and gender-based digital violence. While the Information Technology Act, 2000, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 and the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 provide partial remedies, they do not fully address the regulatory challenges posed by AI-generated synthetic media. This paper critically examines India’s legal framework on deepfakes and Generative AI, particularly in light of fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution, and judicial developments concerning privacy, free speech, dignity and digital governance. Using doctrinal and comparative legal research methods, the study also evaluates international approaches, including the European Union AI Act, the Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence, and selected regulatory measures in the United States and China. It argues for a constitutionally grounded and risk-based AI governance framework that ensures accountability, transparency and protection of individual rights while preserving technological innovation. The paper recommends dedicated AI regulation incorporating algorithmic accountability, mandatory watermarking of AI-generated content, platform liability and institutional oversight mechanisms. The study contributes to digital constitutionalism by proposing legal reforms aligned with Indian constitutional principles and the evolving digital landscape.

DEEPFAKES AND GENERATIVE AI IN INDIA: RETHINKING THE LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR DIGITAL GOVERNANCE Read More »

LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION FOR CORPORATE GOVERNANCE: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF INDIA AND THE UNITED STATES IN THE ERA OF DIGITAL COMMERCIAL JUSTICE

Volume IV Issue III /

LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION FOR CORPORATE GOVERNANCE: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF INDIA AND THE UNITED STATES IN THE ERA OF DIGITAL COMMERCIAL JUSTICE Rahul Basak, 1st Year,LL.B Student of Amity University Kolkata, (India) Saptarnab Basu, 1st Year, LL B Student of Amity University Kolkata, (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.285 This research examines Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) as an emerging mechanism for transforming corporate and commercial dispute resolution and strengthening corporate governance in digitally enabled markets. It undertakes a comparative legal study of India and the United States to assess whether ODR can deliver faster, more cost-effective, and legally enforceable outcomes for shareholders, investors, creditors, companies, and other stakeholders while preserving procedural fairness, transparency, confidentiality, and data security. The study adopts a doctrinal and comparative approach by analysing statutes, regulatory circulars, judicial precedents, institutional practices, and selected ODR platform models. It contrasts India’s increasingly regulator-led framework, particularly SEBI’s securities-market ODR mechanism, with the United States’ more contract-driven and market-oriented ADR ecosystem, where private institutions and digital platforms play a central role. The paper identifies three central conditions for effective corporate ODR. First, ODR outcomes must rest on clear statutory and contractual foundations concerning enforceability, consent, electronic records, and limited but meaningful judicial review. Secondly, algorithmic tools used in digital dispute systems must be supported by transparency, human oversight, auditability, and safeguards against bias so that efficiency does not undermine due process. Thirdly, corporate ODR requires lawful and secure cross-border data governance, particularly where sensitive commercial records, investor information, and confidential communications are processed through digital platforms. On this basis, the paper proposes a model ODR clause for corporate governance documents, an algorithmic transparency protocol, and targeted policy recommendations for regulators, ADR institutions, and corporate boards. By integrating legal, technological, and governance perspectives, the study offers practical guidance for the responsible adoption of digital dispute-resolution mechanisms in the era of digital commercial justice.

LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION FOR CORPORATE GOVERNANCE: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF INDIA AND THE UNITED STATES IN THE ERA OF DIGITAL COMMERCIAL JUSTICE Read More »

