By- Harshita Poonia


At the point when the pandemic has pushed the entire world to the edge of total collapse, India is confronting another test on its fringe with three neighbours. Pressures with northern neighbours have been erupting on the fringes alongside China, Pakistan and Nepal.

It is led along India’s global borders with Myanmar and Bangladesh just as over the line of control with Pakistan and line of genuine control with China. In spite of the fact that the commitment of outskirt exchange in India’s economy is unimportant, it has generous effect on its relations with its neighbours just as on the fringe individuals.

At the two-sided level, it is a significant certainty building measure as it lessens trust shortfalls, supports valuable commitment, settles the fringes by decreasing gratings and gives a legitimate premise to the contested worldwide outskirts.

At the neighbourhood level, outskirt exchange carries monetary thriving to the individuals dwelling in the distant zones and positively affects their passionate prosperity.

It additionally helps in better outskirt exchange between the executives as consideration improves guideline of the traffic of merchandise and individuals over the global fringe.

Strains among India and Pakistan borders

India and Pakistan have seen continuous outskirt conflicts since 1947. The quantity of treaty infringement has bounced to more than 3200 owing to 2019 alongside the Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) fringe, which has the most elevated number of truce infringement in the last 16 years.

The outskirt conflicts have been on a flood after the independent status of J&K was rejected in August a year ago.

“Pakistani soldiers consistently focused on advances posts and towns along the Line of Control (LoC) and the International Border (IB) to make a dread psychosis among the individuals,” said a senior police officer.

India has voiced its interests a few times on worldwide stages including the United Nations affirming that Pakistan is sustaining and supporting Islamist aggressor gatherings and sending them over the outskirt into India, a case dismissed by Islamabad.

Jammu and Kashmir’s more than 300 psychological oppressors are available in platforms over the LoC in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir, holding back to penetrate into the Indian side.

“With respect to International Border (IB), a few psychological oppressor bunches have had the option to invade so far during the current year. That sort of infamous act by Pakistan proceeds,”

Is China's political impact in Nepal hurting Indian interests?

India is by all accounts confronting outskirt issues with two of its neighbours–China and Nepal–while wrestling with rising instances of Coronavirus at home and a typhoon along its east coast.

India’s fringe difficulties are not new. The India-China outskirt issue goes back to the 1962 war. The absence of an obviously outlined limit between the two nations proceeds in spite of endless rounds of talks.

The ebb and flow strains have ejected in a zone in Ladakh in Kashmir with Indian and Chinese armed forces getting fortifications into Demchok, Daulat Beg Oldi and around Galwan stream just as Pangong Tso lake in Ladakh, said two individuals, mentioning secrecy.

There is additionally some pressure in northern Sikkim. The India-China strains “are an update that Chinese animosity isn’t generally expository”.

The India-Nepal limit issue, as well, is decades old. The two nations guarantee an area that lies at the tri-intersection of India, Nepal and China.

India and Nepal had both demonstrated Kalapani and Lipulekh in their political guides, yet Kathmandu drew out another guide that shows another zone, which is Limpiyadhura, inside its limits.

Nepal and China have been infuriated by India’s moves. Delhi’s distributed its new guide of the outskirt locale in November, after it isolated Indian-managed Kashmir into Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh.

The guide joined a portion of the domains contested with Nepal inside India’s fringes. It very well may be concurred that global limit between two nations is characterized by respective deals.

Any one-sided kind of activity can’t set up any real case of their quality. There was no other understanding next to the 1816 Sugauli arrangement that characterized the western outskirt of Nepal with India, and that deal plainly expresses that the three regions have a place with Nepal.

Nepal’s re-examine map demonstrated the contested regions inside Nepal, incensing India in return. It can be asked to the legislature of Nepal to abstain from uncalled-for cartographic affirmation and regard India’s power and regional respectability. The correction to supplant the guide is relied upon to be passed in Nepal’s parliament.

The Lipulekh pass has security suggestions. After its 1962 outskirt war with China, it was worried about a potential Chinese interruption through the pass, and has been quick to clutch the key Himalayan course to prepare for any future incursions.

The pass has demonstrated a state of conflict since. The enhancements will assist with diminishing travel time for the Hindu pioneers that utilize it, yet it was this move that set off the conciliatory altercation with Nepal.

Scores of Nepalese held a dissent before the Indian consulate in the Nepalese capital; Kathmandu requesting India pulls back its officers from the pass.

Others communicated their indignation via online media with hashtags like “#Backoffindia”. Even before the regional question, there were enemies of India slants in Nepal.

Brutal fights ejected in 2015 when the ethnic Madhesi people group revolted, requesting more rights, and merchandise traffic from India was obstructed. In spite of the fact that India denied it was behind the monetary bar, not many individuals in Nepal accepted the forswearing.

The five-month barricade disabled life in Nepal and many were irate that it seriously influenced remaking work after the 2015 earthquake disaster.

Regardless of whether China has been intruding or not the Nepalese government has blamed Indian unfamiliar service authorities for not looking to determine what’s at issue.

The doubt in Delhi is Kathmandu’s recently discovered certainty is a result of Chinese backing. The Nepal “may have raised this issue at the command of another person” – a backhanded reference to supposed Chinese obstruction.

What’s more, some standard conservative media in India have called Nepal “China’s Proxy” for raising the outskirt issue. The comments didn’t go down well in Kathmandu.

Does this emergency mirror a disappointment of India's Neighbourhood First arrangement?

No, it is somewhat oversimplified to accept that this emergency mirrors a disappointment of India’s local procedure. On Nepal, specifically, the triumphs have been shocking since the 2015 course remedy, after the barricade.

