About Lex Bona Fide Law Journal

LBLJ (Lex Bona Fide Law Journal) is an online platform for Students, Teachers and Scholars to express their views in various contemporary legal issues. It is open access, peer-reviewed and refereed journal dedicated to express views on topical legal issues, thereby generating a cross current of ideas on emerging matters.

About the Competition

Lex Bona Fide is organizing its 1st Memorial Drafting Competition 2020.

http://www.lexbonafide.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Moot-Proposition.pdf

Eligibility

The students/participants must be pursuing a Bachelor’s Degree in Law, i.e., 3- year LL.B. Course or 5-year LL.B from any recognized college or university or pursuing LL.M from any recognized University.

Each team shall consist of a minimum of two members and maximum of three.

How to Submit?

  • The body of the mail shall consist: Name of the participant, University/College Name and Year in which you are studying.
  • Submissions Should be made only on the following E-mail ID: submissions@lexbonafide.com.
  • Each memorial should be electronically submitted in two formats: (i) as a Microsoft Word document and (ii) in PDF format.
  • Plagiarism Should not be more than 20%.
  • Electronic documents submitted must contain no information or features other than those required by this rule (e.g. no comments, track changes, etc.). Breach of this provision will be penalized with a deduction of penalty points.

http://www.lexbonafide.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/rules.pdf

Registration Fees

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSftue4A3R48ZmNODV0jVYx_81Noygul3dokYpqwZvAYnK1M_w/viewform

  • For a team comprising up to 2 members: Rs 350/-
  • For a team comprising of 3 members: Rs 450/-
  • The registration fee shall be non-refundable and non-transferable in any circumstance.
  • Registration Open till: 25th September 2020
  • Submission Date: 5th October 2020
  • Mode of Payment
  • Mode: Paytm/Google pay/Phonepe Number: 8435770907
  • UPI ID: sjain6824-1@okicici
  • Kindly upload the payment screenshot in the registration form.

Prizes

  • 1st Prize: Rs. 5000:  Shree Jayant Pandya award, + Free Publication in Lexbonafide + Online Human Rights course at katog + Internship Opportunity at Lex Maven Law Firm.
  • 2nd Prize: Rs.3000 + Free Publication in Lexbonafide + Online Human Rights course at katog + Internship Opportunity at Lex Maven Law Firm.
  • 3rd Prize:Free Publication in Lexbonafide + Online Human Rights course at katog + Internship Opportunity at Lex Maven Law Firm.

Contact Information

E-mail ID: support@lexbonafide.com

Divya Mehta: 9649932531

Surabhi Agrawal: 9910146859

Sanyam Jain: 8435770907

INTRODUCTION

On Friday, a bench of apex court consisting Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Indu Malhotra recommended the Central Government to make Advance Ruling system more comprehensive as a tool for settlement of Disputes. These observations were the byproduct of the judgement passed in an appeal of the case ‘National Cooperative Corporation v. Commissioner of Income Tax’ as this case resulted in a judicial innovation with the Supreme Court passing orders in Oil and Natural Gas Commission & Anr. v. Collector of Central Excise requiring that such cases must be referred to a Committee to be appointed by the Government to facilitate a resolution of such disputes and that no case should be filed without the approval of this Committee. The facts of the present case made the failure of this system apparent, where the SLP filed by the appellant-Corporation was initially dismissed with liberty to revive the same in case the High Powered Committee granted such a permission which was so granted in a meeting held on 14th August, 2009. The said Committee discussed the legal ramifications, and in some way opined in favour of the appellant-Corporation. But the ball was again lobbed back into the Court to adjudicate the said issue rather than a resolution being reached. This resulted only in revival of the appeal, and the consequent decision which has seen the light of the day only now.

The Court observed that the appeal was filed only to invite a dismissal, so that a certificate of dismissal is obtained from the highest court to put a quietus in the matter of the Government Departments. Undoubtedly, this causes a complete wastage of judicial time and in various orders of this court it has been categorized as “certificate cases”, i.e., the purpose of which is only to obtain a certificate of dismissal.

Court’s further observation and recommendation

The Court said that, Advance Ruling was brought into effect in 1993, and a quasi-judicial tribunal was established as the Authority for Advance Ruling, yet this methodology has proved to be illusionary because there is an increasing number of applications pending before the AAR due to its low disposal rate. Contrary to the expectation that a ruling.

  • would be given 6 months (as per Section 245R (6) of the IT Act), the average time taken is stated to be reaching around 4 years. The reason for this situation is the large number of vacancies and delayed appointments of members of the AAR.
  • The court notices that, through Notification No. 11456 dated 3.8.2000 that public sector companies were added to the definition of ‘applicant’, and in 2014’ it was made applicable to a resident who had undertaken one or more transactions of the value of Rs. 100 crore or more. However, insofar as a resident is concerned, the limit is so high that it cannot provide any solace to any individual, and the Court suggested to reduce the ceiling limit.
  • The Court considered it appropriate to recommend to the Central Government to consider the efficacy of the advance tax ruling system and make it more comprehensive as a tool for settlement of disputes rather than battling it through different tiers, whether private or public sectors are involved. A council of Advance Tax Ruling based on the Swedish model and the New Zealand system may be a possible way forward.
  • The Court recommended promotion of mediation to settle disputes between Government authorities or Government departments. The Court noted that Administrative mechanism for resolution of CPSEs Disputes was conceptualized to replace the Permanent Machinery of Arbitration and to promote equity through collective efforts to resolve disputes.
  • The Court recommended to have a committee of legal experts presided by a retired judge in such type of resolutions as the bureaucrats are reluctant to accept responsibility of taking such decisions, apprehending that at some future date their decision may be called into question and they may face consequences post retirement, and in order to prevent such apprehensions the committee should be presided by a retired judge.

One of the largest areas of litigation for the Government taxation matters and the petition rate of the tax department before the Supreme Court is at 87%. The court said that a vibrant system of Advance Ruling can go a long way in reducing taxation litigation.

