Content DPDP Rules, 2025 Notified Powering the AVGC-XR Revolution DPDP Rules, 2025 Notified Why in News? Government notified the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Rules, 2025 on 14 November 2025, completing the operationalisation of the DPDP Act, 2023. Rules framed after nationwide consultations receiving 6,915 public inputs. Relevance : GS2 (Governance) Implements DPDP Act → strengthens citizen privacy rights and grievance systems. Regulates State–citizen data relationship; aligns with right to privacy (Art. 21). GS2 (Polity & Law) Operationalises a major digital rights law; impacts RTI–privacy balance. Establishes Digital Data Protection Board. GS3 (Cybersecurity) Mandatory breach reporting; stronger data security norms. Reduces cyber vulnerabilities across digital platforms. Basics: DPDP Act, 2023 – Foundation Enacted on 11 August 2023 to create a full framework for digital personal data protection. Based on SARAL design: Simple, Accessible, Rational, Actionable. Establishes: – Data Fiduciary – Data Principal – Data Processor – Consent Manager – Data Protection Board Core principles: consent, transparency, purpose limitation, data minimisation, accuracy, storage limitation, security safeguards, accountability. Penalties: – Up to ₹250 crore for failure to maintain security safeguards. – Up to ₹200 crore for breach notifications or violation of obligations related to children. – Up to ₹50 crore for other violations. Why DPDP Rules, 2025 Were Needed To operationalise the Act with granular procedures. To create uniform standards for consent, breach notification, grievance redressal. To ensure citizen-centricity, legal clarity, and predictable compliance frameworks for industry. Key Features of DPDP Rules, 2025 A. Phased Implementation 18-month compliance window for gradual adoption.Mandatory separate consent notices: plain language, purpose-specific. Consent Managers must be India-based companies. B. Personal Data Breach Protocols Mandatory immediate notice to affected individuals. Notice must explain: nature of breach, harm, mitigation measures, help contacts. Parallel reporting to the Data Protection Board. C. Transparency & Accountability Requirements Data Fiduciaries must display clear contact information (designated officer/DPO). Significant Data Fiduciaries (SDFs): – Independent audits. – Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs). – Stricter oversight for AI, biometrics, sensitive technologies. – Government-mandated obligations for restricted datasets (including possible local storage). D. Strengthening Rights of Data Principals Rights operationalised through explicit timelines and formats: – Access, correction, update, erasure rights. – Right to receive copies of personal data. – Right to nominate another person. Mandatory response within 90 days by Data Fiduciaries. E. Digital-First Data Protection Board 4-member, fully digital Board: – Online complaint filing. – Case tracking via portal & mobile app. Appeals to TDSAT. How DPDP Rules Empower Citizens Consent-centric model: explicit, informed, withdrawable anytime. Clear visibility into what data is collected and why. Data lifecycle rights: access, correction, update, erasure. Early breach alerts → empowers citizens to mitigate harm. Designated grievance contact mandatory for all organisations. Enhanced safeguards for: – Children: verifiable parental consent (exceptions: healthcare, education, real-time safety). – Persons with disabilities: lawful guardian consent where required. Alignment with the RTI Act DPDP revises Section 8(1)(j) of RTI to integrate privacy protections. Based on SC’s Puttaswamy (2017) judgment – privacy as a fundamental right. Protects personal information while preserving transparency regime. Section 8(2) RTI continues to allow disclosure when public interest outweighs privacy harm. Removes ambiguity between privacy rights vs. right to access public information. Implications for Stakeholders A. Citizens Stronger control → consent, correction, deletion, nomination. Enhanced breach transparency. Simplified grievance redressal. B. Businesses & Startups Longer compliance runway (18 months). Reduced ambiguity through standardised notices and timelines. Higher compliance cost for SDFs due to audits & DPIAs. C. Government Strengthens trust in digital governance. Builds regulatory capacity via digital Board. Harmonises national privacy regime with global best practices. Comparison with Global Frameworks Similar to GDPR in consent, breach reporting, principals’ rights. More simplified and India-specific: SARAL, 90-day response period, lighter obligations for MSMEs. Less categorisation of data (no “sensitive data” category unlike GDPR). Critical Analysis Strengths: – Clarity, plain language, graded obligations. – Faster enforcement via digital processes. – Strong penalties ensure deterrence. Concerns: – Government power to mandate storage/restricted processing may raise surveillance concerns. – Absence of independent DPA (Board appointed by govt). – Child consent requirements may burden edtech, gaming sectors. – No localisation as default → cross-border flows depend on govt notifications. Powering the AVGC-XR Revolution Why in News? PIB released a detailed update on India’s AVGC-XR ecosystem, highlighting IICT’s operationalisation, global partnerships, WAVES Summit outcomes, state-level AVGC policies, and rapid expansion of India’s creative-tech economy. India positions the AVGC-XR sector as a core driver of its USD 100 billion media & entertainment vision for 2030. Relevance : GS2 (Governance) IICT, AVGC Task Force, and new policies shaping India’s creative-tech ecosystem. Reforms under Cinematograph (Amendment) Act, 2023. GS3 (Economy) Sunrise sector; M&E industry projected to cross USD 100 bn. High employment and export potential. GS3 (Science & Tech) Growth of AR/VR/XR, virtual production, real-time rendering. Collaboration with global tech firms (Meta, Google, NVIDIA). Basics: AVGC-XR Sector AVGC-XR = Animation, Visual Effects (VFX), Gaming, Comics, Extended Reality (AR/VR/MR). Role: High-value digital content, tech-driven storytelling, global outsourcing hub, cultural diplomacy, innovation backbone for media & entertainment. India’s Media & Entertainment (M&E) Sector – Snapshot Sunrise industry; projected to cross USD 100 billion by 2030. Current projection: ₹3,067 billion by 2027 (CAGR ~7%). Contributes significantly to GVA and job creation. Cost advantage: 40–60% in VFX/animation vis-à-vis global studios. 