INSTITUTIONALIZING ARBITRATION IN INDIA: FROM AD HOC TO INSTITUTIONAL GOVERNANCE

Volume IV Issue III /

INSTITUTIONALIZING ARBITRATION IN INDIA: FROM AD HOC TO INSTITUTIONAL GOVERNANCE Afreen Afshar Alam, Ph.D. Scholar, Indian Law Institute (Deemed University), New Delhi (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.284 Over the past few decades, arbitration in India has largely operated in an ad hoc form. While this model is meant to preserve party autonomy, its application has often led to uneven procedures, increasing costs, and repeated court intervention. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 sought to bring Indian law in line with the UNCITRAL Model Law and to limit judicial oversight. Even so, the shift in legislation did not address deeper structural concerns, and challenges to arbitral awards have continued to arise with regularity. Proceedings were delayed. Commercial parties continued to view enforcement as uncertain. This paper examines India’s move toward institutional arbitration as more than a technical amendment. It treats the shift as an effort to reorganize how arbitration is administered. The discussion traces this development through the Law Commission’s 246th Report, the Amendments of 2015, 2019, and the 2021 amendments. It also engages with key Supreme Court decisions on public policy and arbitral autonomy. In addition, the paper draws on an interview conducted by the author with Mr. Navjeet Bhudhiraja, former Additional Coordinator and Deputy Registrar of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre, to illustrate how institutional procedures operate in practice. The paper argues that recent reforms have introduced clearer timelines, more structured fee arrangements, and stronger safeguards around arbitrator independence. At the same time, statutory change alone cannot reshape professional habits. The turn toward institutions has modified the framework within which arbitration operates in India. Whether it reshapes arbitral culture in a lasting way will depend on consistent judicial approach, institutional competence, and the willingness of practitioners to adapt their methods to a more disciplined system.

INSTITUTIONALIZING ARBITRATION IN INDIA: FROM AD HOC TO INSTITUTIONAL GOVERNANCE Read More »

HUMAN RIGHTS AND ADR MECHANISMS: INNOVATIVE PATHWAYS FROM TRADITION TO TRANSFORMATION IN THE GLOBAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

Volume IV Issue III /

HUMAN RIGHTS AND ADR MECHANISMS: INNOVATIVE PATHWAYS FROM TRADITION TO TRANSFORMATION IN THE GLOBAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Zainul Sajdeen, 7th Semester B.ALL.B Student at Jamia Millia Islamia University , New Delhi , (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.283 In the age of increasing global challenges, resolving disputes through traditional court procedures is often lengthy, expensive, and procedurally complex. In today’s highly competitive environment, both nations and individuals endeavour to secure justice, rights, and remedies through effective institutional mechanisms. This has led to numerous disputes and caused instability worldwide, whether in the Russia-Ukraine war or the Palestine-Israel conflict. The value of ordinary human life is undermined in many international and national disputes. Exploring innovative solutions to resolve disputes, including mediation, conciliation, arbitration, and negotiation, offers hope for millions of people. These mechanisms reduce not only the cost and time involved in settlement but also make justice more accessible and approachable. This paper examines how Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms are driving a transformative shift in the global justice system, aligning with the conference theme “From Tradition to Transformation: Innovative Approaches to Alternative Dispute Resolution.” International instruments that support ADR mechanisms include the United Nations Charter of 1945, the Hague Conventions for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, and the 1982 Manila Declaration on the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes, among others. This paper also addresses international human rights violations in environmental law disputes, including matters involving the climate justice network Rete Legalità per il Clima, hydrocarbon operations in Congo, and selected UK-based environmental accountability cases. While challenges such as enforceability, procedural fairness, transparency, and the digital divide continue to exist, this research argues for deeper integration of innovative ADR into the national and international human rights arena.

HUMAN RIGHTS AND ADR MECHANISMS: INNOVATIVE PATHWAYS FROM TRADITION TO TRANSFORMATION IN THE GLOBAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Read More »

ANALYSING THE PREVALENT ISSUES ON ARBITRABILITY OF DISPUTES IN INDIA AND LIMITED JUDICIAL INTERVENTION: EMERGING ISSUES AND CHALLENGES