Key Highlights

  • This was CIVIL APPEAL NOS.5105-5107 OF 2009.
  • Case Name: National Co-operative Developmental Corporation v. Commission Of Income Tax, Delhi-V.

Discuss the following provisions:

  • Explain Section 245 N of IT Act.
  • Explain Section 245 R (6) of IT Act.
  • Explain Section 37(1) of IT Act.

READ THE FULL TEXT HERE

Preview attachment 8001_2007_36_1501_23901_Judgement_11-Sep-2020.pdf

READ THE FULL JUDGEMENT HERE.

REPORT BY-

ABHILASHA KUMARI

Session 1 | 19th September | Fearless Mediation: All issues on the Table. A holistic Approach by Ms. Kathleen Ruane Leedy

Session 2 | 20th September | Intimate Partner Violence and Mediation by Ms. Maureen Robertshaw.

About MediateGuru

Mediate Guru is a social initiative led by members across the globe. The aim of the organization is to bridge the gap between general public and litigation. Here our organisation comes into the picture. We are creating a social awareness campaign for showcasing mediation as a future of alternative dispute resolution to provide ease to the judiciary as well as to the pockets of general litigants.

About the Speaker(s)

  1. Ms. Kathleen Ruane Leedy
    • Bi-coastal mediator trained in Atlanta, GA, Boston & Cape Cod, MA and Tacoma, WA. Now based in Queens, NY.
    • Since 2008 her diverse mediation career has spanned 12 years of mediating cases in court and private practice.
    • Mediates a wide range of cases including small claims, divorce, business and workplace & family issues.
  2. Ms. Maureen Robertshaw
    • Maureen is a Harvard Law School trained negotiator, family law mediator, custody evaluator, parenting time expeditor, Rule 114 qualified neutral, and parenting consultant.
    • Maureen trains attorneys and therapists on intimate partner violence dynamics and has guest lectured at several law schools on the subject.

Note: E-certificates will be provided to those who will attend both sessions.

Platform
The session will be hosted through WebinarJam

Date and Timings

The Workshop will be conducted on 19th to 20th September, 2020.

Session 1 | September 19th
6 PM Indian Standard Time.
1.30 PM British Summer Time.
8.30 AM New York Time.

Session 2 | September 20th
7 PM Indian Standard Time
2.30 PM British Summer Time
9.30 AM Minnesota Time

Registration

Click here to register https://forms.gle/UPC8bL7Kfy1ghrsG9
Or visit us at:
https://www.mediateguru.com/event-details/international-two-day-workshop-on-mediation

Registration Fees:
Kindly note there is no registration fee for the workshop

Contact info:

For any query mail us:
admin@mediateguru.com

Event Coordinator:
Ms. Garima Rana
+91 8800 474 226

About Us

“WE ARE REGISTERED UNDER MINISTRY OF MICRO, SMALL AND MEDIUM ENTERPRISES. UAM NO: UP03D0049755”

ANUMAARGA is a innovative-novel legal platform that aims to provide ‘LEGAL-AID’ and ‘LEGAL-EDUCATION’ over a single platform. Team ANUMAARGA is led by its visionary leader Mr. Deepanshu Raj ideas to democratize the way India learns and simplify the first step towards justice (legal-aid).It provides a different portal for lawyers to communicate within its community or with people in need of Justice with intent to increase the quality of legal aid while keeping in check the costs involved. In short, It tries to serve the vision of uniting lawyers willing to provide legal aid with people in need of it. Also, this application is designed for passionate learners to explore and monitor the strategic landscape of legal field.

About program –

Our interns will be eligible for the following perks-

  • All interns shall be awarded with a certificate after successful completion of the Internship.
  • Task Report of each intern shall be provided after completion of task by the interns.
  • The top 10 participants shall get a chance to publish their article on our website, subject to qualification of Terms and conditions.
  • 10% discount in the upcoming events of Anumaarga
  • And much more….

Rules and Regulations:

The students have to keep in mind these rules while pursuing their internship: –

  • The students shall be given certain tasks to be done within a specified amount of time. If they fail to complete such tasks, it shall lead to their disqualification.
  • Misbehavior on the part of any student shall not be entertained and strict action shall be taken against them.
  • All the details provided by the student in their CV should be true.
  • Please note that all the interns must have minimum qualification marks for receiving the internship certificate.

Eligibility Criteria –

The student(s) should currently be pursuing their Bachelor`s Degree in law, either in 3 year LL. B course or 5 year integrated LL. B course from any recognized university.

Information Required:

Contact Number, Email Id and Place of residence.

Total Intake and Time Period-

The total intake of participants shall be 20 and the total time period of the internship shall be one month.

Application Process:

Mail your CV along with a writing sample of not more than 1000 words at

Internship.anumaarga@gmail.com

Last Date for Registration- September 25, 2020.

Release of list of selected students– September 28’2020. Commencement of Internship Program– 1 October, 2020. End date of Internship- 30 October, 2020.

CONTACT INFORMATION

For any query,

Mail on: Internship.anumaarga@gmail.com

WhatsApp on:

  • Piyush Sharma – 9140576670
  • Utkarsh Shubham- 72960 29460

World Ozone Day Celebration 2020 

Webinar On “OZONE FOR LIFE” 35 Years of Ozone Layer Protection

on 16 September 2020, 3-4 p.m

Kerala State Council for Science Technology and Environment (KSCSTE) & Environmental Information Systems (ENVIS Hub), Kerala jointly organising World Ozone Day Celebration 2020 – Webinar On “OZONE FOR LIFE” 35 Years of Ozone Layer Protection on 16 September (Wednesday), 2020 , 3-4 p.m

For registration follow the link: https://forms.gle/XTL6hGUihHNQJgUv9

https://kscste.kerala.gov.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/ENVIS_OzoneDay_20.pdf

Picture credits to talkehr.com

Abstract

Can a machine think sense or feel like a human being??? Today digital revolutions transform views of the human being about values, behavior, and priorities. Artificial intelligence or machine learning or deep learning is that technology that gradually permeates every aspect of our society, from the vital to the regular life. AI is a science and a set of computational technologies that are inspired by the ways people use their nervous systems to sense, learn, reason, and take action. Various sectors are benefited from these new technologies but on the other side, apprehension is, these new technologies may be misused or performed in unforeseen and potentially harmful ways. In this scenario, it has become a fundamental concern that every requisite innovation is socially preferably and justifiable. Today issue on the role of the law in governing AI systems is more relevant. How the law will struggle to keep up how courts, policymakers, and companies are stepping in to confront the unique legal and policy questions presented by the widespread adoption of AI.