25% OTT viewership from overseas, boosting India’s soft power. Strategic Pillars Driving Growth Talent Development: Skilling, global-standard curricula, industry tie-ups. Infrastructure: Production clusters, AVGC hubs, NCoE, IICT. Innovation & Industry: Start-up accelerators, XR applications, co-productions. Inclusive Participation: Regional language content & creative clusters. Genesis of the AVGC-XR Push 2022: AVGC Promotion Task Force formed; recommended National AVGC-XR Mission with “Create in India” focus. Projection: ~20 lakh direct/indirect jobs in 10 years. Aim: Make India a global digital content creation hub. IICT – Indian Institute of Creative Technologies Institutional Milestones May 2025: IICT formalised as Section 8 not-for-profit company. Global partners: Google, Meta, YouTube, NVIDIA, Adobe, Microsoft, Wacom, JioStar. July 2025: Courses launched; MoU with University of York for global benchmarking. July 18, 2025: First campus inaugurated at NFDC Complex, Mumbai (Budget: ₹400 crore). August 2025: WaveX Startup Incubator launched – first cohort of 15 start-ups. October 2025: MoU with FICCI + Netflix under Netflix Fund for Creative Equity. Functions Skilling + R&D + incubation + industry-education integration. Globally benchmarked content-creation & tech curriculum. National Centre of Excellence (NCoE) for AVGC-XR Approved 2024; apex national body for training, research, industry collaboration. Modern curriculum, joint R&D, global linkages. State-Level Policy Momentum Karnataka – AVGC-XR Policy 2024–29 Skilling ecosystem, incubation, export competitiveness, clusters. Maharashtra – AVGC-XR Policy 2025 (₹3,268 crore) Long-term roadmap till 2050. Focus on investments, jobs, dedicated production clusters. Key Policy and Legislative Reforms 1. Cinematograph (Amendment) Act, 2023 Anti-piracy (Sections 6AA & 6AB): Jail up to 3 years; fines up to 5% of audited production cost. Government empowered to direct intermediaries to remove pirated content. Permanent film certification + age-based categories. Supports content integrity + industry growth. 2. National Broadcasting Policy (Under formulation) Framework for content diversity, competition, ethical standards. Promotes digital broadcasting, IP protection, global presence. 3. India Cine Hub (NFDC) Single-window clearance for film shooting in India. Integrates permissions + incentives → boosts India’s film facilitation ecosystem. WAVES – World Audio Visual & Entertainment Summit (2025) Inaugural edition: 1–4 May 2025, Mumbai. PM inaugurated; global participation. Outcomes: WAVES Declaration on Global Media Cooperation. ₹1,328 crore business pipeline. ₹50 crore investment pool for WaveX startups. India positioned as global M&E hub under Viksit Bharat 2047. Technological Evolution & Impact Early VFX capability: Ra.One (2011), Baahubali (2015), Brahmastra (2022). Current capabilities: real-time rendering, volumetric capture, virtual production. Indian studios now handle high-end global projects. Global Projects Handled by Indian Studios Avatar: 200+ VFX shots. Game of Thrones: Dragon animations. Thor: The Dark World: Major VFX work. RRR: 2,800+ VFX shots; sophisticated workflows. Skilling & Workforce Development MESC leading training, competency standards, modular courses. Produces employable workforce in animation, VFX, gaming, XR, post-production. Innovation and Enterprise Gaming Industry Indian titles gaining traction: BGMI, FAU-G, Indus Battle Royale, Raji. Growing investor interest; shift from outsourcing → IP creation. Comics & Indian IPs Classic characters (Suppandi, Chacha Chaudhary, Shikkari Shambhu) being adapted into animation and series. Strong potential for transmedia storytelling. Academic–Industry Convergence IICT + NCoE + state-level clusters. Joint research, industry-designed curricula, incubation for media-tech startups. WaveX + T-Hub partnership → innovation hubs for AVGC-XR. The Road Ahead Animation & VFX Fiscal incentives + CoEs to position India as post-production hub. Global co-productions & IP-led animation. Gaming & eSports Structured tournaments + ethical frameworks. Start-up funding for gaming ed-tech, med-tech, health-tech applications. XR & Immersive Tech Scale XR in education, defence, tourism, healthcare. Standards for accessibility & interoperability. Comics & Digital IP Digitisation + new franchises + cross-platform storytelling. Strong alignment with cultural heritage. Cross-Sectoral Enablers Integrate AVGC-XR into higher education & vocational training. National talent registry + certification standards. IP protection, co-production treaties, global market access. “Create in India” + “Brand India” promotion for digital content exports.