It is driven by another rationale of relationship and availability, India put resources into overhauling its cross-fringe framework and monetary help: there are presently new rail and street interfaces, an electronic payload framework for Nepali merchandise to travel by means of Indian ports, inland stream route plans, and another cross-outskirt pipeline for oil based goods.

These are only a few instances of the numerous accomplishments of India’s new network methodology, zeroed in on conveying more, better and quicker to help the improvement targets of Nepal and different neighbours.

A portion of the potential answers for this contest in the long term

Even after political trust is re-established and conciliatory exchange starts, regardless of whether in a couple of days, months or years, the two sides should settle.

The fringe debate has now transformed into a perpetual political aggravation between the two nations. Business as usual benefits India, which is in agreeable control of the region.

India may decide to slow down and brush the issue far from anyone’s regular field of vision once more, however not without huge harm to its inclinations and impact in Nepal.

The sooner India settles this debate with Nepal, the lesser the odds for China to get included. Beijing has decided to stay calm this time; however its future count may change.

The Kalapani contest among India and Nepal is additionally a practically impeccable mirror instance of the 2017 Doklam emergency among China and Bhutan, where India ventured up and conveyed its military powers to re-establish business as usual risk.

The verifiable, specialized and cartographic cases from the two sides will most likely prompt an impasse, with endless, conflicting understandings about waterway arrangements and different argumentative standards.

Accepting that there is political purchase in from the initiative on the two sides, the main useful arrangement is to look for some type of co-board or shared power for the contested region.


There are numerous striking prospects: possibly there could be joint arrangement of military and police powers, as during the 1960s on the Nepal-China fringe. Given the exchange potential, the two nations could likewise consider building up a unique financial zone.

At long last, it is in light of a legitimate concern for both that Indian and Nepali travellers can utilize the improved framework in the Kalapani district to arrive at Mount Kailash.

Antagonistic states have had the option to discover such creative arrangements in different pieces of the world and, at a certain point; India and Pakistan were near discovering answers for Siachen or to make fringes unessential in Kashmir.

In view of their set of experiences of cordial relations and driven by realism, it ought not to be hard for India and Nepal to thoroughly consider of the crate and locate a useful arrangement.

Delhi and Kathmandu could lead the best approach to free the subcontinent from the sovereignist, patriot and regional rationale that keeps on leaving everybody in the locale more awful off.

Such broad and porousborders that go through various types of territories — mountains, slopes, fields, valleys, woods, desert, and bogs — here and there are hard to screen, particularly with various regional questions and security inconveniences actually exist in enormous pieces of Indian fringes.

Due to these falsely made limits that caused numerous regional questions and left huge regions permeable for an assortment of sporadic and illicit cross-fringe exercises, India has raised various sorts of hindrances along its public borders.


By- Harshita Poonia

This article endeavours to direct a thorough appraisal of India’s and China’s inclinations in Nepal and Pakistan in the wake of the extraordinary political changes.

The development of individuals and products across borders is carefully constrained by states. Nonetheless, there are a few special cases to these components.

India–Nepal fringe, for example, is tranquil and permeable with negligible limitations on the development of products and individuals. Though, there are times when fringe issues between these two agreeable neighbours have taken a basic turn.

There is additionally an endeavour in this article to examine the ongoing changes in the India– Nepal, China, and, Pakistan relations from the point of view of outskirt considerations.

Key Words– India -Nepal fringe, limitations, inclinations, development



By: Ishita Pancholi

JUDGES: Justices Ashok Bhushan, MR Shah, and R. Subhash Reddy

JUDGEMENT DATE: 10/09/2020


The Accused no.1 and each other – Pukhraj were charged for the offense under Section 20(b) (ii) (B) of the NDPS Act, possessing 20 kg each precluded Narcotic Substance Ganja. According to the instance of the arraignment, 20 kg of Ganja was recuperated from the ownership of the appealing party from the bike.

Nothing offensive was found from the individual of the charged. Blamed were educated about Section 50 for the NDPS Act through a notification and were likewise told about their lawful rights that on the off chance that they need their pursuit was to be done either by an officer or Judicial Magistrate of First Class or some other examining official.

Subsequent to giving consent that the inquiry can be led by any researching official, charged was approached to open the sack kept on his bike, and on opening the equivalent, a pack of Ganja weighing 20kg was found. Panchnama was made of seizures. Tests of opiates recuperated from the charges were tried by smelling, consuming, and tasting it and was discovered to be Ganja.

A recognizable proof panchnama was readied. The Ganja recouped from the blamed was around 20 kg, out of which two parcels each of around 100 gm were made for testing, and afterward, the weight panchnama was made.

The bundles of the substance made were sent to the research center for testing through constable. The substance held onto was discovered to be Ganja. On culmination of the examination against the denounced under the NDPS Act, the litigant and each other – Pukhraj were charge-sheeted for the offense under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act, and another co-accused Rakesh Kumar was charged for the offense under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act.

All the blamed argued not blameworthy and in this way, they came to be pursued for the previously mentioned offenses. In the current case, we are worried about the unique charged – Rizwan Khan and in this way, we will consider the body of evidence against Rizwan Khan.


To demonstrate the body of evidence against the denounced, the indictment analyzed eight observers, out of which Bholu and Kanhaiya are the autonomous observers.  Sudeep Prasad Mishra is the constable who had taken the examples to FSL, was the cop who recorded the data and from that point, the Ashish Shukla researched the case after enrolment of the FIR.

