Content
Flash Floods in Uttarakhand
Eighty years on from Hiroshima
How should money laundering be tackled?
Trump says he will hike tariff on India ‘over next 24 hours’
India may change stance amid U.S. tariffs, EU sanctions over Russian oil
Ayush Ministry and FSSAI release a list of ‘Ayurveda Aahara’ food preparations
U.S. trade deficit with nine countries higher than that of India
DBT helped deactivate 4.08 cr. fake, inactive LPG connections: Puri
Flash Floods in Uttarakhand
Basic Understanding of Flash Floods
Flash Floods are sudden, intense floods caused by heavy rainfall, cloudbursts, or glacial lake outbursts (GLOFs), usually within 6 hours of precipitation.
In mountainous terrains, such as Uttarakhand, they occur due to:
Steep slopes increasing runoff velocity.
Poor drainage due to rapid urbanisation.
Glacial melt and river swelling due to climate anomalies.
Relevance : GS 3( Disaster Management)
Geographic and Climatic Context of Uttarkashi
Location: Uttarkashi district lies in the upper Himalayan region of Uttarakhand, prone to flash floods, landslides, and earthquakes.
Altitude: Dharali town affected in this case is located at 8,600 feet.
River Systems: Kheer Ganga is a tributary in the upper Bhagirathi basin, which eventually feeds into the Ganga.
Monsoon Activity: Heavy rainfall during July–September increases vulnerability.
Tourist Footfall: Uttarkashi is a critical stretch of the Char Dham Yatra, increasing exposure to disaster risks.
The August 2025 Flash Flood: Event Summary
Date & Time: Afternoon of August 5, 2025, around 1:45 PM.
Trigger: Torrential rains caused river swelling and sudden flooding of the Kheer Ganga.
Most affected area: Dharali town – a tourist hub with hotels and markets.
Casualties:
4 confirmed dead.
60–70 people feared trapped, including 9 Army personnel.
Destruction:
Complete washing away of market areas.
Residential buildings, hotels, and people swept away.
Entire town turned into a sludge-filled riverbed.
Rescue and Relief Operations
Agencies involved:
Indian Army
State Disaster Response Force (SDRF)
Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP)
Rescue Data:
120 people rescued in initial hours.
20 rescued by Army within first 3 hours.
Medical Relief:
Separate hospital wings activated.
Medical teams, oxygen, and medicines on alert.
Shelter:
Relief camps set up by district administration.
Wider Impact and Follow-Up Warnings
Sukhi Top: Another flash flood reported here later the same day; no casualties, but sharp river swelling observed.
Travel Advisory: Tourism and trekking activities in Uttarkashi remain suspended.
Weather Forecast:
IMD prediction of continued heavy rain for next few days.
High risk of secondary floods, landslides, and road blockages.
Structural Causes and Broader Vulnerabilities
Ecological Fragility:
Uttarakhand lies in Zone V (highest seismic zone) and is highly susceptible to ecological disasters.
Anthropogenic Pressures:
Haphazard construction, especially in riverbeds.
Unchecked tourism and infrastructural overload.
Deforestation and encroachment on drainage lines.
Climate Change:
Rising frequency of extreme weather events in the Himalayas.
Disrupted monsoon patterns and glacial retreat exacerbate risks.
Past Precedents
Year
Event
Death Toll
Impact
2013
Kedarnath Flash Floods
~5,700+
Worst Himalayan disaster in recent memory
2021
Chamoli Glacier Burst
~200
Hydro project destruction
2023
Joshimath Land Subsidence
–
Town declared sinking zone
Way Forward: Policy and Resilience Measures
Disaster Preparedness:
Strengthen early warning dissemination in remote Himalayan villages.
Community-led resilience planning and mock drills.
Ecological Planning:
Ban on construction within 200m of rivers in fragile zones.
Promote eco-tourism with capped footfalls.
Monitoring Infrastructure:
Install AI-based water-level sensors across rivers.
Drone surveillance in trekking routes during monsoon season.
Capacity Building:
Empower local Panchayats under DM Act 2005.
Invest in mountain-specific disaster research.
Eighty years on from Hiroshima
Historical Context: What Happened in 1945
On August 6, 1945, the U.S. dropped a uranium-based atomic bomb (“Little Boy”) on Hiroshima at 8:15 a.m., killing approx. 70,000 people instantly.
By the end of 1945, at least 70,000 more had died due to injuries and radiation sickness.
On August 9, a second bomb (“Fat Man”), plutonium-based, was dropped on Nagasaki, killing 40,000 on the first day.