Content The lower judiciary — litigation, pendency, stagnation India–Africa Relations: Ten Years After IAFS-III  The lower judiciary — litigation, pendency, stagnation Why in News? Constitution Bench led by the CJI linked massive pendency (4.69 crore cases in district courts) to stagnation in subordinate judiciary. Another SC Bench flagged poor basic knowledge among Delhi judges and ordered training. Debate revived on structural reforms, procedural simplification, and judicial capacity-building. Relevance GS-II (Polity & Governance): Judicial reforms, pendency, subordinate courts, Article 233–235, access to justice. GS-II (Welfare & Governance): Impact of procedural delays on citizens, rule of law. GS-II (Judiciary): Capacity-building, training, structural reforms, case management. Practice Questions Discuss the structural and procedural causes of pendency in India’s subordinate judiciary. Suggest reforms to improve trial court efficiency.(250 Words) Basics: Structure of Subordinate Judiciary Three tiers: District Judges → Senior Civil Judges → Civil Judges (Junior Division). Governance: Appointments and service conditions under Art. 233–235, controlled by High Courts. Workload: Handle 85–90% of India’s total caseload; first point of citizen–justice interface. Pendency drivers: Delays in summons, adjournments, procedural complexity, understaffing, lack of training. Core Problem 1: Ministerial Work Consumes Judicial Time Subordinate judges forced to: Call cases for appearance Issue/reissue summons Receive vakalatnamas, written statements Morning session (10:30 AM–12 PM) consumed by clerical duties → little time left for hearing matters on merits. Quality judicial hours lost daily → slows trials and judgments. Proposed Reform Appoint a ministerial judicial officer (lowest rank) per district: Handles clerical/administrative tasks full day Records ex-parte evidence, issues summons, receives filings Prepares next-day cause list for each court; publish online Actual courts start trial work at 10:30 AM → improves output and judgments. Core Problem 2: Declining Quality of Subordinate Judges Earlier: District munsifs/magistrates selected from lawyers with 10+ years of mentorship & practice. Now: Fresh graduates with no court experience → struggle with drafting orders, managing courtroom. SC noted “lack of basic knowledge” → ordered mandatory training for Delhi judges. Proposed Reform Mandatory few-month training at High Court Benches: Observe hearings, order-writing, argument structure Learn judgment reading & case management culture Raises competence, reduces poor orders, cuts unnecessary appeals. Core Problem 3: Statutory Provisions Increasing, Not Reducing, Pendency (a) Commercial Courts Act – Section 12A (Pre-suit Mediation) Mandatory mediation before filing commercial suits (Patil Automation, 2022). Business disputes already involve pre-litigation notice → mandatory mediation adds delay. Suit filing gets blocked → increases pendency. (b) Marriage Laws – 6-Month Cooling-off Couples wanting quick mutual consent divorce are forced to wait, unless court waives period. Many courts don’t waive → false declarations about “one-year separation” → more litigation. (c) New Rent Act Confusion Conflicting rulings on whether rent court has jurisdiction without registered lease. Same facts → civil court/commercial court jurisdiction, but not rent court. Result: Forum confusion and fresh filings → pendency rises. Core Problem 4: Archaic & Complex Procedural Law (CPC) Key flaws Preliminary & final decree system in partition suits → doubles litigation. Execution proceedings (Order XXI – 106 rules) highly technical → tools for delaying decree implementation. Order VIII Rule 1 (90-day limit on written statement): Rigid for title suits; does not speed disposal. Leads to poorly drafted pleadings, not faster justice. Needed Reforms Merge preliminary–final decrees; make final decree automatic. Simplify execution proceedings; introduce fast-track enforcement. Introduce asset disclosure at framing of issues → speeds recovery. Modernise procedural law designed for 1908 litigation realities. Core Problem 5: Higher Judiciary’s Role Pendency not just a trial court issue—appellate delays also cause stagnation. Need: Faster disposal of appeals Stricter adjournment norms Monitoring of High Court case management Way Forward Create ministerial courts for summons/filings. Recruit experienced lawyers as trial judges (reverse current trend). Mandatory High Court bench exposure for new judges. Overhaul procedural law (CPC, Rent Act, Commercial Courts Act). Fast-track execution of decrees & arbitration awards. Digital cause-lists, e-summons, video evidence recording. Increase judge-to-population ratio (India: ~21 judges per million; global avg: 50+). Fill vacancies quickly; periodic performance reviews. India–Africa Relations: Ten Years After IAFS-III Why is it in News? A decade has passed since India hosted IAFS-III in 2015, the last India–Africa Forum Summit attended by all 54 African states. India has since expanded missions, investments, and diplomatic engagement, but the IAFS mechanism has not reconvened. Strategic review needed as Africa gains demographic, economic, and geopolitical weight; India–Africa ties entering new competitive and opportunity-rich phase. Relevance GS-II (International Relations): India–Africa partnership, South–South cooperation, diplomacy. GS-II (Global Governance): AU in G20, India’s role in multilateral forums. GS-III (Economy): Trade, investments, digital corridor, AfCFTA. GS-III (Security): Maritime cooperation, Indo-Pacific, anti-piracy. Practice Questions IAFS has not met since 2015. Critically analyse the implications for India’s long-term Africa strategy.(250 Words) Basics: India–Africa Forum Summit (IAFS) Institutional platform for structured India–Africa partnership. Held in 2008 (Delhi), 2011 (Addis Ababa), 2015 (Delhi). Themes: capacity building, grants, Lines of Credit (LoCs), training, education, agriculture, energy, digital connectivity. Status of India–Africa Engagement Since 2015 Diplomatic Expansion 17 new Indian missions opened across Africa. India supports African Union’s global role → key in securing AU’s full G20 membership. Economic Links Trade crossed $100 bn. Cumulative investments: $75 bn, placing India among Africa’s top five investors. Shift from resource-led projects to co-creation: ports, grids, vaccines, digital tools. Strategic & Maritime Cooperation 2025: First Africa–India Key Maritime Engagement (AIKEYME) with nine African navies. Focus on Indo-Pacific, anti-piracy, maritime domain awareness. Development Partnerships EXIM Bank extended $40 mn line of credit to ECOWAS Bank → signalling support for African-led development. Knowledge partnerships strengthened (ITEC, ICCR, Pan-African e-Network). Education & People-to-People IIT Madras Zanzibar campus → first offshore IIT. 40,000 Africans trained in India in the