Introduction

Technologies are innovated to make routine life easy and smooth. The world of technology is changing rapidly with computers, machines, and robots, replacing simple human activities. Artificial intelligence (AI) is one of such innovations. Fundamentally, AI is a machine that can think on its own. AI can be understood as the capability of a machine to reproduce intelligent behavior. In a broader sense, AI refers to biologically inspired information systems and includes manifold technologies like machine learning, deep learning, computer vision, natural language processing, machine reasoning, and strong AI. However AI relates to the similar task of using computers to understand human intelligence, but it does not confine itself to biologically observable methods. In general understanding “Artificial intelligence, a branch of computer science is the recreation of

human intelligence processes by machines especially computer system aims to create intelligent machines which can often act and react like humans and makes possible for computers to perform tasks involving human-like decision making, intelligence, learning skills or expertise.

Understanding AI

An intelligent entity has five attributes i.e.

(1) Communication,

(2) Internal knowledge,

(3) External knowledge,

(4) Goal-driven behavior, and

(5) Creativity.

AI technology includes Machine Learning (ML), Cognitive Computing, Deep Learning, Predictive application programming interfaces (APIs), Natural Language Processing (NLP), Image Recognition, Speech Recognition, etc. Highly technical,

specialized skill and the expert system is required in the process of Particular applications of artificial intelligence. AI includes programming of computers for a certain character such as Knowledge, Reasoning, problem-solving, Perception, Learning, Planning, and the ability to move objects. Knowledge Engineering and Machine learning is a core part of AI research. For a machine to act and react like

a human, it is necessary to machine must be possessed with accurate information of the world. To implement knowledge engineering AI is essentially to access properties, categories, objects, and their relations. It is a tedious task to insert reasoning, the power to solve the problem, and common sense in a machine. Machine learning and learning require ample supervision with numerical regressions and classification. Machine perception is capable to use sensory inputs to interpret the different aspects of

the world, while computer vision is the power to analyze visual inputs with a few sub-problems such as facial, object, and gesture recognition. Science fiction has been stimulating the interest of people for a very long time with the concept of

Artificial Intelligence into reality the first time with computers and now with robots and machines. This stimulation can be seen when a robot named Sophia was given the citizenship of the country by Saudi Arab. Robotics is a major field related to AI. It requires intelligence to handle tasks such as object manipulation and navigation, along with sub-problems of localization, motion planning, and mapping.

Origins of AI

It is said, Artificial Intelligence is not a new idea to the person who examines science creative writing. To understand AI and its nexus with our understanding of intelligence, one has to look into the development of the concept of AI. The term was first coined when people began trying to understand whether machines can truly think. In the 1940s McCulloch and Walter Pitts had first attempted

to understand intelligence in mathematical terms. John McCarthy had used the term “Artificial Intelligence” in the Dartmouth Conference at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He defined AI as the science and engineering of making intelligent machines, especially intelligent computer programs. According to him “every solid definition of intelligence relates it to human intelligence….” Alan Turing proposed a test in 1950 to prove a machine “as intelligent”. He proposed that a machine has to pass the Turing test to prove the computer is intelligent. The Turing test engaged a human being, as the ‘judge’, to ask questions via a computer terminal to two other entities, one of which will be a human being and the other will be a computer. If the judge (human being) regularly failed to appropriately differentiate the computer from the human, then the computer was said to have passed the test. Marvin Minsky defined AI, (in 1968), as a science of making machines do things that would require intelligence if done by men. In 1993, Luger and Stubblefield have given a modern definition of AI as the branch of computer science that is concerned with the automation of intelligent behavior. AI was defined by Stuart Russell and Peter Norvig as designing and building intelligent agents that receive percepts from the environment and take actions that affect that environment. This definition of AI brings together different subfields of computer vision, speech processing, natural language understanding, reasoning, knowledge representation, learning, and robotics, to achieve an outcome by the machine. David Poole and Alan Mackworth defined AI as the field that studies the synthesis and analysis of computational agents that act intelligently. Marcus Hutter (ANU) and Shane Legg (Google Deep Mind) proposed the “human-independent” definitions of AI as Intelligence measures an agent’s ability to achieve goals in a wide range of environments. Oxford dictionary has defined artificial intelligence as a computer system, able to perform tasks that normally require human intelligence. In layman terms, artificial intelligence is a technology that behaves and acts like humans or other animals. In popular terms, AI is a science and a set of computational technologies that are inspired by the ways people use their nervous systems to sense, learn, reason, and take action.

Types of AI Applications

Existing AI applications are forms of narrowAI or artificial specialized intelligence” (ASI), aim to solve specific problems or take actions within a limited set of parameters. When we communicate with a device to book film tickets or pay a gas bill or listen to GPS directions etc., we employ weak or narrowAI. Most recognizable products i.e. Apple’s Siri8 and Google’s self-drive cars are using

“weak” AI. It appears intelligent, but it still has defined functions. It has no self-awareness. When a person used a credit card an AI algorithm approves the transaction, use the GPS in a car, we use an AI algorithm. Using Google translate service, is part of AI and is based on statistical machine learning. The face recognition capability of our cameras is AI. AI can enable a machine to mimic “cognitive” functions that humans associate with other human minds, such as “learning” and “problem-solving.” AI which is used in mainstream technologies such as web search, smartphone applications are based on deep learning. Tasks such as trading stocks, flying military planes, and keeping a car within its lane

on the highway are now all within the domain of ASI (artificial specialized intelligence).