Total fatalities from the two bombings by end of 1945: approx. 1,40,000 to 2,00,000.
Relevance : GS 1(World History )
Who Are the Hibakusha?
“Hibakusha” means “bomb–affected people” — survivors of the atomic bombings.
Their testimonies helped build the global moral and ethical case against nuclear weapons.
They faced official suppression initially during American occupation of Japan — effects of the bombs were denied or downplayed.
U.S. Brig. Gen. Thomas Farrell falsely declared that those affected had all died and there were “no continuing effects.”
Relief centers were shut; 50,000 more died by year-end without understanding the cause.
Castle Bravo & the Turning Point in Nuclear Awareness
In 1954, a U.S. hydrogen bomb test (Castle Bravo) in the Marshall Islands went awry — twice as powerful as expected.
A Japanese fishing boat, Fukuryu Maru, was 86 miles from ground zero and got covered in radioactive fallout.
All crew members fell sick from acute radiation — bringing public attention to the delayed and invisible dangers of radiation.
This incident became a critical moment in linking radiation sickness with nuclear weapons in Japan’s public consciousness.
Rise of Anti-Nuclear Movements
Survivors organized under Nihon Hidankyo (Japan Confederation of A- and H-Bomb Sufferers Organizations) in 1956.
They began global campaigns to educate the world about the humanitarian impact of nuclear warfare.
After decades of advocacy, Nihon Hidankyo was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2024 — 70 years after the Castle Bravo fallout incident.
The Norm of Non-Use: Definition & Reality
Despite the expansion of nuclear powers (from 1 in 1945 to 9 today), no nuclear weapon has been used in warfare since 1945.
This “norm of non-use” is not enshrined in law but is a powerful informal norm shaped by:
▸ Humanitarian narratives (Hibakusha testimonies)
▸ Deterrence theory (Mutual Assured Destruction)
Legal instruments regulate testing and proliferation — not use:
▸ NPT (1968): Prevents spread of nuclear weapons; encourages disarmament “in good faith.”
▸ CTBT (1996): Bans all nuclear explosive testing.
▸ Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (2017): Prohibits use but not signed by any nuclear-armed state.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 1996 ruled that nuclear use is generally contrary to international law, though it did not declare an outright ban.
The Changing Nature of Nuclear Threats
Cold War arsenals were large and centralized; today’s arsenals are smaller but more sophisticated.
Shift towards tactical, “useable” nuclear weapons — designed for battlefield use, not large-scale deterrence.
Modernization trends include:
▸ Smaller-yield warheads
▸ Precision delivery systems
▸ Faster, more responsive command and control systems
Erosion of Norms in Today’s Conflicts
Russia’s nuclear threats during the Ukraine conflict have undermined the nuclear taboo.
During India’s Operation Sindoor (2025), PM Modi declared India would not tolerate nuclear blackmail — indicating nuclear signaling in regional conflicts.
The line between conventional and nuclear conflict is increasingly blurred, heightening the risk of escalation or miscalculation.
Why This Matters Today: Key Takeaways
The norm of non-use has held for 80 years, but is under strain from:
▸ Rising geopolitical tensions (Russia–NATO, Indo–Pak, U.S.–China)
▸ Modernization and evolving nuclear doctrines
▸ Erosion of global arms control treaties and norms
Over 13,000 nuclear weapons still exist globally (as of 2023), with 90% held by the U.S. and Russia.
Public awareness is fading — often revived only by accidents like Castle Bravo or active conflict threats.
Complacency is dangerous: even “limited” nuclear use would have devastating humanitarian and ecological consequences.
Moral vs. Strategic Logic
Moral argument: Led by Hibakusha and peace activists emphasizing human cost and long-term radiation effects.
Strategic argument: Based on deterrence theory — fear of retaliation prevents use.
It remains contested which factor (ethics or deterrence) has been more effective in preserving the norm of non-use.
Final Reflection
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not just acts of war — they marked the beginning of an age of existential danger.
Survivors’ testimonies, once silenced, are vital reminders of the risks.
As nuclear rhetoric and modernization increase, reaffirming and reinforcing the nuclear taboo is crucial for global security and human survival.
How should money laundering be tackled?
What is Money Laundering?
Money laundering refers to the process of making illegally obtained money appear legal or “clean.”
As per Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, it involves concealing or projecting criminal proceeds as untainted property.
It often funds illegal activities including terror financing, corruption, and organized crime.