last decade. African students, athletes, researchers increasingly visible in India → reciprocal people-to-people linkages. Opportunities: The Growth Corridor By 2050: 1 in 4 humans will be African, while India becomes the 3rd largest economy. Complementary strengths: Africa’s demography + India’s technology Africa’s markets + India’s industry Shared colonial history + Global South leadership AfCFTA is creating a single African market → opportunities for Indian manufacturing and digital finance. Challenges India lags behind China in trade volume and infrastructure presence. Indian firms face: Small balance sheets Slow execution Policy uncertainty Bureaucratic delays Africa’s innovation hubs (Kigali, Nairobi, Lagos) face intense global competition → India must move faster. Sectoral Priorities for the Next Decade 1. Co-invest in Future Sectors Green hydrogen Electric mobility Digital public infrastructure Vaccine & pharma manufacturing Agritech & food processing 2. Build an India–Africa Digital Corridor Combine India Stack/UPI with Africa’s mobile-first digital ecosystems. Joint platforms for: Tele-education Tele-health Payments Government services 3. Strengthen Institutional Mechanisms Revive IAFS-IV to reset long-term agenda. Annual ministerial consultations, thematic working groups (health, digital, energy). India’s Competitive Advantage Historical goodwill; no colonial baggage. Affordable technology and capacity-building model. Strong diaspora links and educational exchanges. Soft power: Bollywood, cricket, yoga, healthcare. Core Strategic Logic Africa’s rise is inevitable; India’s rise is ongoing → convergence creates a South–South Growth Corridor. India–Africa partnership must shift from donor–recipient to co-creation and co-investment. Delivery, not mere announcements, will define the next phase.

Content Ladakh Groups Submit Draft Proposal to MHA on Statehood & 6th Schedule Status Social Audit for SIR 2.0 Trajectory of Anti-Rape Laws in India Batukeshwar Dutt National Gopal Ratna Awards (NGRA) 2024–25 Digital Labour Chowk, LCFCs & New Cess Portal UNESCO’s Global Ethics Framework on Neurotechnology Ladakh Groups Submit Draft Proposal to MHA on Statehood & 6th Schedule Status Why in News? Leh Apex Body (LAB) and allied groups submitted a 29-page draft proposal to the MHA demanding: Statehood for Ladakh Sixth Schedule status General amnesty for those arrested after September 24 violence Release of climate activist Sonam Wangchuk, detained under the NSA. Negotiations between Ladakhi groups and MHA stalled in September after Wangchuk’s hunger strike. Relevance : GS2: Polity & Governance Centre–State relations, Union Territories without legislature Sixth Schedule, Tribal rights, Constitutional safeguards Democratic deficit, decentralisation, federalism GS3: Internal Security Governance in border regions (LAC with China) NSA use, civil society movements, environmental activism GS1 (Society) Tribal identity, cultural preservation in Himalayan regions Governance Structure of Ladakh Became a Union Territory (UT) without legislature after J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019. Administration controlled by: Lieutenant Governor (LG) Two Autonomous Hill Development Councils: Leh Hill Council Kargil Hill Council No elected Assembly — demand for democratic deficit & resource control. What is the Sixth Schedule? Constitutional provision for tribal-majority areas ensuring: Autonomous District Councils with legislative, judicial and financial powers. Special protections over land, culture, natural resources. Applicable currently in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, Mizoram. Why Ladakh Wants Sixth Schedule Status? Tribal population ≈ 90% (Scheduled Tribes). Fears over: Unregulated industrialisation Loss of land, culture, ecology External demographic pressures Sixth Schedule seen as stronger protection than current Hill Councils. Key Demands in the 29-Page Draft Proposal Full Statehood to ensure democratic governance. Sixth Schedule inclusion for constitutional protection of land & resources. General Amnesty for those arrested after September 24 clash in Leh. Immediate Release of Sonam Wangchuk detained under NSA. Resumption of stalled talks with clear timelines. Enhanced powers for local bodies, environmental protection, and tribal safeguards. Why the Issue Matters? Involves Centre-State relations, tribal rights, UT governance. Part of India’s border governance strategy with China. Reflects challenges in post-2019 reorganisation of J&K. Integrates themes of environmental activism, federalism, security law use (NSA). Challenges & Concern Areas Centre’s hesitation to grant 6th Schedule → precedent concerns for other UTs/states. Security implications due to location near LAC. Divergence between Leh (favors unionism) and Kargil (historically pro-statehood) narrowing, but still present. Rising youth discontent, seen in September 24 clashes. Potential Outcomes Going Forward MHA may: Offer enhanced powers under Ladakh Hill Councils Act instead of Sixth Schedule. Consider partial concessions (cultural & land safeguards) without full autonomy. Set timelines for institutional mechanisms like Tribes Advisory Council. If negotiations stall: More civil society mobilisations expected. International attention due to climate activism angle. Social Audit for SIR 2.0 Why in News? ECI initiated Special Intensive Revision (SIR) 2.0 across 12 States/UTs to reverify voter eligibility. The article warned that the Bihar experience shows potential mass disenfranchisement, particularly of women, Muslims, and migrants, threatening the integrity of electoral democracy. Relevance : GS2: Polity & Governance Electoral reforms, electoral roll accuracy ECI’s constitutional mandate, independence & accountability Social audits (constitutional backing: Local Bodies, transparency) What is Special Intensive Revision (SIR)? A documentation-heavy re-verification of existing voters. Requires fresh submission of documents proving: Identity Address (ordinary residence) Age