Opportunities of AI in various sectors

Many projects are taken to explore and implement AI for use in the public sector, including government, anti-corruption efforts, and similar activities. Predictably, the markets for AI services are growing and the broader economy shall be benefited enormously with potential AI services. AI technology may provide help to solve complex global challenges like climate change and resource

utilization on the impact of population growth by improved decision making with data-driven strategies. It is realized that AI has the potential to transform people’s lives for the better by introducing new information and digital personal assistants which can anticipate our needs. We can see the use of AI technology in education, Agriculture, etc.

AI in Manufacturing Industry and Service Sector

The use of industrial robots has increased significantly and demonstrably in the manufacturing industry. It may reduce production also. Skilled Robots are deploying in service industries services such as restaurants or hospitals. They are assisting disabled people, humans to avoid laborious or dangerous work. AI technology also has the potential to provide solutions to social challenges like caring for the aging population.

AI in Autonomous Vehicular Sector

Various research projects working on AI application in the automobile sector for Autonomous vehicles (AV) are advocated that it will reduce road accidents, reduce traffic congestion, reduce fuel consumption and emissions, improve road safety, improve the mobility of the elderly and disabled, and free up commuting time for other tasks. Drones (a specialized type of AV) are growing in popularity.

AI in Legal Profession

The future of the legal profession without AI software is hard to believe. Companies dealing in artificial intelligence technology have been looking out ways to develop technology for providing better, speedy, and accuracy in the legal profession also. The technological advancement in the legal profession has transformed the framework. Legal research is the most important aspect of practicing lawyers and because of technology, it has undergone a drastic development. From journals and reporters to CD-ROMS and Online software, legal technological innovation has changed the way how legal services were rendered. AI software helps the lawyer to find relevant case laws and applicable statutes. With this software complex legal questions can be answered in simple and basic language. Lawyers and firms are drafting and reviewing the contracts as well as the case documents with the help of software. There are different ways in which artificial intelligence technology is being currently applied in the legal profession around the globe and proving to be advantageous for law firms and lawyers respectively. Can a robot replace a lawyer?? Practically, robots cannot replace a lawyer’s role in court, but AI robots have the power to create and draft documents. Therefore, the clerical role of lawyers might be reduced to a large extent. Appearing and arguing a case before judges in the court might be the only role lawyer’s play.

Challenges

The debate is around regulating this technology in the country within the realm of municipal and international law. One of the foremost concerns surrounding AI is data protection because Every AI interface relies entirely on the data which is being fed into its system. Secondly, in the absence of the direct application of the human mind behind any action that an AI system undertakes, who is to be

blamed for the loss which is likely to be sustained by innocent users? It is also criticized that complete automation or complete dependency on the AI system may be risky to the human being. There some dangers in eliminating human oversight i.e. coming to depend entirely on the decisions of AI systems when we do not fully understand how these systems are making those decisions.

Data Protection Act

India has also not yet enacted specific legislation on data protection. However, the Indian legislature did amend the Information Technology Act (2000) (“IT Act”) to include Section 43A and Section 72A, which give a right to compensation for improper disclosure of personal information. Some people question govt that why it was introduced;

The data protection act grew out of public concern about privacy in the face of rapidly developing computer technology. It works in two ways, giving individuals certain rights whilst requiring those who use and record personal information on the computer to be open about that use. The data protection act become law on 12th July 1984 and was updated in 1998. The Indian central government subsequently issued the Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information) Rules, 2011 (the “Rules”) under Section 43A of the IT Act. A clarification of the above Rules was issued on 24 August 2011 (the “Clarification”). The Rules have imposed additional requirements on commercial and business entities in India relating to the collection and disclosure of sensitive personal data or information which have some similarities with the GDPR and the Data Protection Directive.  

India has introduced a biometric-based unique identification number for residents called ‘Aadhaar’. Aadhaar is regulated by the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies Act) 2016 (“Aadhaar Act”) and rules and regulations issued thereunder.  Entities in regulated sectors such as financial services and telecom sector are subject to obligations of confidentiality under sectoral laws which require them to keep customer personal information confidential and use them for prescribed purposes or only in the manner agreed with the customer.

Finally, personal data is protected through indirect safeguards developed by the courts under common law, principles of equity, and the law of breach of confidence. In a landmark judgment delivered in August 2017 (Justice K.S Puttaswami & another Vs. Union of India), the Supreme Court of India has recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution as a part of the right to “life” and “personal liberty”. “Informational privacy” has been recognized as being a facet of the right to privacy and the court held that information about a person and the right to access that information also needs to be given the protection of privacy (“Privacy Judgment”). The court stated that every person should have the right to control the commercial use of his or her identity and that the “right of individuals to exclusively commercially exploit their identity and personal information, to control the information that is available about them on the internet and to disseminate certain personal information for limited purposes alone” emanates from this right. This is the first time that the Supreme Court has expressly recognized the right of individuals over their data.

Fundamental rights are enforceable only against the state and instrumentalities of the state and the Supreme Court in the same judgment recognized that enforcing the right to privacy against private entities may require legislative intervention.

The Government of India, therefore, constituted a committee to propose a draft statute on data protection. The committee proposed draft law and the Government of India has issued the Personal Data Protection Bill 2019 (“PDP Bill”) based on the draft proposed by the committee. This will be India’s first law on the protection of personal data and will repeal S. 43A of the IT Act.