Volume IV Issue III /

ANALYSING THE PREVALENT ISSUES ON ARBITRABILITY OF DISPUTES IN INDIA AND LIMITED JUDICIAL INTERVENTION: EMERGING ISSUES AND CHALLENGES Shivani Johri, Assistant Professor, HILSR, Jamia Hamdard University, Delhi (India) Prof. Dr. Tarkesh Molia, Professor, Sharda University, Greater Noida (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.282 Arbitration in India has developed as an important alternative to traditional litigation, particularly in commercial disputes where delay, procedural complexity and judicial backlog remain serious concerns. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeks to promote party autonomy, procedural efficiency, finality of arbitral awards and minimal judicial intervention. However, Indian arbitration jurisprudence has historically reflected a continuing tension between arbitral autonomy and court supervision, especially in matters concerning arbitrability, interim relief, appointment of arbitrators, public policy review and enforcement of foreign awards. This paper critically examines the scope of judicial intervention in arbitration proceedings in India, with specific focus on the legal position before and after Bharat Aluminium Co. v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Inc. The pre-BALCO position, shaped by decisions such as Bhatia International and Venture Global, permitted wider Indian court intervention even in foreign-seated arbitrations. BALCO marked a significant doctrinal shift by reaffirming territoriality and restricting the application of Part I of the 1996 Act to India-seated arbitrations. The paper further analyses subsequent legislative amendments and judicial decisions that have attempted to strengthen arbitral independence while preserving limited judicial oversight in exceptional cases. The paper argues that judicial intervention remains justified where it protects procedural fairness, public policy, statutory rights and non-arbitrable subject matters. Nevertheless, excessive court interference undermines the efficiency, finality and autonomy of arbitration. The study concludes that Indian arbitration law is moving toward a more arbitration-friendly framework, but continued doctrinal clarity and institutional reform are necessary to balance arbitral autonomy with legitimate judicial supervision.

ANALYSING THE PREVALENT ISSUES ON ARBITRABILITY OF DISPUTES IN INDIA AND LIMITED JUDICIAL INTERVENTION: EMERGING ISSUES AND CHALLENGES Read More »

REIMAGINING PATENT JUSTICE: TRANSFORMING INDIA’S INNOVATION DISPUTES THROUGH SPECIALIZED ADR

Volume IV Issue III /

REIMAGINING PATENT JUSTICE: TRANSFORMING INDIA’S INNOVATION DISPUTES THROUGH SPECIALIZED ADR Harsh Pandey, 4th Year BA LLB Students, CHRIST (Deemed to be University) Delhi NCR (India) Shubhangi Joshi, 4th Year BA LLB Students, CHRIST (Deemed to be University) Delhi NCR (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.281 The expansion of the innovation driven industries in India, particularly in the pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, telecommunications and standard essential patents (SEPs) which led to a significant rise in the complex patent disputes. While statutory remedies exist under the Patents Act, 1970 and through commercial courts, patent litigation in India continues to face structural challenges including prolonged timelines, high costs, technical intricacy and multi- jurisdictional enforcement concerns. Against this backdrop, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms such as arbitration, mediation frameworks are increasingly being considered as viable and innovation sensitive alternatives. This doctrinal paper critically examines whether the current ADR frameworks in India are institutionally and jurisprudentially equipped to handle the patent disputes effectively. It evaluates ADR through parameters of time efficiency, cost rationality, party autonomy, confidentiality, enforceability and preservation of commercial relationships. Particular attention is devoted to the doctrinal debate surrounding arbitrability, especially the distinction between right in rem (patent validity) and rights in personam (licensing, royalty, infringement settlements) and the evolving judicial approach in India. The research further undertakes a comparative study of the international institutional models, including the WIPO Arbitration & Mediation Center and administrative enforcement frameworks in jurisdictions such as China, Singapore, & The USA. By integrating comparative insights with domestic legal analysis, this paper assesses the feasibility of adapting specialized patent ADR mechanism within India’s legal architecture. It concludes by proposing structured reforms aimed at institutional strengthening, expert driven adjudication, technology enabled dispute resolution to transform ADR from a peripheral alternative into a central pillar of patent governance.