The indictment additionally delivered on record the narrative proof, for example, seizure notice, FSL report, and so on. After the conclusion of the proof for the benefit of the arraignment, the further proclamation of the denounced under Section 313, Cr.P.C., 1973 was recorded. The case in the interest of the litigant – unique blamed no.1 was for absolute refusal.

After the finish of the preliminary and on energy about the proof on record, the educated Special Judge held the charged liable for the offense under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act and condemned him to go through five years thorough detainment with fine of Rs.25,000/ -, in default, to go through further one year’s thorough detainment.


The judgment in Jarnail Singh v. State of Punjab [1], depended on by the direction for the respondent State additionally bolsters the instance of the arraignment. In the previously mentioned judgment, this Court has held that simply in light of the fact that arraignment didn’t inspect any autonomous observer, would not really lead to an end that the charge was erroneously involved. The proof of authentic observers can’t be doubted and distrusted, only because of their official status.

 In-State (NCT of Delhi) v. Sunil[2], It is an obsolete thought that activities of the cop ought to be drawn nearer with introductory doubt. It is time currently to begin putting at any rate beginning trust on the activities and the reports made by the police. At any rate, the court can’t begin with the assumption that the police records are deceitful.

As a recommendation of law, the assumption ought to be the other route round. That official demonstrations of the police have been consistently performed is a guideline of assumption and perceived even by the council.

Applying the law set somewhere near this Court on the proof of police authorities/police observers to the realities of the case close by, alluded to hereinabove, we are of the assessment as the police observers are discovered to be solid and dependable, no blunder has been submitted by both the courts underneath in indicting the blamed depending upon the statement for the police authorities.


The Supreme Court has seen that to demonstrate the case under the NDPS Act, the responsibility for the vehicle from which the stash is seized isn’t needed to be set up.

[1]Jarnail Singh v. State of Punjab, (2011) 3 SCC 521.

[2]State (NCT of Delhi) v. Sunil, (2001) 1 SCC 652.


By- Gaargi Tomar


Trafficking of children can be defined as: “Sale and purchase of children for gain, within the country (intra-country) and across border (inter-country), by deceit, fraud or force, resulting in exploitation of the person trafficked”.

Childhood is the most valuable period in every human being’s lifetime, when one explores, learns, adapts to various aspects of life for one’s overall growth and development.

Also it is the most impressionable part of a child’s journey before becoming an adult and instead of providing education to children, if children are forced to work in an age which is not permitted by law, it robs from them their childhood and creates a permanent dent in their future.

This deviation in their life leads to long term ill effects such as depression, malnutrition physical disability etc.

Trafficking in human beings especially in women and children has become a matter of serious concern and trafficking is a worldwide phenomenon affecting large number of girl and boys.

Families are often influenced by the promises of better employment or for better life far from their homes, later, they are kidnapped and sold and this way children’s rights are violated to grow up in their family environment and also take away their childhood from them.

Now the question which arises is “what are Children trafficked for?”

The Children are trafficked for:

  • Labour:
  • Bonded Labour
  • Domestic Work
  • Agriculture labour
  • Construction work
  • Illegal activities:
  • Begging
  • Organ Trade
  • Drug peddling and smuggling
  • Sexual Exploitation:
  • Forced Prostitution
  • Socially and religiously sanctified forms of prostitution
  • Sex Tourism
  • Pornography
  • Entertainment and Sports:
  • Circus, dance troupes, beers bars etc.
  • Camel Joke
  • For and through marriage
  • For and through adoption
  • As Child soldiers or combatants in armed conflicts

The Factors which leads to Trafficking are the Supply Factors such as poverty, child marriage, Natural disaster (floods, cyclones etc.), Domestic Violence, unemployment, lack of employment opportunities etc. and another is Demand Factors such as Migration, Hope for jobs/marriages, Sex Tourism, Internet Pornography etc.

Magnitude of Problem

In India, Child Trafficking is a matter of serious concern and large numbers of children are trafficked not only for sex ‘trade’ but also for non-sex based exploitation such as Domestic labour, industrial labour, agricultural labour, begging etc.

According to NCRB, 2005 Child Trafficking is on rise and nearly 60% are the victims of child trafficking who are below the age of 18 years. Also, as per NHC Report on Trafficking in Women and Children, in India the population of women and children in sex work in India is stated to be between 70,000 and 1 million of these, 30% are 20 years of age. Nearly 15% began sex work they were below 15 and 25% entered between 15 and 18 years.

A rough estimate prepared by an NGO called End Children’s prostitution in Asian Tourism reveals that there are 2 million prostitutes in India and 20% among them are minors

We cannot say that poverty is the only cause; there are some factors also such as Supply factors and Demand factors. Supply factors can be categorized as Feticide, Child Marriage, Domestic Violence, unemployment; Lack of employment opportunities etc. and Demand Factors can be categorized as Migration, Hope for jobs, Sex tourism, Internet pornography etc. Both these factors lead to Trafficking.

Case Study

Deepa’s Story:

In eastern India, Kolkata has become a hub for the trafficking of the girls, who arrives from the Nepal, Bangladesh and Burma. Deepa, a 15 year Old Girl from a village outside the Kolkata, told how year she was drugged by a woman, who kidnapped her and sold her to a madam in Mumbai.

 There, she was told that she has to become a prostitute and she denied and as a result of that she was beaten a lot and they also used hot iron rod to beat her and then eventually she had to agree for it.

Deepa could not escape and her day used to begin at six in the morning and she had 12-13 customers on daily basis and her day was used to end at 3 a.m.