Relevance : GS 3(Internal Security)
Three Stages of Money Laundering:
Placement:
Illicit cash is introduced into the financial system (e.g., depositing small sums into various accounts — “smurfing”).
Layering:
Funds are moved through complex transactions to hide their origin (e.g., shell companies, offshore accounts).
Integration:
Money re-enters the economy as apparently legitimate through investments in real estate, businesses, or luxury goods.
About PMLA, 2002:
Enacted in line with UN resolutions to prevent money laundering and confiscate tainted property.
The Act puts the burden of proof on the accused, not the prosecuting agency.
Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR), not an FIR, is sufficient to initiate proceedings (SC upheld in Vir Bhadra Singh v. ED, 2017).
Enforcement and Conviction Data:
Between 2015 and 2023, ED initiated 5,892 cases under PMLA.
Only 15 convictions have been secured — a conviction rate of approximately 0.25%.
Signals poor outcomes in securing justice despite rising investigations.
Issues with Implementation:
Rising number of cases indicates growing financial crime or overreach in enforcement.
Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal Chaudhury v. Union of India (2022) clarified:
A “scheduled offence” is necessary to initiate prosecution under PMLA Section 3.
But property can be attached even without a criminal case being registered — leading to misuse.
Misuse of PMLA: A Cause for Concern
Critics allege political misuse of PMLA to target dissenters and opposition leaders.
The law allows ED vast discretionary powers with minimal judicial oversight.
ED is not bound to share the ECIR with the accused, limiting defense preparation.
Global Context: The ‘Laundromat’ Model
Origin: Term derived from laundromats used by US crime syndicates to legitimize illicit earnings.
A laundromat refers to shell networks that:
Clean dirty money,
Evade taxes,
Hide ownership,
Fund illicit operations.
International Case Studies: China’s Overseas Operations
In April 2023, the US FBI arrested two operatives in New York linked to China’s Ministry of Public Security (MPS).
They were charged with acting as agents for the Chinese government and obstructing justice.
Highlights how covert financial operations can blend with political espionage.
In contrast, countries with stronger economic ties with China (e.g., Mongolia, Serbia) have shown little public action on such covert programs.
Suggests that national security concerns can be sidelined for geopolitical convenience.
Global Financial Action: FATF & DTAA
Financial Action Task Force (FATF):
International watchdog on money laundering and terror financing.
Recommends robust enforcement, transparency, and global cooperation.
Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAA):
India has signed DTAAs with ~85 countries.
Facilitates tax info exchange, helps track illegal cross-border flows.
But DTAA enforcement and cooperation gaps remain.
Economic Impacts of Money Laundering:
Weakens financial institutions by encouraging non-transparent transactions.
Fuels inflation and distorts asset prices due to excess illicit liquidity.
Undermines monetary policy and economic integrity (SC in P. Chidambaram v. ED, 2019).
Key Takeaways:
While legal mechanisms under PMLA exist, their implementation suffers from low conviction rates, procedural opacity, and allegations of misuse.
Strengthening ED’s accountability, judicial oversight, and adherence to FATF norms is essential.
Global cooperation through FATF and DTAA must be institutionalized beyond paperwork to tackle transnational laundering networks effectively.
Trump says he will hike tariff on India ‘over next 24 hours’
WHAT’S HAPPENING?
Donald Trump, in a 2025 interview with CNBC, accused India of being a bad trading partner and threatened to impose “very substantial” tariffs within 24 hours.
His primary criticism: India’s high tariff regime and continued imports of Russian crude oil despite Western sanctions.
India responded sharply, calling the remarks “unjustified and unreasonable,” pointing to the West’s own continued trade with Russia.
Relevance : GS 2(International Relations)
TRADE TARIFFS – A SIMPLE EXPLANATION
Tariffs are taxes imposed by governments on imported goods.
High tariffs make foreign goods expensive, protecting domestic industries but potentially reducing foreign trade.
Trump alleges India imposes the highest tariffs in the world, making it hard for U.S. goods to compete in India.
DONALD TRUMP’S KEY ALLEGATIONS
“India is the highest tariff nation”: He claims India imposes higher import duties than any other country.
“We do very little business with India”: Trump argues the U.S. exports little to India due to these high tariffs.
“They buy a lot from us, but we don’t buy from them”: He implies an imbalanced trade relationship.
“They are fueling Russia’s war machine”: Trump criticizes India’s purchase of discounted Russian crude oil post-Ukraine war.
TRUMP’S POLICY SIGNALS
He indicated raising tariffs on Indian imports from 25% to a higher, unspecified rate.