eligibility Intended purpose: clean rolls, remove duplicates, update migrant data. Problem: No specific Rules, procedural clarity, or transparent oversight mechanism under existing electoral law. Legal Framework: Electoral Roll Revision Governed by Representation of the People Act, 1950. Section 19: Person must be “ordinarily resident” to be enrolled. Section 20: Defines “ordinaryresidence”, but outdated; does not recognise: Long-term migrants Short-term/seasonal workers Circular migrants SIR’s reliance on strict documentation → risks excluding these groups. Bihar Case Study: What Went Wrong? Evidence of Disenfranchisement Sharp drop in adult–elector ratio. Large-scale deletions of women and Muslim voters. Duplicate names, bogus entries, inconsistent deletions. People unable to produce documents → lost voting rights. Why It Became Controversial ? Exercise resembled a citizenship screening regime, not voter roll maintenance. Heavy burden placed on citizens rather than ECI/BLOs. Led to fear of stealth NRC-like filtration through electoral rolls. Institutional Issues Raised Election Commission of India (ECI) Allegations of: Lack of transparency Defensive posture in court filings Avoiding scrutiny Prioritising institutional authority over inclusive roll preparation Perception of declining impartiality and institutional credibility. Supreme Court Monitored the exercise but: Avoided ruling on legality of SIR powers. Allowed SIR to continue despite procedural deficiencies. Mitigated small inequities but did not address structural flaws. Risk of legitimising an unconstitutional framework with discriminatory outcomes. Vulnerability of Internal Migrants India has 450+ million internal migrants (Census projection-based estimates). Tamil Nadu flagged as a major concern due to high migrant worker population. Strict interpretation of “ordinary residence” → mass exclusions. SIR does not differentiate between types of migrants, leading to: Loss of franchise Distorted voter representation Urban–industrial disenfranchisement Democratic Implications Universal adult franchise depends on: Automatic, accurate enrollment No arbitrary deletions No documentation barriers SIR introduces burdens that shift responsibility from the State to citizens. High non-participation already exists: 30–40% do not vote; forcing reapplications worsens exclusion. Need for Mandatory Social Audit Concept Community-based verification of public records. Ensures transparency, accountability, and participation. Constitutional & Institutional Backing Articles 243A & 243J empower community monitoring. CAG formally endorses social audits as essential for mass programmes. Advantages for Electoral Roll Verification Ground-level correction by: Gram sabhas Ward sabhas Booth-level committees Ensures: Minimal manipulation Maximum inclusion Real-time correction of errors Historical Precedent (2003 Experiment) Conducted under CEC J.M. Lyngdoh. Decentralised social audits in 5 poll-bound States. In Rajasthan alone: 7 lakh corrections made after public audit. Demonstrated best practice for inclusive and transparent roll revision. Article’s Recommendation ECI must: Frame clear Rules for SIR. Make social audit mandatory. Consult civil society, political parties, and rights groups. Ensure that SIR 2.0 does not replicate Bihar’s exclusions. Trajectory of Anti-Rape Laws in India Why in News? Chief Justice of India B. R. Gavai publicly condemned the 1979 Supreme Court acquittal in the Tukaram v. State of Maharashtra (Mathura rape case), calling it an “institutional embarrassment.” CJI’s remarks highlight India’s evolving anti-rape legal framework, reforms in consent definitions, custodial rape protections, and contemporary changes under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023. Article traces the entire legal trajectory from 1972 to 2023, linking reforms to public outrage and judicial criticism. Relevance : GS2: Polity & Social Justice Evolution of criminal law, custodial violence, women’s safety laws BNS 2023 changes (gender neutrality, consent definition) Judicial interpretations shaping reforms (Mathura, Nirbhaya) GS1: Society (Women Issues) Gender norms, patriarchal biases in law enforcement Understanding the Mathura Rape Case (Tukaram Case, 1972–79) Survivor: Tribal girl, 14–16 years, sexually assaulted inside a police station by two policemen. Trial Court (1974): Disbelieved survivor, labeled her “habituated”; held no rape proven. Bombay High Court (1976): Convicted policemen, recognized power imbalance and coercion. Supreme Court (1979): Acquitted the accused, arguing: No injuries → “peaceful intercourse” Survivor “did not resist” Reflected a patriarchal, colonial-era understanding of consent. Turning Point: The 1979 Open Letter Written by: Upendra Baxi, Lotika Sarkar, Vasudha Dhagamwar, Raghunath Kelkar. Key arguments: Submission ≠ Consent Absence of resistance ≠ consent Court ignored: Power of police Survivor’s age Illegality of calling minor girls to police station at night Socio-economic vulnerability Sparked national protests → beginning of India’s modern women’s rights movement. Immediate Legal Reforms Triggered Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1983 Custodial rape created as a separate aggravated offence. Burden of proof shifted to the accused in custodial rape cases after intercourse is proved. Strengthened: Dowry Act penalties Family Courts First major statutory shift recognising coercive environments. Evolution Through Major Cases & Movements Nandini Satpathy Case (1978) Justice Krishna Iyer: Women cannot be summoned to police stations. Must be questioned at residence. Highlighted custodial vulnerabilities even before Mathura verdict. Bhanwari Devi Case & Vishaka Guidelines (1992–1997) Bhanwari Devi gangraped for stopping child marriage. Vishaka Guidelines (1997) laid foundational framework for workplace sexual harassment law. Recognised State obligation to ensure safe working spaces for women. Nirbhaya Case & Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2013 