Fortunately her luck changed and one day she was rescued but there was the threat of AIDS infection. According to one estimate, 70% of prostitutes in Mumbai are infected with the virus.

When she was rescued she went back to her home and told her mother everything and her mother got her tested and fortunately she was tested negative.

But there are many children who are still in the cage of the traffickers and are getting infected with virus such as AIDS, HIV etc.

Are the poor the only target?

It’s not only children who are from weaker sections of the society who are exposed to the threat of trafficking but also children from well-to-do households, who are able to access to internet are also bagged by the traffickers.

The perpetrators connect with the children using internet and lure them out and these children are being lured by the traffickers who connect with them and chat online.

The parents are unaware about all this and the safety protocols that are need to be followed. There is still a huge gap when it comes to parents and teachers interacting with children and it is very important to bridge the gap. Before providing smart phones to children it is also necessary to let them know about its advantage and disadvantage.

As per Reena Banerjee, who runs Navsrishti, an NGO in Delhi said that lockdown has put a lot of pressure on the mental health of children and this could be the reason for rise in the cases of voluntary running away from home with even strangers.

Also as per Reena, Atul Kumar, the Project Coordinator at Navsrishti, the children feel suffocated and they felt they are being monitored more than ever which pushed them to run away and another reason could be lack of communication with the parents as they are being told here to go where not to go, to whom they should speak but there is no proper communication, they have no one whom they can talk to or with whom they can share their feelings. This instigates them to find a way out and when an opportunity presents they grab hold of it.

Legal framework to address trafficking in India

  • Article 23 of the Constitution: Guarantees Right against Exploitation, prohibits traffic in human beings and forced labour and makes their practice punishable under law.
  • Article 24 of the Constitution: Prohibits employment of children below 14 years of age in factories, mines or other hazardous employment.
  • Indian Penal Code,1860: There are 25 provision relevant to trafficking; significant among  them are:
  • Section 366A- Procuration of a minor girl (below 18 years of age) from one part of the country to the another is punishable
  • Section 366B: importation of a girl below 21 years of age is punishable
  • Section 374: provides punishment for compelling any person to labour against his will
  • Child labour (Prohibition and regulation) Act, 1986: Prohibits employment of children in certain specified occupations and also lays down conditions of work children.
  • Information Technology Act, 2000: Penalizes Publication or transmission in electronic form of any material which is lascivious or appeals to prurient interest or if its effect is such as to tend to deprive and corrupt persons to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied therein. The law has relevance to addressing the problem of pornography

Another act has also been introduced such as such as Juvenile Justice (Care and protection of children) Act, 2000, and Goa Children’s Act, 2003.

The international laws also lay down standards that have been agreed upon by all the countries. The following are the most important International Conventions regarding trafficking of children such as:

  1. The Convention on the Rights of the Child,1989
  2. The Convention of the elimination of all the forms of discrimination against women (CEDAW) 1979,
  3. The Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially women and children.
  4. SAARC Convention on Regional Arrangements for the Promotion of Child Welfare, 2002

After seeing all the situations, it can be interpreted that Child trafficking is still prevailing in India and main cause of it is due to lack of awareness about the such crime happening around them and illiteracy which also turns to the poverty because of lack of education, knowledge and lack of employment opportunities can also be the cause which creates such opportunity for such trafficker and traffickers provide an gratuitous promise to provide more wages, better married life and transport them to the big cities therefore as a parents they must have knowledge and ability to identify such traffickers.

The awareness can be created among them as there are many organizations that conduct campaign and spread such awareness about such traffickers. The government must launch media campaign the promote Children’s right and elimination of any kind of child labour.


 India is viewed as hub of trafficking and also it is a humanities issue which is usually concerned in backward countries and involves among poor people who are influenced  by the fake promises and also poor people usually have financial problem and this makes themselves willing themselves place anywhere without investigation the background of that place or job for which they are promised and this requires an approach to address the dimension of the problem and best solution can also be the involvement of government in formulating and drafting laws which will protect the people from these traffickers.

Moreover the involvement of NGO can also play a big role in eradicating the problem of Child Trafficking in helping the solving the problem of Child Trafficking as NGO’s can carried out the decision that Government cannot carry out.

In the fight against trafficking government organization, non-governmental organizations, civil society, pressure groups, international bodies, all have to play an important role. 

Law cannot be the only instrument to take care of all the problems, as a citizen of our country we also need to put input in solving the problem of Child Trafficking.


By- Gaargi Tomar

Trafficking in human beings especially in women and children is a serious matter that is pervasive in India. Trafficking of children is a worldwide phenomenon where women and children are subjected to forced labour and sex trafficking.

In India, in the last few years the magnitude of human trafficking has increased though the accurate numbers are not known. It is one of the most lucrative criminal trades beside arms and drug smuggling which are undertaken by highly organized criminals.

In India, Child trafficking is not only carried out for sex ‘trade’ but also for the other forms of non-sex based exploitations which include domestic labour, industrial labour, agriculture labour, begging, organ trade and false marriage.

And when the question arises that who are the children trafficked, they are illiterate with very low level of illiteracy, belong to poor families, street children and even many of them are victims of natural disasters or calamities.

After viewing the magnitude of the problems, India has built a fairly wide framework of laws enacted by the Parliament. Article 23 and 24 of the Constitution and is the Legal Framework to address trafficking in the India.

The author has also discussed the factors which are leading to trafficking, magnitude of problems, role of state, NGOs, Media and legal framework subjected to child trafficking. 