Suggested such trade penalties would be punishment for India’s continued economic engagement with Russia.
Linked India’s crude oil imports to undermining Western efforts to isolate Russia.
INDIA’S RESPONSE – STRONG AND DATA-BACKED
Called the targeting of India “unjustified and unreasonable.”
Emphasized trade with Russia is a “vital national compulsion” for energy security.
Pointed to hypocrisy in the West’s own trade with Russia:
The U.S. continues importing:
Uranium hexafluoride (for nuclear industry)
Palladium (used in EVs)
Fertilizers and chemicals
EU continues trade in:
Fertilizers
Mining products
Iron & steel
Machinery and transport equipment
STRATEGIC AND GEOPOLITICAL UNDERPINNINGS
India maintains strategic autonomy: continues balancing ties with both the West and Russia.
Western countries, especially during wartime, want allies to align more closely with sanctions regimes.
Trump’s approach reflects economic nationalism—penalizing partners who don’t align with U.S. foreign policy objectives.
TRADE DATA INSIGHT
As of 2024 (latest available):
U.S. is one of India’s largest trading partners (bilateral trade of over $128 billion).
India imports significant quantities of crude oil from Russia (exceeding 1 million barrels/day in 2023–24).
India imposes average tariffs of around 17%, higher than developed countries (e.g., U.S. ~3.4%), but consistent with other emerging economies.
PREVIOUS TENSIONS UNDER TRUMP (2016–2020)
Trump terminated India’s benefits under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) in 2019.
Tensions over price caps on medical devices, e-commerce restrictions, and agricultural access.
A limited trade deal was negotiated but not finalized before his term ended.
ECONOMIC SECURITY VS. GEOPOLITICS
India defends Russian oil purchases as essential to maintaining price stability and energy access for 1.4 billion people.
Also strategically diversifying sources while increasing clean energy investments.
India’s diplomatic stance: multiple Western countries continue buying from Russia when it suits their national interest.
CONCLUSION
International trade is deeply influenced by domestic policy, geopolitical interests, and global energy needs.
The U.S.–India trade relationship has historically been strong but contentious on tariffs and market access.
Trump’s rhetoric often escalates tensions but may not always translate into long-term policy changes.
India is asserting itself more confidently on the global stage, pushing back against perceived double standards.
India may change stance amid U.S. tariffs, EU sanctions over Russian oil
Context: India, Russia, and Global Energy Geopolitics
Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Western nations (especially the U.S. and EU) imposed sanctions to curtail Russian oil revenues.
India, as the world’s 3rd-largest oil importer, ramped up discounted purchases of Russian crude to meet energy needs and stabilize inflation.
Russian crude’s share in India’s imports rose from <2% in 2021 to over 35% by early 2023.
India defends these purchases as necessary for national interest and economic stability.
Relevance : GS 2(International Relations) , GS 3(Energy Security)
MEA’s Latest Statement: A Clearer, Assertive Tone
The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) issued its strongest defense yet of Russian oil imports.
Asserted India will take “all necessary measures” to protect its energy and economic interests.
Marked a tonal shift from earlier low-key responses to Western criticism post-2022.
Trigger: Threats from U.S. President Donald Trump
Trump accused India of selling Russian oil for “massive profits” while ignoring Ukrainian deaths.
Threatened “substantial” new tariffs on Indian goods, in addition to a 25% global tariff that kicks in soon.
This echoes previous U.S. actions:
In 2018–19, India had to reduce oil imports from Iran and Venezuela due to U.S. secondary sanctions.
Then too, U.S. tariffs (e.g., on steel, aluminum) created tensions in trade ties.
India’s Response to U.S. & EU: Calling Out Double Standards
The MEA pointed out:
Both U.S. and EU continue to buy Russian energy, fertilizers, minerals, and steel.
No similar penalties imposed on China, the largest buyer of Russian oil (about 2 million bpd in 2024).
Unstated hypocrisy: Western silence on their support for Israel amid Gaza war (over 60,000 deaths), while moralizing over Ukraine.
India’s Strategic Options Ahead
Maintain Status Quo
Continue Russian oil imports, possibly increasing them.
Absorb sanctions while pushing for FTAs with EU, U.S., UK to reduce friction.
Diversify Energy Partners
Accelerate FTA talks with:
GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council), EAEU (Eurasian Economic Union), Australia, New Zealand.
ASEAN-India Trade pact revision or re-entry into RCEP may be explored.
Secure alternate suppliers: Iraq, Saudi Arabia, UAE, U.S., Brazil.