REIMAGINING PATENT JUSTICE: TRANSFORMING INDIA’S INNOVATION DISPUTES THROUGH SPECIALIZED ADR Read More »

VALIDITY OF EXCLUSIONARY CLAUSES IN INDIAN GOVERNMENT WORKS CONTRACTS: INTEREST, COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYER-CAUSED DELAY

Volume IV Issue III /

VALIDITY OF EXCLUSIONARY CLAUSES IN INDIAN GOVERNMENT WORKS CONTRACTS: INTEREST, COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYER-CAUSED DELAY Satharasi Vasudeva Naidu, Professor & Former Principal, University Law College and Department of Studies in Law, Bangalore University, (India) Prof. Dr. N. Dasharath, Professor & Former Principal, University Law College and Department of Studies in Law, Bangalore University, (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.280 Indian Government construction contracts frequently contain non-negotiable clauses that restrict claims for interest on amounts withheld and deny compensation for delays covered by extensions of time. Such clauses are commonly found in standard-form contracts used by public agencies such as the Indian Railways, NHAI, KPWD and K-RIDE, and are generally defended on the basis of freedom of contract. This paper examines the enforceability of such exclusionary clauses where delay or non-payment is caused by the employer’s own conduct, including arbitrary deductions, failure to provide land or drawings, delayed certification, or non-performance of reciprocal contractual obligations. The research adopts doctrinal and comparative methods and analyses the Indian Contract Act, 1872, the Interest Act, 1978, the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the MSMED Act, 2006, along with leading judicial decisions on government works contracts. The paper specifically contrasts the contractual approach in Ramnath International Construction (P) Ltd. v. Union of India with the public-policy reasoning adopted in Simplex Concrete Piles (India) Ltd. v. Union of India and MBL Infrastructures Ltd. v. Delhi Metro Rail Corp. The analysis argues that while reasonable and symmetrical risk-allocation clauses may remain enforceable, absolute exclusions that permit public employers to avoid liability for their own breach should be treated as void under Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act. It further proposes a statutory amendment invalidating clauses that exclude liability for wilful breach, arbitrary withholding or employer-induced delay, together with corresponding reforms to Government Construction Contracts to protect contractors from wrongful retention of payments.

VALIDITY OF EXCLUSIONARY CLAUSES IN INDIAN GOVERNMENT WORKS CONTRACTS: INTEREST, COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYER-CAUSED DELAY Read More »

INTEGRATING DARUL QAZA AS COMMUNITY-BASED PRIVATE MEDIATION CENTERS WITHIN INDIA’S ADR FRAMEWORK

Volume IV Issue III /

INTEGRATING DARUL QAZA AS COMMUNITY-BASED PRIVATE MEDIATION CENTERS WITHIN INDIA’S ADR FRAMEWORK Imran Ullah Khan, Research Scholar at Faculty of Law, Integral University, Lucknow, (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.279 A renewed push for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in India has revived interest in traditional, indigenous and community-based mechanisms of dispute resolution. Darul Qaza represents a historically rooted institution within the Muslim community aimed at resolving matrimonial, family, community and civil disputes through principles grounded in Islamic jurisprudence. However, its legal status, constitutional legitimacy and intersection with the formal statutory framework remain subjects of complex debate. This paper investigates the operational framework of Darul Qaza through the lens of modern mediation principles, such as voluntariness, accessibility and party autonomy while evaluating its potential transformation into recognized private mediation centers within India’s formal ADR ecosystem. It further identifies key challenges including enforceability, legal validity, gender justice concerns, secularism, debates around public perception and overlap with formal courts of law. This paper argues that instead of viewing Darul Qaza as parallel judicial systems, they may be restructured as voluntary community mediation centers functioning within the statutory safeguards. Such an integration can strengthen access to justice, reduce litigation burden, and preserve cultural autonomy while upholding constitutional values. The paper proposes evolving a reform-oriented model that harmonizes community-based dispute resolution with constitutional policies, reflecting the broader transformation of traditional justice systems within modern democracies. The paper explores avenues for future collaboration between the indigenous and cultural ADR practices of Darul Qaza and conventional modes of conflict resolution within the modern Indian ADR regimen. It further proposes mediation-friendly reforms that can leverage the widespread social acceptance of Darul Qaza, thereby offering a localized, cross-cultural model for efficient dispute resolution.

INTEGRATING DARUL QAZA AS COMMUNITY-BASED PRIVATE MEDIATION CENTERS WITHIN INDIA’S ADR FRAMEWORK Read More »