KEY WORDS: Child Trafficking, Constitution, drug smuggling, agriculture labour, begging



By- Aaditya Sinha

The purpose of this is study is to analyze the three ordinances which are passed in Lok Sabha (Lower house of the parliament).

Before these ordinances, the agricultural structure of our country was based on the Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC) Act. The act regulates the farming structure and if the lender wants to purchase the commodities from the farmer, they need a license. There is also a concept of Minimum Support Price (MSP) which is the least amount that the lender must give to the farmers.

APMC Act itself is not a flawless Act, because many lenders decided that they will not give more than the MSP, so MSP equals to Maximum Selling Price. Also, if the MSP will increase then the common people will suffer, so the situation was very dicey.

Among these three ordinances, the most controversial thing is from “The Farmers Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Ordinance, 2020”. Section 2(m) of this Act doesn’t define the territory of APMC and this is the reason why the farmer feels that the government will privatize the agriculture set-up.

The solution as of now seems very gloomy because the farmers are saying that this Act is not helpful whereas the Government has given the slogan stating “One Nation One Market”.

KEYWORDS: APMC, Maximum Selling price, Minimum Support Price, Lok Sabha,  One Nation- One Market



By- Aaditya Sinha

I feel sorry that today’s television news has become nothing more than a provider of popular memes and WhatsApp stickers. I remember when I was a kid, whenever my father or grandfather used to tell “Turn on the TV, let’s watch the news”, the first thing that would come to my mind was a boring discussion for say 30 to 35 minutes.

Today, however, the situation is changed. Today, I can assure to all the kids that you won’t be bored; instead, you will have all the fun and entertainment. There would be catchy headlines, glamorous photos of the actresses in the background, and much more.

I can rant about this topic for hours, but that will only add a layer of despondency in times where everything is already so chaotic. So, I will try my best, to talk to you about an issue, which is certainly not important for the TV debates, because honestly, I didn’t know about this topic before actually studying about it. Maybe there would be that much coverage of this issue in a TV channel which usually a Hindi film actress gets in a typical Masala Film.

Agriculture: Backbone of Indian Economy and its History

Infinity is never defined, no matter whatever you do there would be some who would be in a superior position or more popular than you. The same thing happened with probably modern India’s most influential leader, LAL BAHADUR SHASTRI.

He gave a slogan that every politician in our country used in the same way we use the “applications” of what we have studied in every subject in real life. The slogan was “JAI JAWAN JAI KISAN”.

However, the latter ones in this slogan Kisan (English, Farmers) are actually struggling these days. They are protesting, and they even have made their own slogan “KISAN BACHAO MANDI BACHAO”.

These protests were started by Bhartiya Kisan Union as they asked from the government of Haryana to conduct a protest to which the government declined their request. The farmers started their protest in the “Tractors” and this protest was called “Tractor Protest”.

In order to understand the meaning of “Kisan Bachao Mandi Bachao” (English: Save farmers save Marketplace), first, we have to understand the structure of Agriculture in our country. I hope you remember the first chapter of economics in class 9th which was “The story of Palampur”.

The chapter tried to educate us with a tale of a fictional village about the problems of the farmer in our country. The thing is that roughly 58% of the population depends upon agriculture. 

Historically the problem with farmers was that the distribution system of the agriculture system was somewhat occupied by the money lenders and traders, especially in the village. The farmers were used to be in debt. Since the major population of our country still depends on agriculture and at the time when India got independence, this number was even more than what it is today. So, the government made a plan to have a committee.

The government thought to form APMC (Agriculture Produce Market Committee). The government planned to formulate a “market area” in a State and the jurisdiction was given to the Market Committee.

In order to purchase commodities from the farmers, they needed a license to purchase. APMC was formulated by the APMC Act and the main objective of this act was to reduce the exploitation of farmers by formulating a new concept of Minimum Support Price (MSP).

Here, we have to understand that the MANDI which the farmers are referring to is actually APMC, APMC is a kind of MANDI or say a regulated market where the farmer was not exploited

APMC and MSP: Boon or Bane?

The government made a very structured way of APMC and also introduced a concept of Minimum Support Price.  MSP can be defined as a minimum price that must be given to the farmers in order to sell their crops and other kinds of stuff.

This reduced the exploitation of the farmers by the otherwise shrewd traders. MSP was supposed to be a boon for the farmers but as they say, theory and practice are two different things. In reality, most traders decided to fix the amount to be given to the farmers.

Let’s understand this by a simple example, for example, if an apple is produced by a farmer and the MSP of that apple is say (5 Rs), but if all the traders had already decided that they will not give more than 5 then, the minimum support price becomes the “MAXIMUM SELLING PRICE”. This was one of the major flaws of the APMC system which is also known as MANDI.

The whole debate started when after the monsoon session began this week, in the Lok sabha three major bills were passed to replace the ordinances. The three bills have been named as “The Farmers Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Ordinance, 2020”, “The Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Ordinance, 2020”, and “The Essential Commodities (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020”.

Why Are Farmers Protesting?

Now we have to talk about the issue which farmers are protesting for. While it has to be noted that farmers are protesting against all three ordinances, the main objections which farmers are raising are mostly against the provisions of the first ordinance.

However, it has to be noted that till today, there is no uniform demand among the protesters nor there is a unified leadership of certain groups, but it has emerged that the main concerns among all the farmers are mainly about sections relating to “trade area”, “trader”, “dispute resolution” and “market fee” in the first ordinance. Now we have to look at the sections of the Act:

Section 2(m) of “The Farmers Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Ordinance, 2020” defines  “trade area” as any area or location, place of production, collection, and aggregation including (a) farm gates; (b) factory premises; (c) warehouses; (d) silos; (e) cold storages; or (f) any other structures or places, from where the trade of farmers’ produce may be undertaken in the territory of India”.