Retaliatory Counter-Measures
Delay trade talks: India-EU BTIA (Bilateral Trade and Investment Agreement), U.S.-India Trade Policy Forum.
Slow down cooperation in nuclear energy, defence, critical minerals.
Leverage India’s strategic role in Indo-Pacific, Quad to extract concessions.
Broader Implications
Shift in diplomatic posture: From submissive (e.g., Iran/Venezuela episode) to assertive realpolitik.
Rise of multipolar diplomacy: India signals it will not be bullied into Western strategic camps.
Watchpoint: Will this impact India-U.S. ties in Quad, Indo-Pacific vision, and high-tech cooperation?
Data Snapshot (as of 2024-25 estimates)
India’s monthly Russian crude imports: ~1.3–1.5 million barrels/day.
Russia is India’s top oil supplier, followed by Iraq and Saudi Arabia.
Discounted rates on Russian Urals crude saved India ~$5-6 billion in 2023.
India’s exports to U.S.: ~$80 billion/year; imports from U.S.: ~$60 billion/year (2023-24).
India-EU BTIA talks ongoing since 2007; trade with EU ~$115 billion/year.
Conclusion
India’s statement marks a growing confidence in shaping its own energy diplomacy and foreign policy — one rooted in pragmatism, national interest, and global multipolarity. It signals that India is willing to push back against perceived Western hypocrisy while keeping its strategic options open across economic and geopolitical fronts.
Ayush Ministry and FSSAI release a list of ‘Ayurveda Aahara’ food preparations
What is Ayurveda Aahara?
Ayurveda Aahara refers to food items formulated based on principles of Ayurvedic nutrition, emphasizing balance (doshas), seasonality (ritucharya), and natural ingredients.
These foods are meant to support preventive health, long-term wellness, and sustainable living by integrating traditional Ayurvedic wisdom with modern dietary preferences.
Relevance : GS 1(Culture , Heritage)
Who released the list and why?
The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), in consultation with the Ministry of Ayush, released the categorized list.
Objective: To mainstream Ayurveda-based dietary practices and give clarity to food businesses and consumers under the legal framework of the Food Safety and Standards (Ayurveda Aahara) Regulations, 2022.
Legal and Regulatory Context
Ayurveda Aahara is governed under the FSSAI’s 2022 regulations, which legally recognize foods described in authoritative Ayurvedic texts.
The new list is issued under Note (1) of Schedule B and draws from classical Ayurvedic texts listed in Schedule A of the regulations.
This brings legal backing and standardized labeling for Ayurveda-based food products.
Key Features of the New List
Identifies Category A products (standardized Ayurveda Aahara) that follow prescribed recipes, ingredients, and processes.
Examples likely include items such as churnas, lehya, medicated ghee, herbal decoctions (kwath), etc., but tailored for food use, not drugs.
Businesses (FBOs) can apply to add new items, provided they submit references from Schedule A texts.
Implications for Stakeholders
For Consumers:
Boosts trust by ensuring scientific and regulatory validation of traditional recipes.
Promotes informed consumption of health-supportive, herb-based foods aligned with Ayurveda.
For Food Businesses:
Provides legal clarity and market expansion opportunities in the health/nutrition segment.
Enables standardized production, labeling, and advertising within FSSAI guidelines.
For Government:
Aligns India’s traditional knowledge with modern food safety laws and WHO recommendations on integrative medicine.
Socio-Health Relevance
Rising demand for preventive health, immunity-boosting foods, and sustainable eating post-COVID has expanded Ayurveda’s appeal.
Ayurveda Aahara is projected to complement India’s nutraceutical and wellness industry, which is expected to reach $100 billion by 2025 (as per Ayush Ministry projections).
Way Forward
FSSAI will continue to expand the approved list based on stakeholder inputs and evidence from Ayurvedic texts.
Supports India’s larger goals of soft-power diplomacy, global wellness leadership, and Atmanirbhar Bharat in the AYUSH sector.
U.S. trade deficit with nine countries higher than that of India
Basics of Trade Deficits and Tariffs
A trade deficit occurs when a country imports more goods and services than it exports to a specific country.
Tariffs are import taxes imposed by a country to protect domestic industries or penalize perceived unfair trade practices.
Higher tariffs can make imported goods more expensive, reducing competitiveness in the market.
Relevance : GS 2(International Relations)
U.S. Trade Deficit Landscape (2024)
According to data analyzed by Rubix Data Sciences:
The U.S. had a trade deficit of $49.5 billion with India in 2024 — ranking India 10th among its top trade deficit countries.