It states that anyone processing Personal data must comply with 8 enforceable principles of good practice. Data must be:

  • Fairy and lawfully enforced.
  • Processed for specified purposes
  • Adequate, relevant, and not excessive
  • Accurate and, where necessary, up to date
  • Not kept longer than necessary
  • Processed by the data subject’s rights
  • Secure
  • Not transferred to countries without adequate protection

Personal Data

Information about living identifiable individuals. Personal data do not have particularly sensitive, can be as little as name and address.  Personal data under Indian laws and rules are termed “personal information”. Personal information has been defined under the Rules as “any information that relates to a natural person, which either directly or indirectly, in combination with other information available or likely to be available with a body corporate, is capable of identifying such person”.

The PDP Bill proposes a similar definition but extends it to include any inference drawn from such data for profiling. There are no specific rules that govern the processing of personal data.

However, the Rules state that a body corporate or any person who processes personal information on behalf of the body corporate should provide a privacy policy

The PDP Bill proposes that the processing of personal data must comply with seven principles for processing, namely:

  • Processing of personal data has to be fair and reasonable;
  •  It should be for a specific purpose;
  • Only personal data necessary for the purpose should be collected;
  • It should be lawful;
  •  Adequate notice of the processing should be provided to the individual;
  •  Personal data processed should be complete, accurate, and not misleading; and

Personal data can be stored only as long as reasonably necessary to satisfy the purpose for which it is processed

Data Users

Those who control the content and use of a collection of personal data. They can be any type of company or organization. A data user does not necessarily own a computer. With the few exceptions data users have to register to the Data Protection registrar. They must give their name and address together with broad descriptions of:

  • The items of data held
  • The purpose for which the data are held
  • Who will have access to the data
  • The type of organization to whom the information may be disclosed i.e. shown or passed on to
  • Any overseas or territories to which the data may be transferred.

Conclusion

Our inability to answer the challenges arises due to the application of AI forces us to understand the weakness of our legal system to deal with AI. AI is the capability of a machine to imitate intelligent human behavior. To safeguard the integration of AI, a balanced approach would need to be adopted which efficiently regulates the functioning of AI systems but also maximizes its benefits.

Effective and strong Contract drafting- In India however AI technology is in its emerging stages but there are plenty of opportunities for private industries to participate and profit from its development. In the absence of a regularity framework, Contracts between the AI user and the AI developer are vital in

determining the liability of parties. Participants must outline their respective roles, responsibilities, and obligations in the contract. During the negotiation of a contract, the parties should identify the scope of services being offered, the warranties relating to the AI technology, the scope of liability (including limitations and exclusions) at the very least.

Parallel Approach- Artificial intelligence is the future and there is no denial, but in our quest of replacing ‘human errors’ with smart technology and strong AI, we need to move slowly and keep abreast of the parallel needs of upgrading the laws and literary framework in the country.

Two-layered protection model -Since 2017, more than 20 countries (including, India) have released discussion papers on AI. However, to date, no country has enacted specific legislation to comprehensively regulate the use of AI. Therefore, to be at forefront of this revolution, the Indian legislature should take pro-active steps to fill the regulatory lacunae and provide surety in this field. AI is growing

multi-fold technology and we do not know all the advantages or dangers associated with it. Therefore it is of utmost importance to have a two-layered protection model: one- technological regulators; and two- laws to control AI actions as well as for accountability of errors. The solution is not to hold back on innovation, but we have to innovate around: how do you keep people engaged when AI can do most things better than most people. In the meanwhile, in the absence of a regulatory framework, stakeholders should strive towards implementing measures that would protect them from unforeseen consequences and liabilities that may arise in the course of use and implementation of AI technology. A mere oversight at the contracting stage could lead to significant losses.

Latest Posts


This case analysis has been written by Pooja Lakshmi pursuing law at Bennett University

Case Number

Writ Petition Nos. 4610-4612 & 5068-5079 of 1981

Citation

1986 AIR 180, 1985 SCR Supl. (2) 51

Bench

Chandrachud, Y.V. ((Cj), Fazalali, Syed Murtaza, Tulzapurkar, V.D., Reddy, O. Chinnappa (J), Varadarajan, A. (J)

Decided On

10/07/1985

Relevant Section

Constitution of India, 1950: Articles 14, 15, 16, 19, 19(1), 21, 22, 25, 29, 32, 37, 39 and 41.

Indian Penal Code, 1860: Section 441.

Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888: Sections 312, 313, and 314. 

Abstract

The case analysis of ‘Olga Tellis V. Bombay Municipal Corporation,’ discusses the case that came in front of the Supreme Court of India during 1985 as a writ petition. It was filed by pavement and slum dwellers in Bombay (now Mumbai), seeking to be allowed to remain on the pavements against their order of eviction during the monsoon months by the Bombay Municipal Corporation. Lawyers often cite the case to justify the eviction of tenants and slum dwellers.

Facts of the Case

In Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation, the State of Maharashtra in 1981, and therefore the Bombay Municipal Corporation decided to evict the pavement dwellers and people who were residing in slums in Bombay.

• According to it, the then Chief Minister of Maharashtra, Mr. A. R. Antulay ordered on July 13 to evict slum dwellers and pavement dwellers out of Bombay and to deport them to their place of origin.

• The eviction was to proceed under Section 314 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act 1888.

• On hearing about the Chief Minister’s announcement, they filed a writ petition within the High Court of Bombay for an order of injunction, restraining the officers of the state government and also the Bombay Municipal Corporations from implementing the Directive of the Chief Minister.

• The High Court of Bombay granted an ad-interim injunction to be effective until July 21, 1981. Respondents agreed that the huts would not be demolished until October 15, 1981. Contrary to agreement, on July 23, 1981, petitioners were huddled into State Transport buses for being deported out of Bombay.

• The respondent’s action was challenged by the petitioner on the grounds that it is violative of Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution. They also asked for a declaration that Section 312, 313, and 314 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act 1888 is violative of Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.