The main problem is that the MANDIS which are included under the AMPC Act will be excluded from the definition of trade are according to this new legislation. According to the protestors, because of this act, the MANDIS will only be confined in the physical premise and corporate will rule the agriculture industry too.

In simple words, this is the typical concept of free-market or capitalism. Most of the farmers are scared that this will actually reduce their income. The government has however given a slogan named “ONE NATION- ONE MARKET”.

According to the government, this policy will actually help farmers because they can purchase anything from anywhere, and the farmers are not bounded or restricted towards only one “MANDI” or market in a loose sense.


A monopoly is a type of market, where a specific person is responsible for selling commodities in a market. For example, Railways in India is a monopoly of the government, because the government controls the railways and they make all the rules regarding that.

In a democratic socialist set-up, a Monopoly may be a decent type of market, because if it is owned by the government people have believed in the government they have chosen. However, the monopoly is considered to be a very authoritarian type of market if it is private because it considers a situation where only Samsung phones are available in the market.

People who like Red me or Real me or any other phones cannot buy it. This situation can never be healthy and the customer has only one option to purchase. This is the reason the monopoly is considered to be a grim business policy. 

I am talking about Monopoly because the criticism this government is facing is about monopoly. This is because in around the month of January 2020, finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman has said that the government is planning to sell AIR INDIA (Airline company) and Bharat Petroleum Corporation (Oil and natural gas corporation).

The government has also planned to start around 151 private trains on different routes. Currently, India has some private trains which are run by IRCTC in Delhi (NCT OF DELHI) Lucknow (UP), Mumbai (Maharashtra) Ahmedabad (Gujarat), and Indore (MP) Varanasi (UP). 

The thing is that somewhere everyone is scared that someday this government will sell everything and we will be under a private or say a corporate set-up. This is the reason why somewhere farmers are also prejudiced to the fact that the government is trying to sell the agriculture setup also.

Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) party which was in the coalition with the BJP has ended their alliance. In fact, Sukhbir Badal, leader of the SAD party announced in the Lok sabha that Harsimrat Badal who is the Union Minister for Food Processing Industries from his party will resign. She has now resigned from the post.


I don’t want to take any sides here and I understand that you will be irked and call me spineless because I am not criticizing it but I believe that no matter how much I study, I will still be not able to understand all the nuances of this subject because I am not an economist nor an expert on the subject of agriculture or farming.

Neither I am an amateur in these subjects, but yes with my limited knowledge, I can say that “One Nation- One Market” seems to be flawed because at least for me it is impossible to think that a farmer from Betiah (Bihar) will go to Bidholi (Uttrakhand).

However, I believe that we have a quasi-federal structure, we have a different ministry. Under the different ministries, we have a highly intelligent and efficient bureaucrat, so, I will hope that they will understand the problem of the farmer and will try their best to the job for them because as I said one of the most influential leaders of modern India who was also born on 2nd October has said “JAI JAWAN JAI KISAN”.


By- Anjanee Goel[1]

In the search for better corporate governance, and appropriately composed and assembled efficient advisory board can provide non-obligatory but knowledgeable assistance and serve as a remarkable friend. Hence, provisions relating to the Central level and State level Advisory boards under the Code on wages 2019 and Minimum Wages Act 1948 have been discussed below.

According to the Code on Wages, 2019, the floor pay payable to employees will be chosen in meeting with the Central Advisory Board and certain State Governments as the Central Government regards vital.

Section 42 of Chapter V of the Code on Wages, 2019 states that the Central and State governments will establish Advisory Boards which will comprise of following people:

(a) Employers,

(b) Employees (in equivalent number as employers),

(c) Independent people, and

(d) 5 delegates of such State Governments as might be designated by the Central Government.

State Advisory Boards will comprise of employers, independent representatives, and employees.

Further, 33% (one-third) of the total individuals on both the Central and State Boards will be females under the wages code, 2019. This step is taken for the upliftment of women.

The Boards under the Code will prompt particular governments on different issues including:

(a) Fixation or amendment of least wages and other associated matters;

(b) Providing females with employment opportunities;

(c) The Central Government may, by notification, indicate the degree to which ladies might be employed in such foundations or jobs; and

(d) Any other issue identifying with this Code.

With respect to Section 7 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, the Appropriate government will designate an advisory board for the rationale of coordinating the work of committees and sub-committees nominated underneath section 5 and advising the appropriate Government in general, in the matter of putting in place and updating minimum wage rates.

Section 8 of Minimum Wages Act, 1948 states that the Central Government will choose a Central Advisory Board for the reason for prompting the Central and State Governments in the issues of the fixation and correction of minimum rates of wages and different issues beneath this Act and coordinating the work of the Advisory Boards.

The Central Government representing managers and workers in the programmed employments will nominate the persons of the Central Advisory Board who will be equivalent in number.

The Central Government will appoint one of the independent persons out of the sum total independent individuals not exceeding one-third (33.3%) of its total number of members as the chairman of the board.

Thus, through these provisions under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and The Code on Wages, 2019, relating to the establishment of Advisory boards and their functions, the overall betterment of Corporate Governance in any Organization is properly ensured and amended from time to time to maintain pace with the dynamic society and technological advancement.

[1] 5th Year, BBA LLB (H.) in Corporate Laws, UPES, Dehradun.


