LIJDLR

Article 21

CRIMINALIZATION OF MARITAL RAPE IN INDIA: A CONSTITUTIONAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS PERSPECTIVE

Volume IV Issue I /

CRIMINALIZATION OF MARITAL RAPE IN INDIA: A CONSTITUTIONAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS PERSPECTIVE Shashwat Gupta, B.A. LL. B (Hons), Guru Govind Singh Indraprastha University (India) Saurav Sanjay, B.B.A LL. B (Hons), Guru Govind Singh Indraprastha University (India) Megha Prabhakar, B.B.A LL. B (Hons), Guru Govind Singh Indraprastha University (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.64 Still stuck from British times, India lets married men escape rape charges if their wife is above eighteen. Section 63, Exception 2 in the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 keeps this rule alive. Marriage doesn’t mean surrendering control over one’s body. That idea clashes with what the Constitution promises – fair treatment under Article 14 and personal freedom under Article 21. Privacy matters. So does self-respect. Bodily rights stand firm even after wedding vows. Back in 2017, the Supreme Court made it clear through the Puttaswamy verdict – consent isn’t erased just because two people are married. When the 2012 Nirbhaya case shocked people, the Justice Verma Committee said in 2013 that marital rape should be clearly made illegal. Yet lawmakers ignored it, worried about clashing with what some call family traditions. So, today’s laws still skip punishing husbands who force sex on wives. This also undermines India’s commitments under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), which India ratified in 1993. CEDAW General Recommendation No. 35 on Gender-Based Violence against Women (2017), updating General Recommendation No. 19, recognises such abuse as a form of gender-based violence requiring state action without exception. Look elsewhere: Britain abolished the marital rape immunity in R v R [1992] 1 AC 599 (HL), affirming that marriage does not negate the requirement of consent. In Canada, their Criminal Code treats consent the same for everyone, respecting culture but rejecting pressure. Start here: laws, past rulings, and international promises are weighed to argue one clear point – scrapping the current rule now. A fresh version should treat everyone equally, hinge on real consent, allow courts to strike it down when freedoms clash. Training officers helps, so do quicker trials, public talks that shift views slowly. What grows between people works best when picked freely, never forced. When the law bans coercion, fairness follows; silence breaks inside houses just like outside them.

CRIMINALIZATION OF MARITAL RAPE IN INDIA: A CONSTITUTIONAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS PERSPECTIVE Read More »

CYBER SECURITY LAWS AND ROLE OF JUDICIARY IN PROTECTING PRIVACY RIGHTS IN INDIA

Volume IV Issue I /

CYBER SECURITY LAWS AND ROLE OF JUDICIARY IN PROTECTING PRIVACY RIGHTS IN INDIA Arpit Tripathi, LLM student at DSNLU Visakhapatnam (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.15 The rapid digitisation of India’s socio-economic framework has intensified concerns regarding cybersecurity and the protection of privacy rights. Recognised as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution, the right to privacy attained definitive constitutional status through the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017). This judgment not only affirmed privacy as intrinsic to human dignity and personal liberty but also established the principles of legality, necessity, and proportionality to assess state intrusion. India’s cybersecurity regime is primarily governed by the Information Technology Act, 2000, and strengthened by the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023. While the IT Act addresses cyber offences such as hacking, identity theft, and unauthorised access, the DPDP Act introduces a structured framework regulating data collection, processing, storage, and consent-based governance. Together, these statutes seek to ensure accountability of data fiduciaries and enhance digital security. The judiciary continues to play a pivotal role in balancing individual privacy with competing state interests, including national security and public order. Through constitutional interpretation and judicial review, courts have imposed procedural safeguards on surveillance mechanisms and reinforced limitations on arbitrary state action. This paper critically examines the evolving interplay between legislative measures and judicial oversight in shaping India’s digital privacy landscape, highlighting the need for robust enforcement and rights-oriented governance in the era of expanding digital infrastructure.

CYBER SECURITY LAWS AND ROLE OF JUDICIARY IN PROTECTING PRIVACY RIGHTS IN INDIA Read More »

RIGHT TO PRIVACY, A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT: A CASE STUDY ON JUSTICE K. S. PUTTASWAMY (RETD.) & ANR. V. UNION OF INDIA & ORS., 2017

