Month: July 2022

About the Advocate

Adv. Priyanka Das is a Senior Panel Advocate for Union of India before Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and Hon’ble Delhi High Court.

About the Responsibilities  

Call for Application for Internship at the Chambers of Adv. Priyanka Das

As an intern you are required to:-

• Legal Research, Drafting, Assistance in Court Work

Location

8/13, Hospital Road, Jangpura Extenstion, Jangpura, New Delhi.

Time Period

1 Month (can be extended based on performance) -10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

Eligibility

• Candidates in 4th / 5th Year of B.A. LLB. Or candidates in last year of LLB. Course

Deadline for Applying

15th July 2022

How to Apply?

Interested candidates may apply from here: – lawchamberinternship@gmail.com

Disclaimer: All information posted by us on Lexpeeps is true to our knowledge. But still, it is suggested that you check and confirm things on your level.

For regular updates, we can catchup at-

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/G4bxdgRGHY8GRzOPSHrVwL

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

https://www.linkedin.com/company/lexpeeps-in-lexpeeps-pvt-ltd

–Report by Avinash Pandey

Impersonation refers to a state in which a person or a company is trying to pretend to be someone else to either take advantage of their goodwill to gain unnecessary profit or to conduct such acts which might harm the company’s acknowledgment in the market. Infringement of intellectual property refers to a process when a person is using an intellectual property registered under someone else’s ownership without their due permission for their advantage. Intellectual property infringement can be related to any type of intellectual property including trademark infringement, copyright infringement or patent infringement, etc.

The plaintiff in Amazon Seller Services PVT Ltd. Vs Amazon Buys and ORS is “Amazon” which is a very popular online marketplace when it comes to India where lakhs of people buy products and vendors indulge in business. The petitioner in this case owns the traditional intellectual property rights to its name and domain name i.e., Amazon and its logo of the brand. By following the due process of law established in India to register the intellectual property, the plaintiff has completed all the aspects in order to publicize its brand within the territorial boundaries of India.

The plaintiff contended in this case that the defendant i.e., Amazon buys was using the intellectual property of “Amazon” by having a similar domain name and using the same logo owned by “Amazon”. They further stated that this company was conducting fraud by using the name of the plaintiff as it was charging fees from the buyers and the sellers on the website which has never been demanded by “Amazon” under the established policies and processes.

The plaintiff further contended that the defendant had used the same user face on its website that “Amazon” had used and the links were also edited in a way that the customers will be directed to the defendant’s website even though they will be clicking verified website links. The main contention put forward was whether “Amazon buys” was infringing the intellectual property rights of “Amazon” and whether using identical logos and an identical user interface can be considered an infringement of intellectual property.

The court while observing the case had looked over all the documents presented by the plaintiff that was against the defendant including screenshots and emails from the customers saying that the price for the product displayed online was way higher compared to the competitors. The court felt that the customers were being robbed by the defendant as the customers were asked to pay more than usual. Further, the High Court observed that “Amazon”, the plaintiff in this case had established a prima facie case.

The court delivered an interim judgment in favor of the plaintiff’s services, it further stated that the defendants are ordered to immediately stop using the same logo and same website interface as that of the plaintiff. It was ordered to deactivate and remove all the social media accounts of the defendant which were impersonating the plaintiff, block the IP addresses of the people that were using the website and freeze all the bank accounts that were connected to the website. Moreover, the defendants were directed to release an affidavit for all the transactions that had been conducted. Lastly, the court ordered the Ministry of Electronic Information and Technology to block all the URLs and links that were presented by the plaintiff in the case which would direct the customers to some other website.

–Report by Rhea Mistry

In Ircon International Ltd. v. Reacon Engineers (India) Ltd., on 10th June 2019, the petitioner filed the petition under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, contesting an arbitral award given by a Single Arbitrator-Led Arbitral Tribunal. Concerning the agreement made on 16.06.2010, there was a disagreement between the parties which made them opt for the arbitration settlement.

Contentions by the Respondent

The respondent contended that the petition filed by the petitioner was filed after the period for filing had expired. Under the Limitation Act, the period under which a petition shall be filed is three months and the petitioner filed the petition on 13th September 2019 when the last date to file was 12th September 2019. The petitioner has not submitted any legal paperwork asking for a delayed pardon. The respondents also asserted that initially when the petition was filed, there was no attachment made to it, i.e., contested award, statement of truth, and the vakalatnama was not attached. The petition was unsigned and when it was re-filed by the petitioner, it was after the court’s window for tolerating delays.

Referring to the case Union of India v. Bharat Biotech International Ltd. and INX News Pvt. Ltd. v Pier One Construction Pvt. Ltd. to support his contentions, he stated that the petition that was filed on 24th October 2019 cannot be regarded as the same as filed on 13th September 2019.

Contentions by the Petitioner

The petitioner claimed that the contested award was received by him on 12th June 2019 and was delivered on 10th June 2019. They filed the petition one day after the expiration of filing the petition i.e., on 13th September 2019, and as per section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the petition can be filed within three months from the date of receipt of the arbitral award.

The petition that was filed on 13th September 2019 was 73 pages and the registry returned the petition on 16th September 2019 stating that it was defective and did not contain any attestation on affidavits, awards, documents, or statement of truth, there were also no bookmarks, and the pages were without page numbers. The petition was refiled on 24th October 2019, with a total of 1325 pages. The registry again said the petition is still defective and returned it on 30th October 2019 to be re-filed. It was refiled on 6th November 2019 and again returned on 13th November 2019 with defects, it was refiled on 14th November 2019 and returned yet again as defective on 15th November 2019 and refiled on 18th November 2019 to cure some defects, and finally was refiled on 19th November 2019.