Brief Facts and Procedural History

This was a written petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution. Olga Tellis, a journalist in conjunction with the PUCL and other organizations, questioned the eviction order approved by Mr. A.R. Antulay, the then Chief Minister of Maharashtra. The inhabitants of the pavement and also the public interest organizations affirmed that the eviction order of the inhabitants of the pavement violates the fundamental rights. The eviction deprives them, among others, of their fundamental rights enshrined in Article 19 and of the right to life guaranteed under Article 21.

In 1981, the State of Maharashtra, and therefore the Bombay Municipal Council decided to evict all pavement and slum dwellers from the city of Bombay. The residents claimed such action would violate the right to life since a home in the city allowed them to achieve a livelihood and demanded that adequate resettlement must be provided if the evictions proceeded. The Court declined to provide the remedies requested by the applicants but found that the right to a hearing had been violated at the time of the planned eviction. The Court held that the right to life in Article 21 of the Constitution, encompassed means livelihood since, “if there is an obligation upon the State to secure to citizens an adequate means of livelihood and therefore the right to work, it might be sheer pedantry to exclude the right to livelihood from the content of the right to life. However, the right to livelihood was not absolute, and deprivation of the right to livelihood could occur if there was a just and fair procedure undertaken according to law. The government’s action must be reasonable, and any individual affected must be afforded a chance of being heard as to why that action should not be taken. In the present case, the Court found that the residents had been rendered the opportunity of being heard by virtue of the Supreme Court proceedings. While the residents were clearly not aiming to trespass, they found that it had been reasonable for the government to evict those living on public pavements, footpaths, and public roads. The evictions were to be delayed until one month after the monsoon season (October 31, 1985). The Court declined to hold that evicted dwellers had a right to an alternate site but instead made orders that: (i) sites should be provided to residents presented with census cards in 1976; (ii) slums existing for 20 years or more were not to be removed unless the land was required for public purposes and, in that case, alternative sites must be provided; (iii) high priority should be given to resettlement.

Issues before the Court

Question of Estoppels against fundamental rights or Waiver of Fundamental Rights?

Scope of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution?

Constitutionality of provisions of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888.

Whether pavement dwellers are “trespasser” or not under the IPC.

Arguments Raised

Petitioners – The council on the applicant’s behalf argued that the “right to life” guaranteed by Article 21 included the right to a means of subsistence which he would be deprived of his livelihood if he was expelled from the slums. Moreover, it is sidewalks that might amount to a deprivation of his rights—life and thus unconstitutional.

Respondent – On the question of natural justice, was it argued that this possibility of hearing should be given to whom? To the intruder who has encroached on public property Or to people that committed the crime?

Ratio of the Case

Article 39 (a) of the Constitution, a guideline of State policy states that the State shall give particular attention to its policy to make sure that citizens, both men, and women, have an equal right to means of livelihood.

Article 41, which constitutes another guideline, stipulates that the State must, within the bounds of its economic capacity and its development, effectively guarantee the right to work within the event of unemployment and unnecessary desires. Article 37 states that the principles of the Directive, although any court can not apply them, are nevertheless fundamental within the governance of the country.

The principles commenced in Articles 39 (a), and 41 must be considered as equally fundamental for understanding and interpreting the meaning and content of fundamental rights. If the State were obliged to provide citizens with adequate means of subsistence and therefore the right to work, it might be quite irreproachable to exclude the right to subsistence from the content of the right to life.

The State cannot, by positive action, be obliged to provide adequate means of subsistence or work to the citizens. However, anyone deprived of their right to a means of subsistence, except per the just and fair procedure established by law, may challenge deprivation as a violation of the right to life conveyed through Article 21.

Decision of the Court

Although the Court refused to conclude that the expelled inhabitants were entitled to an alternative site, it ordered that:

No one has the right to encroach on trails, sidewalks, or any other place reserved for public purposes.

The provision of section 314 of the Bombay Municipality Act is not unreasonable in the circumstances of this case.

Sites must be provided to censored residents in 1976.

Slums existing for 20 years or more should not be removed unless the land is required for public purposes and, in this case, alternate sites must be provided.

High priority should be given to resettlement.

In the case of the Narmada Dam, adequate resettlement was ordered, but most of the evicted persons affected were not properly resettled, and the majority of the Court refused to do.

Judgment

The judgment reflects the ‘Principle of Utility’ propounded by J. Jeremy Bentham. According to Bentham, happiness can be maximized, only if the instances of pain are lighter and fewer. The judgment delivered by the Hon’ble Court can be said as a replica of the idea embodied in the ‘Principle of Utility’. Slum and pavement dwellers constitute almost half of the total population of the Bombay. The Court ordered that:

  • No one has the right to encroach on trails, sidewalks, or any other place reserved for public purposes.
  • The provision of section 314 of the Bombay Municipality Act is not unreasonable in the circumstances of this case.
  • Sites must be provided to censored residents in 1976.
  • Slums existing for 20 years or more should not be removed unless the land is required for public purposes and in the present case, alternate sites must be provided to the required people.
  • High priority should be given to the resettlements

Comments

The right to Life includes the right to Livelihood. This case is widely quoted as exemplifying the utilization of civil and political rights to advance social rights. Still, it’s also viewed as problematic, thanks to its failure to provide for the right to resettlement. It is also inconsistent with developments in other jurisdictions, where courts have found more substantial rights to resettlement. The pavement dwellers were evicted without resettlement. Since 1985, the principles, in this case, are affirmed in many subsequent decisions, frequently resulting in large-scale evictions without resettlement. The scope of the term “life” was extended and has also paved the way for the reform of substantive law.

Latest Posts


About

The RMLNLU Law Review Blog is an online publication of Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow. The Blog purports to facilitate publication of diverse perspectives on a range of issues concerning topics of contemporary legal significance and interest in the form of short, well-informed opinions. The Blog was launched in July 2015 and is edited and managed entirely by a small team of student editors at the University.

Submit A Post

We invite submissions on a rolling basis throughout the calendar year from members of the bar, legal professionals, law students, or others who are interested in publishing with us and wish to further legal discourse.