Rape-and-murder of a 22-year-old physiotherapy intern (Dec 2012). Massive protests → Justice J.S. Verma Committee → sweeping reforms: Definition of rape expanded beyond penetration. Police non-registration of FIR punishable. Hospitals mandated free treatment to survivors. Silence or “feeble no” ≠ consent. Age of consent raised to 18. Death penalty for extreme cases & repeat offenders. Unnao and Kathua Cases (2017–18) & Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2018 Unnao: MLA Kuldeep Sengar convicted for rape of a minor. Kathua: Minor girl gangraped and murdered. Reforms: Death penalty for rape of girls below 12 years. Minimum 20-year sentence for rape of girls below 16. Fast-tracked: Investigation: 2 months Trial: 2 months Appeals: 6 months Latest Phase: Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023 Major overhaul replacing IPC. Key changes: Sexual offences made gender-neutral for victims and perpetrators. Gangrape of a woman below 18: death or life imprisonment. New offence: sexual intercourse under false pretences/false promise of marriage. Expanded definition of: Sexual harassment Non-consensual sexual acts not covered earlier Reflects modern understanding of consent and coercion. Themes Underlying India’s Legal Evolution Recognition of power asymmetry (custodial, caste, economic, institutional). Increasing acknowledgment that: Consent must be affirmative, voluntary. Lack of resistance is not consent. Greater victim-sensitive procedures: FIR rights Medical care Shifting burden in custodial cases Faster trials in minors’ cases Progressive move away from: Stereotypes about “chastity,” “habituality,” “conduct” Injury-based understanding of rape Challenges That Continue Low conviction rates (~27–33% nationally). Police bias, investigative lapses, hostile environments. Victim intimidation, delays in evidence collection. Need for: Better forensics Survivor support systems Gender-sensitisation of police and judiciary Batukeshwar Dutt Why in News? A recent article revisits the life, legacy, and neglect of Batukeshwar Dutt, co-revolutionary of Bhagat Singh, on the occasion of renewed debates around revolutionary memorialisation. Highlights the 1929 Central Assembly bombing, Dutt’s sacrifices, and the lack of adequate national recognition despite his central role. Relevance : GS1: Modern Indian History Revolutionary nationalism, HSRA, Central Assembly Bombing Freedom fighters’ contributions beyond textbook icons GS1: Heritage & Personalities Historical neglect, issues of memorialisation Basic Facts  Event: Central Assembly Bombing, April 8, 1929 (Delhi). Actors: Bhagat Singh & Batukeshwar Dutt (HSRA members). Objective: Protest against the Public Safety Bill & Trade Disputes Bill; aimed to “make the deaf hear”. Nature of Bombs: Harmless, non-lethal; intended for symbolic protest. Slogans: Inquilab Zindabad; Samrajyavad ka Nash Ho. Pamphlet: “To Make the Deaf Hear”. Outcome: Both arrested; life sentence for Dutt, death sentence later in Lahore Conspiracy Case for Bhagat Singh. Batukeshwar Dutt: Life & Background Born: 18 November 1910, Burdwan (Bengal). Joined HSRA as a young revolutionary; close associate of Bhagat Singh. Convicted in the Delhi Assembly Bomb Case (June 12, 1929); sentenced to transportation for life. Jail Years & Hunger Strikes Imprisoned in Multan, Jhelum, Trichinopoly, Salem, Andamans. Undertook multiple hunger strikes demanding political prisoner rights. Twice fasted over a month, highlighting prison brutality. Was in Salem Jail when Bhagat Singh, Rajguru, Sukhdev were executed (March 23, 1931). Post-Release Struggles Released in 1938; re-arrested in Quit India Movement (1942); jailed again for 4 years. Married Anjali; lived in Patna. Bihar govt allotted him a coal depot — economically unviable. President Rajendra Prasad urged support; resulted only in a token 6-month nomination to Bihar Legislative Council. Health Decline & Death Suffered from bone cancer (mid-1960s). Admitted to AIIMS Delhi; eight months of suffering. Plans to send him abroad dropped after assessment that Indian care was comparable. Died: 20 July 1965. Cremated at Hussainiwala, Punjab — beside Bhagat Singh, Rajguru, Sukhdev. Neglect vs Recognition Massive state funeral attended by President, PM, ministers, large public turnout. Yet no portrait of Bhagat Singh or Dutt in Parliament; contrast with Savarkar’s portrait being prominently placed. 2014 protests by MPs for inclusion of Bhagat Singh’s portrait; ignored. Dutt largely absent from school textbooks, memorials, public memory. Chaman Lal Azad’s Documentation Journalist and revolutionary; cared for Dutt during his final months. Wrote Urdu series compiled as Bhagat Singh aur Dutt ki Amar Kahani (1966). Contains: Bhagat Singh’s letters, statements, postcards. Gandhi’s letter to Dutt. Rare photographs with Nehru, Indira Gandhi. Dutt’s recollections of fellow revolutionaries (Hari Kishan Talwar, Ehsan Ilahi, etc.). Hindi translation commissioned but unpublished due to copyright issues. Revolutionary Network & Personal Bonds Close ties with Bhagat Singh’s family; Mata Vidyawati stayed with him in final days. She even sold a poetic manuscript to raise money for his treatment. Comrades like Shiv Verma, Kiran Das, and others remained with him. Leaders like Gulzari Lal Nanda, Y. B. Chavan, Jagjivan Ram visited, though recognition came mostly posthumously. Ideas & Ideological Contributions Shared Bhagat Singh’s vision of socialism, secularism, and class equality. Emphasised Singh’s intellectual depth — always reading, studying, debating ideology. Dutt criticised early films on Bhagat Singh for distortions; approved only Manoj Kumar’s “Shaheed” (1965). Key Takeaways Dutt’s journey reveals systemic neglect of revolutionaries post-independence. Highlights tensions between ideological preferences in official memorialisation. Shows how state narratives often sideline figures who challenge mainstream political icons. His life symbolises the unrewarded sacrifices of many lesser-known freedom fighters. Demonstrates the