Volume III Issue IV /

RIGHT TO PRIVACY, A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT: A CASE STUDY ON JUSTICE K. S. PUTTASWAMY (RETD.) & ANR. V. UNION OF INDIA & ORS., 2017 Fannana Mazumder, Student, LLM, 1st semester, IILM University, Greater Noida (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.203 Right to privacy is a complicated concept that has evolved over time and was affected by various factors. It is a multifaceted aspect which differs from person to person that seems to be easy but difficult to define. Right to privacy, in layman’s words, can be defined as the impalpable as well as physical right of any person to live freely from others’ interference or intrusion. The idea of privacy is a vague one having an intricate value. Right to privacy can also be defined as one’s freedom of choice.  The Right to Privacy is a fundamental aspect of human liberty and dignity. In India, right to privacy was recognized as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution by the Supreme Court in the case of Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) & anr. v. Union of India & ors., 2017. This case was a historic judgement that unanimously recognized Right to Privacy as a fundamental right. The historic judgement was delivered by a nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India in the year 2017. The case originally arose when Justice K. S. Puttaswamy, a retired judge of the Karnataka High Court via writ petition moved to Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of the Aadhar Scheme on the grounds that it violated the citizens’ right to privacy. The primary issue in this case was that whether the right to privacy was an intrinsic part of right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution and a part of the freedoms guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution.  The Supreme Court of India in its nine-judge bench unanimously delivered judgement, recognized right to privacy as a fundamental right and an intrinsic part of right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It was also held that right to privacy is also a part of the freedoms guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution. The Court overruled the earlier judgments in the cases of M. P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra, 1954 and Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 1964, where it was held, that right to privacy was not a fundamental right. This case emphasized that any infringement on the right to privacy must satisfy the conditions of legality, necessity and proportionality. The judgement also emphasized that privacy extends to all spheres of life including individual freedoms, data protection and sexual orientation. This historic judgement laid the groundwork in the case of Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, 2018 for decriminalization of homosexuality. This case was a game changer in the context of individual freedom in India marking the beginning of a historic legal battle. 

RIGHT TO PRIVACY, A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT: A CASE STUDY ON JUSTICE K. S. PUTTASWAMY (RETD.) & ANR. V. UNION OF INDIA & ORS., 2017 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 »

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 »

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 »

DIGITAL SURVEILLANCE AND INDIAN PRIVACY LAWS

Volume III Issue I /

DIGITAL SURVEILLANCE AND INDIAN PRIVACY LAWS Kamalpreet Kaur, BABA FARID LAW COLLEGE, PUNJAB Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2024.v03.4 “Privacy is not an option, and it should not be the price we accept for just getting on the Internet.[1].” These words by technology expert Gary Kovacs highlight the growing concerns relating to privacy in this digital age. Privacy is a fundamental human right that allows an individual to live free from unwarranted public attention and interference. On the other hand, there is ‘Digital Surveillance’, the process of monitoring, analyzing, and collecting data relating to the virtual activities of individuals like online communications, social media usage, patterns, behaviors, etc. In this digital era, the internet and technology are growing rampantly and have become an important aspect of almost all spheres of life. This technology is also being used for surveillance by government agencies for various purposes like prevention of crime, national security, etc., and even private entities collect individuals’ data for running advertisement campaigns, preventing fraud, etc. However, such practices also raise concerns about individuals’ privacy as they violate the Right to Privacy, which, although not explicitly mentioned, has been recognized as an integral part of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Now, as the popular saying goes, “Excess of anything is bad.” While unchecked surveillance violates privacy rights, absolute privacy can also be misused. Thus, there is a need for a perfect balance between the surveillance and the privacy laws so that the misuse of any of these laws be checked. This paper examines the relationship between digital surveillance and privacy laws in India, assessing the effectiveness of existing legal provisions and their ability to balance security needs with individual freedoms. It also explores judicial perspectives, policy gaps, and potential reforms inspired by international best practices to strengthen privacy protection in the Indian context.   Type Information Research Paper LawFoyer International Journal of Doctrinal Legal Research, Volume III, Issue I, Page 61-77. Creative Commons Copyright This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. © Authors, 2024

DIGITAL SURVEILLANCE AND INDIAN PRIVACY LAWS Read More »

VERACITY OF LIVE IN RELATIONSHIP IN INDIA

Volume II Issue II /

VERACITY OF LIVE IN RELATIONSHIP IN INDIA Kamaljeet Kaur, Student at University Five Year Law College, University Of Rajasthan, Jaipur Download Manuscript ABSTRACT As the Article 21 of the Indian Constitution says “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.”1  After the landmark judgement of Apex court in Navtej Singh Johar vs Union Of India  case  Article 21 also includes in its ambit the right to live with the partner of your choice.  Starting to Study  with the Historical Perspectives of marriages and live in relationships in India it can be concluded that despite of not having any specific legislations, the rulings of the Hon’ble Apex Court and The High[1] court stands as a milestone and ruling to protect and provide rights to live in relationship cohabiting couples. Furthermore the live in relationship is not only circumscribed in the definition of cohabitation of two hetero or homosexual persons being legally married but there can be many reasons for which this relationship starts. This can include examining compatibility, division of expenses, financial independence, checking the dispute resolution, emotional support   and many more according to the needs before formalizing this relationship into a legal marriage. Central to this paper is the legal and constitutional frameworks ranging from rights, precedents to legislations for resolving the disputes arousing with the passing time and increasing trend and protection of woman especially who are then neglected by society. The legislations include the Domestic Violence Act (2005), alimony, financial and property laws. Later on there comes speed breakers (challenges and concerns) that are need to be resolved. By drawing insights from worldwide and comparing the legislations of India with other countries like Brazil, France, USA, New York, Scandinavian countries valuable perspectives on alternative approaches to regulating and recognizing live-in relationships can be concluded. Type Information Research Paper LawFoyer International Journal of Doctrinal Legal Research, Volume II, Issue II, Page 293-309. Creative Commons Copyright This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. Copyright © LIJDLR 2024