If you are interested in submitting a piece, kindly mail us at blog.rmlnlulawreview@gmail.com with the subject line: ‘Submission’.

Authors are expected to adhere to the following submission guidelines:

  • Articles should contain content that is both original and unpublished.
  • Articles should be submitted in Microsoft Word format.
  • We encourage the use of hyperlinks as opposed to footnotes. However, if your article contains sources that cannot be linked, please use Oxford Standard for the Citation of Legal Authorities (OSCOLA) (4th edition) style in the footnotes.
  • Except under extreme circumstances, we do not publish articles beyond 1500-1600 words. Lengthier articles can be published in the form of Blog series with the permission of the editors.
  • We evaluate articles on three chief criteria: relevancy of the article, content of the article and language employed in the article. We tend to publish perspectives that are not adequately covered on other fora.
  • Formatting: Please use British English. To add emphasis, please italicise the text.

For more information visit here https://rmlnlulawreview.com/

Ideal Institute of Management and Technology & School of Law is organising Rakesh Aggarwal Memorial National Debate Competition 2020 on “Parity in Legal Age: A Paradigm Shift” on 22nd September 2020.

ABOUT COMPETITION

The Rakesh Aggarwal Memorial National Debate Competition is organized annually by IIMT & School of Law on contemporary issues of legal significance. Through the competition, participants will gain first-hand invaluable exper

ABOUT INSTITUTION

Ideal Institute of Management and Technology was established in the year 1999 under the auspices of New Millennium Education Society. The institute is affiliated to Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Delhi, and its professional courses in law and busoness administration are recognised by bar council of india and government of nct delhi.Being a NAAC accredited institution,it melds state of the art infrastructure with quality in education as its paramount principle.

Theme of Competition

Parity in Legal Age: A Paradigm Shift

Awards

Winning Team Rs 3000

Runners up team 2000

Best Speaker Rs 3000

Runner Up Speaker Rs 2000

Second Runner Up Speaker Rs 1000

E-Certificate for participation will be given to all the participants

Date & Time

22nd September, 10:00 AM onwards.

Platform

CISCO WebEx.

Important Dates

Last Date of Registration: 17th September 2020

Date of Competition: 22nd September 2020

Registration Fee

1000 INR (per team)

Registration Procedure

Registration can be done through Paytm or via Official Online Portal

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScRnAjVmOLbMGgfjGpeyq9NGWcmsr3yzGvjOwQbAag3zbogjA/viewform?usp=sf_link

Payment

Official Portal: Click here to Pay

Paytm Portal: Click here to Pay

Rules of Debate

·  A team of two candidates from each University/Institute shall be eligible to participate (one for the motion and one against the motion.)

· Each speaker will get five minutes (4+1) in total for debate and there will be one interjection. Exceeding the time limit shall be a disadvantage for the team and the candidate.

·  The teams are free to use either medium Hindi or English exclusivel

·  Each team must register with the Organizing Committee of National Debate Competition by filling the Registration Form along with the required payment through Paytm/NEFT (details are given in Registration form) of Rs.1000/- by17th September 2020.

·  The confirmation will be given to the team within two days of receiving Registration Form along with the Registration fees.

·  The judgment of the jury shall be final and binding.

Contact

Hemlata Sharma: +91-98118 44877

Kanika Arora: +91-98113 80350

The application of science to those criminal and civil legislations that are enforced by the police agencies in a criminal justice procedure is known as SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE.

The expression ‘evidence’ has been defined in Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act. The word ‘evidence’ signifies that state of being evident. All instruments by which relevant facts are brought before the court are included in the term ‘evidence’.

Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 defines evidence as

“Evidence” means and includes

(1) All statements which the Court permits or requires to be made before it by witnesses, in relation to matters of fact under inquiry; such statements are called oral

evidence;

(2) All documents including electronic records produced for the inspection of the Court, such statements are called documentary evidence.

SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE,In general, is established on the understanding that has been formulated by wielding the scientific method. This means that the basis for the evidence has been deduced and tested and is normally accepted within the scientific community. The concept on which the scientific evidence is based has been published in scientific journals and has been subjected to a peer review within the scientific community. Several categories of forensic evidence are often regarded as scientific evidence, like DNA matching, fingerprint identification, and hair/fiber evidence. The strategies used to formulate these types of evidence are generally beyond the spectrum of understanding that judges and juries possess and are therefore generally enlisted as scientific evidence.

The Application of science in law is typically recognized as Forensic Science. The region of its application is considerably broad and detailed. Forensic science is that portion without which the riddle of a criminal investigation is left sketchy. Devoid of forensic science, criminals can never be doomed unless an eyewitness exists. While investigators and law enforcement agents are implicated in the compilation of indications, be it manual or digital, it is forensic science that deals with the estimation of those evidence in order to ascertain facts legitimate in the court of law. This, in a world without the discovery of forensic science, murderers, thieves, drug traffickers, and rapists would be prowling scot-free. The obligations and accountabilities of a forensic scientist in a criminal investigation is significant as it involves the thorough analysis of evidence while ensuring that it is not meddled with. A distinct pool of forensic scientists and forensic means go into the examination of a criminal act.

If scientific strategies are taken into deliberation these are not at all illegal or unlawful. Once recovery is made with the help of scientific tools and techniques, the prosecution can easily demonstrate the close association between the finding of a material object in the commission of an offense. Thus, the use of Narco-analysis polygraph and brain-mapping would extensively encourage examination councils that too in a scientific manner without compelling authorities to take refuge in inhumane treatment.

Narco Analysis

The term Narco analysis is derived from the Greek word “Nark” meaning anesthesia. In the test, the subject is injected with a drug, and his imagination is neutralized while he is semi-conscious. It is difficult for him to lie and these answers are restricted to facts he is already aware of. The Narco analysis test in India is done by a team comprising an anesthesiologist, a psychiatrist, a clinical/ forensic psychologist, an audio-videographer, and aiding nursing staff. The forensic psychologist formulated the report about the disclosures, which will be accompanied by a compact disc of audio-video recordings. In order to verify the strength of the revelations made it is further verified by subjecting the person to polygraph and brain mapping tests.