By- Adhish Chandra Saxena & Diksha Gupta


The ground of divorce by mutual consent was embedded in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by an amendment in 1976, by including Section 13B[1]. Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act[2], 1955 runs:

“Subject to the provisions of this Act a petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce may be presented to the district court by both the parties to marriage together, whether such marriage was solemnized before or after the commencement of the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976, on the ground that they have been living separately for a period of one year or more, that they have not been able to live together and that they have mutually agreed that the marriage should be dissolved.”

On the movement of both the parties made not sooner than a half year after the date of the presentation of the appeal to alluded to in subsection (1) and not later than eighteen months after the said date, if the petition is not pulled back meanwhile, the court should, on being fulfilled, in the wake of hearing the parties and in the wake of making such petition as it supposes fit, that a marriage has been solemnized and that the averments in the petition of are true, pass a pronouncement of divorce announcing the marriage to be broken down with impact from the date of the announcement.

Section 28 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 which likewise manages divorce on grounds of mutual consent is pari materia to the above section.

Requirements of divorce by mutual consent

The necessities which must be met to look for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act are as per the following:

  1. The parties have been living separately for a time of no less than one year
  2. They have not possessed the capacity to live respectively, and
  3. They have mutually agreed that marriage ought to be resolved.[3]

The main prerequisite is that the parties ought to be living separately for a time of no less than one year before filing the divorce appeal. It is important to comprehend what does the expression ‘living separately’ implies.

Living Separately

The Supreme Court of India on account of Sureshta Devi v. Om Prakash[4] has precluded “that the expression living separately connotes not living like a couple, merely husband and wife. It has no reference to the place of living. The parties may live under the same rooftop by way of circumstances, but they may not be living as a couple. What is by all accounts vital is that they want to perform conjugal commitments or marital obligations and with that, they have been living separately for a time of one year immediately preceding the presentation of the petition.”

It has been precluded by Supreme Court in different cases that the expression “have been living separately’ does not really implies physical division or living separately and separated what is material is that no conjugal commitments are performed between the mates and they are not living respectively as a husband and wife.

Parties Have Not Been Able To Live Together

In the wake of setting up the main necessity that the parties were living separately for one year or more, the second point that must be built up is that the parties have not possessed the capacity to live together respectively.

In Sureshta Devi v. Om Prakash[5], the Supreme Court watched that the expression “have not possessed the capacity to live together” appears to show the idea of separated marriage to such an extent that there is no probability of any compromise.

The parties require not to set up the way that they have not possessed the capacity to live respectively. The very certainty that they have displayed an appeal by mutual consent is demonstrative of this reality that they have not possessed the capacity to live together[6]. However, it is exceptionally basic to decide if assent given by both the parties is free and not got by any sort of power, extortion, or undue impact.

Subsequent to fulfilling the over two necessities and recording a joint petition for divorce by mutual consent, the parties must sit tight for no less than a half year, normally named as the “cooling period”.

After the finish of this period, if the underlying appeal is not pulled back by both of the parties or together, both the parties may move court by method for joint movement inside the stipulated time of year and a half from the underlying date of the recording of the joint petition. This period is given to parties to reexamine their choice.

The accompanying parts of this arrangement have been liable to legal interpretation:[7]

Whether the waiting period of six months is mandatory or directory?

There have been clashing judgments on this respect whether the courts ought to obligatorily sit tight for a time of a half year as given in the subsection (2) of Section 13B.

In the Grandhi Venkata Chitti Abbai[8]case, the court watched that-“If Section 13-B (2) is perused as required, the very reason for changing the approach of pronouncement of divorce by mutual consent will be disappointed all the more so when the parties began living separately for an impressive time. Subsequently, s 13-B (2) however is obligatory in the frame is catalog in substance.

In like manner, on account of Dinesh Kumar Shukla v. Neeta,[9] it was held that the holding up period is a registry in nature and it can be brought down from a half year (gave the obligatory necessities of s 13-B (1) are satisfied) when all endeavors at compromise fizzled.

However, on account of Hitesh Narendra Doshi v. Jesal Hitesh Joshi,[10] it was held that “the arrangement has an unmistakable reason and question, i.e. offering time to the parties for thoughtfulness and compromise. Reason and protest gazes at us so plainly by the dialect communicated in s 13-B (2) of the Act victimizing endlessly the privilege of the court from considering the petition of sooner than a half year.”

On account of Ashok Hurra v. Rupa Ashok,[11] it was held that “in the exercise of its exceptional powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court can give alleviation to the parties without sitting tight for the statutory time of a half year stipulated in s. 13-B of the Act. This principle of unrecoverable separation of marriage is not accessible even to the High Courts which don’t have powers like those practiced by the Supreme Court under Article 142 of the Constitution.”

Along these lines, the courts have been slanted more towards forgoing off this period if the condition of the case demands so and where there is no possibility of compromise between the parties. Additionally, the Supreme Court by method for its remarkable powers as given under Article 142 of the Indian Constitution can give divorce without sitting tight for a half-year on the off chance that it is fulfilled that the marriage is hopelessly separated.

In any case, this power is restricted just to the Supreme Court. There is still vulnerability whether High Courts and Family Courts need to obligatorily sit tight for a time of a half year. In any case, as it is evident from many situations where there is no plausibility of compromise between the parties and the marriage has been separated hopelessly, the courts ought to take after the soul of law more than the formal prerequisites of the section.

Whether consent can be unilaterally withdrawn?

There have been differentiating judgments on this issue. The contention is that since under this section the two parties need to record a joint appeal to for divorce how might one gathering singularly pull back from it.