importance of archival preservation — many primary sources remain inaccessible. National Gopal Ratna Awards (NGRA) 2024–25 Why in News? Union Animal Husbandry Ministry announced winners of the National Gopal Ratna Awards (NGRA). Aravind Yashavant Patil (Kolhapur, Maharashtra) won the top award for Best Dairy Farmer – Indigenous Cattle/Buffalo Breeds. A total of 2,081 applications were received for the 2024–25 cycle. Awards will be presented on November 26. Relevance : GS3: Agriculture & Allied Sectors Dairy sector, livestock economy, indigenous breeds Breed improvement, fodder, veterinary infrastructure GS3: Economics (Rural Economy) Dairy cooperatives, SHGs, FPOs, rural livelihoods Basics  Ministry: Union Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry & Dairying. Launched under: National Programme for Bovine Breeding & Dairy Development (NPBBDD). Purpose: Promote indigenous bovine breeds, scientific dairy practices, and farmer-led breed conservation. Categories typically include: Best Dairy Farmer (Indigenous breeds) Best Artificial Insemination Technician Best Dairy Cooperative/SHG/Producer Company Best Dairy Entrepreneur Objectives of NGRA Encourage farmers to rear indigenous cattle and buffaloes. Promote breed improvement, genetic purity, and productivity enhancement. Reward best practices in animal management, feeding, disease control, clean milk production. Strengthen local germplasm conservation and sustainable dairy economy. Highlight role of dairy sector in rural livelihoods and nutritional security. Significance for Dairy Sector India is the world’s largest milk producer (~230+ million tonnes annually). Indigenous breeds (Gir, Sahiwal, Tharparkar, Red Sindhi, Murrah, Jaffarabadi etc.) are critical for: Higher disease resilience Lower maintenance cost Adaptation to climatic stress (heat stress + drought) Better A2 milk demand Awards push formalisation, quality improvement, and skill development among dairy workers. Recent Trends & Data Increasing shift toward indigenous breed improvement programmes, including: Rashtriya Gokul Mission National Kamdhenu Breeding Centres IVF & Embryo Transfer initiatives NGRA complements government’s push for breed conservation + commercial viability. Rising pan-India applications (2,081 this year) shows growing interest in scientific dairy farming. Governance & Implementation Angle Supports Atmanirbhar Bharat via livestock-based rural economy. Strengthens cooperatives, SHGs, and Farmer Producer Organisations. Encourages private sector and youth participation in dairy entrepreneurship. Recognises role of women dairy farmers, often the backbone of rural dairy work. Environmental & Sustainability Linkages Indigenous breeds help reduce climate vulnerability of rural dairy systems. Lower input requirements → lower carbon footprint vs exotic breeds. Promote pastoral, mixed-farming systems and biodiversity conservation. Issues & Criticisms Indigenous breeds often face: Lower productivity vs crossbreeds Inadequate veterinary infrastructure Fragmented breed conservation efforts Artificial insemination skill gaps Awards must be backed by financial support, extension services, fodder development, and market linkages. Digital Labour Chowk, LCFCs & New Cess Portal Why in News? The Construction Workers’ Federation of India (CWFI) criticised the Union Labour Ministry’s new digital initiatives: Digital Labour Chowk Portal & App Labour Felicitation Centres (LCFCs) Online Building and Construction Workers (BOCW) Cess Collection Portal CWFI alleges these measures aim to “de-unionise” workers, bypass unions, and strengthen employer control. Claims that these initiatives divert attention from the government’s failure to register workers and disburse accumulated welfare funds under the BOCW Act. Relevance : GS2: Governance Labour welfare laws, tripartism, de-unionisation debate Digital governance, welfare delivery reform GS3: Economy Informal sector, migrant labour, construction sector shape Cess utilisation & transparency Basics Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996 Mandates: Registration of construction workers. Safety, welfare, social security benefits. Funded through 1% cess on construction cost collected from employers. Key Institutions Central/State BOCW Welfare Boards → responsible for worker registration, fund management, benefit distribution. Cess Collection Portal (new) → digitises employer payments, compliance, and transparency. Digital Labour Chowk → digital job-matching platform for construction labour. What the New Digital Initiatives Do Digital Labour Chowk Portal & App Online marketplace connecting workers & contractors. Digitises hiring, attendance, wage flow, and worker profiles. Intended to reduce middlemen and informal negotiation. Labour Felicitation Centres (LCFCs) Physical centres for onboarding workers, grievance redress, digital literacy. Online BOCW Cess Collection Portal Streamlines cess payment. Reduces leakages and manual delays. CWFI’s Key Objections No consultation with trade unions → violates tripartite approach (state–employer–worker). De-unionisation: Digital hiring bypasses unions → weakens collective bargaining power. Surveillance concerns: Portals emphasise worker tracking and data collection. Top-down design: Insufficient worker involvement in shaping the system. Diversion from core failures: Millions of workers still unregistered. Thousands of crores of cess funds lie unspent (due to bureaucratic delays). Benefits remain inaccessible to migrant and unorganised workers. CWFI’s Specific Critiques 1. “Digital gates while the vault stays locked” Government focuses on tech platforms but not on actual welfare delivery. Portal efficiency irrelevant if benefits remain undistributed. 2. Fundamental flaws App and portal require digital literacy, documentation, and smartphones → excluding a majority of migrant BOCW workers. Job-matching platforms may promote casualisation rather than secure employment. Digital systems may formalise employer control over hiring without strengthening worker rights. 