In India, narco-analysis was first used in 2002 in the Godhra carnage case. It was again in the news in the Telgi stamp paper scam when Abdul Karim Telgi was taken to the test in December 2003. Though in the case of Telgi, an immense amount of information was yielded, doubts were raised about its value as evidence. The Bombay High Court, in a significant verdict in the case of Ramchandra Reddy and Others v State of Maharashtra, upheld the legality of the use of P300 or Brain Mapping and narco analysis test. The court also said that evidence procured under the effect of the narco analysis test is also admissible. However, defense lawyers and human rights activists viewed that the narco analysis test was a very primitive form of investigation and third-degree treatment, and there were legal lapses interrogation with the aid of drugs. Narco analysis is in the limelight in the context of the infamous Nithari village (Noida) serial killings. The two main accused in the Nithari serial killings Mohinder Singh Pandher and Surendra Kohli have undergone narco-analysis tests in Gandhinagar in Gujarat.

There is no law which deals with the admissibility of scientific evidence including the Narco analysis test Still the law is not clear about the admissibility of the Narco analysis. But in some cases, courts allow the above sad test when there are no shreds of evidence except the circumstantial evidence. Thus in rare cases courts allow the test to fill the vacuum in the evidence.

Narcoanalysis test on Abdul Rehman for the identification of terrorist activities – A Gulbarga resident Shami Ahamad Saha alias Abdul Rehman (31) was arrested on 31-3-2006 and was subjected to polygraph, narcoanalysis, and brain mapping tests at Forensic Science Laboratory at Bangalore. He is alleged to be a member of Laskhar-e-Toiyaba.

Polygraphy

A process in which selected physiological activities are recorded is known as polygraphy. According to the definition of Webster’s legal dictionary, “a polygraph is a device for measuring certain involuntary bodily responses, such as blood pressure and perspiration, from which an opinion is drawn as to whether or not the person being tested is telling the truth. Also called, to some extent positively, a Lie Detector. The problem with it is that it may yield accurate opinions in many cases, it may make nervous or confused truth-tellers, and there is no way to know exactly which results are accurate and which are not.

Nowadays, the control question (CQ) technique is the most commonly used for the Polygraph test. Control question tests are the second group of detection of deception tests. Control question tests are the most commonly used polygraph test in law enforcement today. The High Court of Gujrat in the case of Abbasbaig Habibbaig Mirza v. State of Gujarat [(2005) 3 GLR 2418] held that “The legality, validity or evidentiary value of the Lie Detector test is again a question which has to be determined at the trial”.

Polygraph test conducted on Mumbai serial killer – One Ravindra Kantrolle, a suspect of serial killing of seven people in South Mumbai in Marine Drive and Azad Maidan Police Station was subjected to scientific tests like polygraph, narcoanalysis and higher version of brain mapping tests [i.e., Brain Electrical Oscillation Signature (BEOS)]. During these tests, he confessed his involvement in the crimes.

Brain Mapping

Brain Mapping is one more valuable scientific tool for the investigation of crimes.

Brain Mapping is also known as Late Positive Complex or P3 or P300. It is a component of averaged brain potentials. In this test, no questions are asked by the accused. He is made to sit in an evoked potential recording machine and is shown objects relating to the crime scene or is made to hear sounds pertaining to the crime site. The sensors from his head pick the event-related potentials in the form of Brain Mapping only if the person has been at the site of crime. The accuracy of Brain Mapping is almost 100%. When the brain recognizes a person or a sound, it produces a precise electric wave which is called P30028. In this test, sensors are attached to the head of the subject and the subject is seated before a computerized monitor. The sensors catch the electrical activity in the brain and record the P300 wave, which is produced only if the subject has some correlation with the pictures shown to him and the sounds which he is made to hear.

Brain fingerprinting is a boon for investigating agencies. In a planned commission of a crime, the physical pieces of evidence may vanish or made to vanish and sometimes it happens that no clue of the criminal acts is found. The investigating agencies have to grope in dark in order to catch a suspect. In such a case, the brain fingerprinting has prevented it from being a boon in that regard. In the commission of a crime, the brain of the preparer is always with him while planning, exciting, and committing the crime. By this technique, it is measured as to whether there is crime-related information stored in the brain of the suspect or not.

Case Laws

The scientific test about age as a result of the epiphysis of the bones is held to be most trustworthy. In Harpal Singh v. the State of H.P. (AIR 1981 SC 361), the age of a girl was in question.

Radiologist after examination of the girl found that she was about 15 years of age and

this was corroborated by an entry in the admission register in the government school

wherein the girl was a student, which was proved by the Headmaster, and by a certified copy of the relevant entry in the birth register.

In the State of Tamil Nadu v. Rajendran,[ (1999) 8 SLC 679] the wife was found dead in a hut which had caught fire. But the medical evidence showed that the wife died due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation and not on account of burn injuries. Later, in trial court came to the conclusion that it was the husband who strangled his wife and thereafter set the hut on fire.

It is important to note that usually with death blood disappears from the heart but the heart in asphyxia, specifically the right chambers are always found full of dark venous blood.

The following cases show the important role play of scientific evidence in the field of a criminal investigation. Custodial crime is a violation of fundamental rights subjecting an accused to undergo a scientific .test is a much better option than to let him face third-degree torture. Scientific techniques help in a speedy and fair trial. The concept of the fair trial and fair investigation is not only to be considered from the point of view of liberty or right of the accused only, the victim and the society also suffers where investigation becomes a casualty

Thus, Scientific evidence in criminal proceedings has played a key role in deciphering cases and has also resulted in a quick and steady justice system.

Latest Posts