Additionally, one of the motivations behind giving an era of a half year is to enable parties to reconsider their choice, and in the event that one of the gatherings chooses to pull back from it, why should it not be permitted to do as such.

In Jayashree Ramesh Londhe v. Ramesh Bhikaji,[12] the court held that once a joint appeal by mutual consent was recorded, no gathering could pull back from it without the assent of both the parties.

In like manner, in Nachhattar Singh v. Harcharan Kaur,[13] it was held that-“If both the parties had deliberately agreed to record the appeal to for dissolving the marriage by mutual consent and every single other condition said in sub-Section (1) of section 13-B of the Act are satisfied, it won’t be interested in a gathering to pull back the assent.”

Then again, in Sureshta Devi v. Om Prakash[14], the Court has held that petition of divorce can be pulled back singularly. It was held for this situation that on the off chance that one of the parties pulls back its assent the Court can’t pass an announcement of divorce by mutual consent.

The Court held that “if the declaration is exclusively in light of the underlying appeal it invalidates the entire thought of commonality and assent for divorce. Mutual agreement to divorce is the sine qua non for passing a pronouncement for divorce under Section 13-B. Mutual consent should precede till the divorces proclaim is passed.”[15]

In any case, in a current judgment of Supreme Court on account of Anil Kumar Jain v. Maya Jain[16] it was held that-“Under the current laws, the assent given by the parties at the season of the recording of the joint petition of for divorce by common agree needs to subsist till the second stage when the appeal to comes up for orders and a pronouncement for divorce is at long last passed and it is just the Supreme Court, which, in the exercise of its exceptional powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, can pass petitions to do finish equity to the parties.”

The Supreme Court however plainly communicated that exclusively utilize the power under Article 142 just in unique conditions, in typical conditions the arrangements of the statute must be offered impact to.

The law as clarified in the Sushreta Devi’s case still holds great that is the parties can pull back assent singularly. Be that as it may, the Supreme Court utilizing its energy as given under Article 142 of the Constitution can give divorce regardless of the possibility that the spouse or husband pulls back its ascent amid the procedures in the lower court and before the death of the pronouncement.

Whether mere silence at the second stage would tantamount to withdrawal?

In the event that the parties who have petitioned for divorce under mutual consent and after the finish of the half-year time frame what could possibly be done both of them don’t turn up. Will it add up to the withdrawal of assent?

Rajasthan High Court on account of Suman v. Surendra Kumar[17] has addressed these issues. For this situation, the spouse in the wake of documenting a joint assent petition for divorce did not show up for hearings. The family court held that no pronouncement could be passed without both parties.

In advance, it was held by the court that-“When one gathering has himself left the issue for derivation, the induction should be attracted the support of assent as opposed to for nonattendance of assent.” It was held that quiet can’t be taken to add up to the withdrawal of assent.


Through this paper, we have examined Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriages Act. Divorce by mutual consent gives a chance of genial determination of question amongst parties and spares time and cash.

The necessities as given under this Section are that before recording a joint petition for divorce parties must be living separately for a time of no less than one year. As we specified out, before living separately, does not really indicates physical division, what is basic is that parties are not satisfying conjugal commitments and not living as a couple.

The second prerequisite is that the parties have not possessed the capacity to live respectively. The way that both parties have documented a joint appeal by mutual consent is characteristic of the face that parties have not possessed the capacity to live respectively.

Just thing that is vital is that the assent has been gotten uninhibitedly and not by method for power, misrepresentation or undue impact as the entire reason for mutual consent will be vitiated if the assent is not free.

After parties have documented a joint appeal for divorce satisfying all the imperative conditions they are given a day and age of a half year and not over eighteen months after which they need to record a moment movement and courts subsequent to hearing the parties and investigating the averments in the petition of pass a declaration of divorce.

The three purposes of the dispute are that whether the holding up time of a half year is compulsory for the registry, the second is that can parties singularly pull back their assent, and third that whether quiet at the second stage would add up to the equivalent to withdrawal.

There have been differentiating judgments on the initial two issues. Distinctive high courts have received diverse measuring points in the elucidation of Section 13-B. Some High Courts have held that the holding up time of a half year is compulsory according to the Section while some High Courts have embraced the soul of law more than the specialized expressions of the section and have decided out that the period is catalog if there is zero chance of compromise between the parties.

Be that as it may, the Supreme Court utilizing its remarkable powers under Article 142 of the Constitution can pass the declaration of divorce without sitting tight for a time of a half year. Additionally, the Supreme Court on account of Sushreta Devi has decided out that the appeal of divorce can be pulled back singularly. On the third issue, the courts have decided out that hush of not showing up for hearings won’t add up to the withdrawal of assent.

[1] Kusum, Family Law Lectures (2nd, Lexis Nexis Butterworths wadhwa, Nagpur 2007) 161.

[2]The Hindu Marriage Act 1955 S. 13(B).

[3]Paras Diwan, Law of Marriage & Divorce (5th, Universal Law Publishing Co., New Delhi 2008) 525.

[4](1992) AIR SC 1904


[6]Paras Diwan, Law of Marriage & Divorce (5th, Universal Law Publishing Co., New Delhi 2008) 529

[7]Kusum, Family Law Lectures (3rd, Lexis Nexi Butterworths wadhwa, Nagpur 2002) 162

[8]AIR 1999 AP 91.

[9]AIR 2005 MP 106.

[10]AIR 2000 AP 364.

[11]AIR 1997 SC.

[12]AIR 1984 Bom 302.

[13]AIR 1986 P&H.

[14]AIR 1992 SC.


[16]AIR 2009 SC.

[17]AIR 2003 Raj 155.