3. Anti-worker implications Weakens unions → reduces bargaining over wages, safety gear, work hours. Employers gain real-time access to labour pools → pushes wages downward. Increased vulnerability for interstate migrant workers. 4. Lack of transparency about welfare funds Unspent cess funds in many states (estimates often run into thousands of crores). Digital makeover may obscure rather than solve the welfare delivery problem. Government’s Expected Rationale  Digitisation increases efficiency, transparency, and portability of benefits. Helps track migrant workers across states. Reduces leakages in cess collection. Supports ease of doing business by simplifying compliance. Aims to build a national labour database ahead of full implementation of Labour Codes. Issues & Challenges Deep digital divide → exclusion risk. Migrant construction labour is highly mobile; portal registration alone does not ensure welfare access. Centralised platforms risk data misuse without strong privacy safeguards. Undermining unions creates long-term asymmetry of power between labour and contractors. Labour Codes (still pending/partially rolled out) already weakened traditional protections — unions view new portals as part of this trend. Broader Structural Context Construction workforce: ~5 crore workers, highly informal, migrant-heavy. One of India’s most dangerous sectors → high accident rate, low safety compliance. Historically under-registered: welfare boards often have less than 30–40% coverage. Cess utilisation varies widely; some states have used barely 20–30% of collected funds. Key Takeaways CWFI sees the digital initiatives as centralised, surveillance-oriented, and designed to weaken worker collective strength. Major concern: digitisation without welfare delivery → cosmetic reform over substantive rights. Highlights India’s persistent challenge: bringing informal, migrant, construction workers under real welfare protection. UNESCO’S global Ethics Framework on Neurotechnology Why in News? UNESCO issued the first-ever global normative framework on neurotechnology ethics on November 5, 2025, which came into force on November 12. Aims to balance innovation with human rights, prevent misuse of brain data, and protect freedom of thought in the emerging neurotech era. Parallelly, a new study on transgenerational behavioural inheritance in C. elegans (published in eLife, Nov 11) highlighted ethical concerns around neurodata interpretation and biological determinism — relevant to the framework’s “future generations” principle. Relevance : GS2: International Relations Global ethics norms, UNESCO role Neurorights emerging in global governance GS3: Science & Technology Neurotech, BCIs, AI–brain interfaces Data protection, mental autonomy, future risks GS4: Ethics Mental integrity, autonomy, human dignity Ethical limits on technology, consent, manipulation What is Neurotechnology? Devices, procedures, and systems that access, assess, or act on neural systems. Examples: AI-assisted neuroimaging Brain–computer interfaces (BCIs) Neural implants (e.g., Neuralink) Cognitive enhancement tools Global Investment: Public funding > $6 billion (2023 UNESCO study). Private funding > $7.3 billion (end-2020). Why a Framework Was Needed ? Neurotechnology can decode neurodata → enabling: Tracking emotional states Predicting preferences Decoding intentions Influencing decision-making Risks identified: Political persuasion via brain-signal profiling Insurance discrimination using neural markers Workplace screening using stress tolerance or hidden traits Covert manipulation of behaviour through stimuli Absence of global norms despite rapid commercialisation. Key Drivers Before UNESCO Framework 2019 OECD Standards: Responsible innovation, tech transfer, IP pools, and licensing norms. 2022 UNESCO Bioethics Committee Report: Called for a comprehensive governance structure. Growing “neurorights” movement: Chile: first to protect “mental integrity” constitutionally. California (2024): law protecting brain data. What UNESCO’s Framework Contains  Three-Pillar Structure Definition of neurotechnology & neurodata Values, principles, sector-specific (health, education) guidance Special protections for vulnerable groups (children, elderly, disabled) Core Ethical Principles  Protection Principles Mental autonomy & freedom of thought Mental integrity Privacy and protection of neural data Prohibition of manipulation, deception, political or commercial influence Non-discrimination & inclusivity No harm & proportionality Innovation Principles Beneficence Accountability & transparency Trustworthiness Epistemic justice Protection of future generations Sustainable development alignment Explicit Prohibitions Using neural signals for political microtargeting Brain-data-driven insurance premium decisions Employer/HR neuro-screening mandates Manipulative neurostimulation to influence choices Covert extraction of neural data through devices or interfaces Framework on Innovation & IP Encourages responsible research and innovation (RRI): Anticipate social impacts Engage public & stakeholders Build “ethics-by-design” Promotes open science: Open datasets, shared tools Verifiability, reuse, collaborative development Tension highlighted: Open science vs intellectual property rights Need to avoid commodification of the human brain Calls for balanced licensing & equitable technology transfer Implementation Expectations States to integrate principles into: Health regulations Education systems Data protection laws Labour and employment policies Companies to adopt: Internal ethics boards Transparent neurodata policies Safety audits Voluntary compliance codes Key Takeaways  UNESCO’s framework is the first global ethical code for neurotechnology — landmark event. Protects freedom of thought, mental autonomy, integrity of neural data, and human dignity. Explicitly prohibits manipulative uses of brain data in politics, employment, insurance, and advertising. Encourages open science, responsible innovation, and balanced IP rights.