VERACITY OF LIVE IN RELATIONSHIP IN INDIA Read More »

DENIED IDENTITY: EXAMINING THE INFRINGEMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS THROUGH THE BAN ON CASTE DECAL FOR VEHICLES

Volume II Issue II /

DENIED IDENTITY: EXAMINING THE INFRINGEMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS THROUGH THE BAN ON CASTE DECAL FOR VEHICLES Lakshay Gupta, Student of B.B.A.LLB at Christ Deemed to be University Delhi, NCR campus Shaivi Agnihotri, Student of B.B.A.LLB at Christ Deemed to be University Delhi, NCR campus Download Manuscript ABSTRACT Caste and religious decals on cars have drawn a lot of attention, particularly considering the Uttar Pradesh police’s recent enforcement campaign against them. Numerous court rulings and orders have emphasised the ban on these decals, highlighting issues with social harmony and public order. Nonetheless, objections to these prohibitions have been made, pointing out that the Indian Constitution’s fundamental rights have been violated. Three fundamental rights—Article 14 (Equality before the law), Article 19 (Freedom of speech and expression), and Article 21 (Protection of life and personal liberty)—intersect with the ban on caste and religious decals. Since Article 14 guarantees equality and the protection of the law, banning these decals might be unfair and discriminatory. It is implied that prohibiting these decals may limit expression, association, and identity assertion whereas, Article 19 protects the freedoms of speech, association, and movement. The protection of the right to life and liberty, which includes autonomy and dignity, is provided by Article 21. This right may be jeopardised by restricting speech and upholding discrimination. These prohibitions are still in effect despite legal challenges, and violations are subject to fines under certain provisions of the Motor Vehicle Act. But since the Act doesn’t specifically forbid caste or religious decals, it’s unclear whether the fines levied for their display are justified. Furthermore, the Act usually permits small modifications, such as stickers, provided they don’t change the fundamental design of the vehicles. The prohibitions on religious and caste decals seek to address social issues, but to be justified as constitutional, they must pass the reasonableness test. Navigating this complicated issue requires striking a balance between societal interests and individual freedoms to protect both that is our fundamental rights and advance inclusivity and social harmony. Type Information Research Paper LawFoyer International Journal of Doctrinal Legal Research, Volume II, Issue II, Page 215-225. Creative Commons Copyright This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. Copyright © LIJDLR 2024

DENIED IDENTITY: EXAMINING THE INFRINGEMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS THROUGH THE BAN ON CASTE DECAL FOR VEHICLES Read More »

TURN OF TABLES : AN OVERVIEW OF THE LEGALITY OF THE JALLIKATTU PRACTICE

Volume I Issue II /

TURN OF TABLES : AN OVERVIEW OF THE LEGALITY OF THE JALLIKATTU PRACTICE Disha Bhalla, First-year student at Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow. Download Manuscript ABSTRACT Recently, the Jallikattu Practice performed in the State of Tamil Nadu had a rollercoaster ride. Jallikattu in Tamil Nadu, Bullock-cart racing in Maharashtra, and Kambala in Karnataka are culturally infused bull-taming sports performed in these states. Their legality has been a subject of challenge for years now. The apparent conflict between the infliction of harm on animals and humans involved, and the cultural significance of the sport/s has left the judiciary in hot water. Despite this, the judiciary has finally derived some crucial conclusions in this regard.  But to grasp the spirit of the issue, understanding the legal background stands as a requisite. This Article aims at analyzing the timeline of events and providing an overview of the legality of the Jallikattu practice. From the basic understanding of what the practice is to the analysis of the historical decision recently held in the Animals Welfare Board of India v. Union of India[1], this Article aims at providing an understanding of all. All this started with a Writ Petition filed against this conventional practice in 2014, which eventually got the Practice struck down. However, protests by the performers reignited the issue. The final verdict has been at the long haul ever since.  But the wait is finally over, with the hoped-for recent judgment of a Constitutional bench of the Apex court substantiating their conclusions and turning the tables. Type Information Research Paper LawFoyer International Journal of Doctrinal Legal Research, Volume I, Issue II, Page 55 – 63 Creative Commons Copyright This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. Copyright © LIJDLR 2023 Recent content TURN OF TABLES : AN OVERVIEW OF THE LEGALITY OF THE JALLIKATTU PRACTICE LEGAL ASPECTS OF MARRIAGE OF MENTALLY UNSTABLE INDIVIDUALS A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ARMED FORCES SPECIAL POWER ACT (AFSPA). A NEED OF THE TIME OR A DELINEATION FROM THE MORALITY OF THE LAW? CORPORATE GOVERNANCE IN MODERN TIMES: CAN UTILIZATION OF TECHNOLOGY HELP ACHIEVE STRONGER CORPORATE GOVERNANCE AI ETHICS AND LEGAL COMPLIANCE-THE IMPERATIVE FOR RESPONSIBLE INNOVATION DRUGS PREVENTION LAWS IN INDIA-A CRITICAL ANALYSIS

TURN OF TABLES : AN OVERVIEW OF THE LEGALITY OF THE JALLIKATTU PRACTICE Read More »