Other countries with a larger U.S. trade deficit than India include:
Mexico: $175.9 billion
Vietnam: $129.4 billion
Germany: $87.9 billion
Ireland: $87.2 billion
Taiwan: $76.4 billion
Japan: $72.3 billion
South Korea: $69.9 billion
Italy and Switzerland (implied but not stated)
Disproportionate Tariffs on India
Despite a lower trade deficit, the U.S. levies a 25% tariff “plus penalties” on Indian imports — the 3rd highest among its top deficit partners.
Only China (30%) and Canada (35%) face higher U.S. tariffs than India.
Other countries with higher deficits than India face lower or similar tariffs:
Vietnam, Japan, Germany, etc., all have lower than 25% tariffs.
Mexico, despite a 3.5x larger trade deficit, faces the same 25% tariff.
Implication: The U.S. trade stance toward India appears disproportionately harsh relative to the scale of the trade imbalance.
India-U.S. Diplomatic Tensions
The Indian Ministry of External Affairs called former U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariff targeting “unjustified and unreasonable.”
These tariffs are seen as a pressure tactic on India amid wider geopolitical frictions — including energy trade with Russia.
U.S. Criticism of India’s Russian Oil Imports vs. Global Trends
Trump criticized India for buying oil from Russia, linking it to ongoing civilian casualties in Ukraine.
However, independent data (Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air, Dec 2022–June 2025) shows:
EU bought 51% of Russia’s LNG exports — the largest buyer.
China: 21% of Russian LNG; Japan: 18%.
For pipeline gas:
EU: 37% of Russia’s exports
China: 30%
Türkiye: 27%
For crude oil:
China: 47%
India: 38%
EU: 6%
Türkiye: 6%
Insight: India is not the top energy buyer from Russia — both the EU and China consistently top Russian energy import charts.
Key Takeaways
India faces the 3rd highest U.S. tariff among top trade deficit countries despite being 10th in deficit size.
U.S. criticism of India’s Russia policy ignores EU’s significantly higher Russian energy imports.
DBT helped deactivate 4.08 cr. fake, inactive LPG connections: Puri
DBTL (PAHAL) Scheme
Launched: January 2015 by the Government of India.
Objective: To transfer the LPG subsidy amount directly to the bank accounts of beneficiaries, promoting transparency and reducing leakages.
Key Principle: LPG is sold at market price; subsidy is later reimbursed to eligible consumers via Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT).
Relevance : GS 2(Governance , Schemes)
Core Features
All LPG cylinders are sold at non-subsidised prices.
The eligible subsidy amount is transferred directly to consumers’ bank accounts.
Applies to both existing customers and new beneficiaries under the Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (PMUY).
Key Achievements (as of July 1, 2025)
4.08 crore duplicate, fake/non-existent or inactive LPG connections have been blocked, suspended, or deactivated.
Enabled identification and removal of:
Ghost connections (non-existent).
Multiple connections under one name.
Inactive or unverified users.
Helped curb misuse and diversion of subsidised LPG for commercial use.
Role of Technology & Verification
Aadhaar-enabled DBT authentication:
Allows real-time, accurate, and cost-effective beneficiary identification and de-duplication.
Ensures only eligible citizens receive the subsidy.
Biometric authentication:
Public sector Oil Marketing Companies (OMCs) have been directed to complete biometric Aadhaar authentication of all PMUY and PAHAL beneficiaries.
As of July 1, 2025, 67% of PMUY beneficiaries have undergone biometric verification.
Common LPG Database Platform (CLDP)
A centralised database used to:
Identify and eliminate duplicate or fake connections.
Use parameters like Aadhaar number, bank account, ration card, address, and name for cross-verification.
CLDP supports targeted delivery and enhances database accuracy across agencies.
Special Focus on PMUY (Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana)
New PMUY beneficiaries must complete biometric Aadhaar authentication before receiving LPG connections.
Ensures subsidies are targeted at intended poor households, mainly women from Below Poverty Line (BPL) families.
Impact on Governance & Welfare Delivery
Promotes:
Transparency.
Accountability.
Financial inclusion (through Aadhaar-linked bank accounts).
Aids in rationalising subsidy expenditure.
Strengthens India’s overall social safety net and welfare delivery mechanisms.
Broader Significance
DBTL is a global case study in the use of fintech and digital identity for subsidy reform.
Forms part of India’s JAM Trinity (Jan Dhan, Aadhaar, Mobile) based governance.