The counsel of the petitioner claimed that even though there was a delay of one day, he applied to explain that he had met with an accident and could not attend to file the petition for three weeks.

Decision

There was a delay of thirty-seven days in filing the petition, so the petitioner has submitted absolutions for the delay of thirty-seven days in re-filing the petition but did not submit absolution for the delay in filing the initial petition.

The initial petition filed on 13th September 2019 was only seventy-three pages and did not contain any attachments which were mandatory such as the contested award and the statement of truth. On 24th October 2019 the petition was filed which contained 1325 pages with all the proper attachments, attested, signed, and formatted as prescribed.

The court stated in favor of the respondent’s contention that the petition which was filed on 24th October 2019 cannot be considered the same petition filed on 13th September 2019 as they are completely different. The court noted that the petition as filed on 13th September did not contain the impugned award or vakalatnama. Considering the same, the case of Union of India v. Bharat Biotech International Ltd is substantially applicable to the facts of this case and so the filings made on 13th September 2019 cannot be considered a valid submission.

The filing made on 24th October 2019 is considered the first date of filing in the present petition. This filing is made after three months period of filing and as per the Limitation Act, it is beyond the period the court can condone.
The petition stands dismissed due to the limitation and all the pending applications are also dismissed with this petition.

–Report by Ishika Sehgal

The Kerala High Court stated on Tuesday that based on Supreme Court precedents, a partition deed signed by a Muslim mother acting as the guardian of her minor children is invalid.

According to the Division Bench of Justices P. B. Suresh Kumar and C. S. Sudha, even though there is nothing in personal law that forbids it, the Muslim mother cannot be the guardian of her minor child’s person or property, with the exception of movable property. It has been established by the various precedents.

CONTENTIONS OF APPELLANT

Invoking the Hadiths, the appellants made the case that a woman has been acknowledged as the guardian of both her husband’s home and his wards. These Hadiths were never taken into account in any of the rulings that found that a mother cannot serve as a minor’s guardian. Furthermore, there is nothing in the Quran that prevents a mother from serving as a guardian

CONTENTIONS OF RESPONDENTS

The renowned attorney for the respondents, however, stated that neither the Quran nor the Hadith mentions a mother becoming a guardian. She holds that one cannot infer something from the Quran or Hadith that is not there. The Quran and the Hadith both permit widows to remarry after the “iddah” time if they so choose and demand that the man bequeaths for the widow a year’s maintenance and residence without turning them out, therefore the mother was never supposed to be a guardian. Further, she made reference to Sita Ram v. Amir Begam (1886) ILR 8 All 324 case, wherein it has been decided that even though the appellant’s children were minors, she was ineligible to act as their guardian in these situations and hence could not exercise any power of disposition over their property.

JUDGEMENT

The Kerala High court stated that “There is nothing in the Qur’an or the Hadith prohibiting or barring women from being considered as guardians of their minor offsprings…Be that as it may, this court is bound by the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.”

The court further observed that it is undoubtedly true that the arguments put out by the knowledgeable appellants’ attorney, in this case, were never brought before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in any of the rulings. But According to the ruling in Ballabhadas Mathurdas Lakhani, the High Court cannot disregard a ruling by the Supreme Court if it believes that “the relevant clauses were not brought to the Court’s attention.” In the Shayara Bano case, it was decided that the Muslim personal law system, or Shariat, cannot be forced to comply with the laws outlined in Part III of the Indian Constitution, in accordance with Article 13 of the Constitution. Similar to this, the Apex Court has ruled in a number of decisions that Muslim mothers are not permitted to act as guardians of their underage children or property. The Court ruled that, in conformity with Article 14 of the Constitution, it is bound by past rulings.

INTRODUCTION

In India, Public Interest Litigation materialized as a blossoming method in the sphere of environmental protection. In environmental litigation, the parties that are influenced may be anonymous or a disseminated herd of individuals and the infringement of a legal right of a person would be grueling to establish. Before the 1980s, the locus standi in writ jurisdictions only involved petitions from an individual who has endured a breach of his/her guarded legal right or interest or is likely to abide such breach, thus no other person was authorized to represent an indignant participant such a person would not acquire the locus standi to initiate a petition. But with the emergence of Public Interest Litigation through the reports of the Committee on Legal help supervised by Justice P.N. Bhagwati and Justice Krishna Iyer escort about a new development in an environment aligned jurisprudence.

The alleviated procedural rules under PIL can give rise to cases where the plaintiff is seeking implementation of the constitutional or legitimate rights of those persons or society who because of poverty, dysfunction, or ethically, culturally, or economically disadvantageous position find it tough to plea the appellate courts for rectifying. Thus PIL is directed as the judicious arm of legal movement and is serene “ingress to justice” for the re-establishment of the breached human rights of the criticized groups in society. Through this imaginative approach, appellate courts in India have considered environmental petitions under PIL besides the use of contaminated water, vehicular excretion pollution, forbidden cutting of trees in forests, projects including environmental pollution, and transformation of public parks into private hospitals, etc.

IMPORTANCE OF PIL FOR ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION

The field of environmental litigation has changed tremendously since the introduction of the concept of Public Interest Litigation. It has broadened the scope for the public to exercise their constitutional and statutory rights through public interest litigation. Before the arrival of public interest litigation, litigations were to be filed against environmental pollution and degradation were governed by the Indian Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure under criminal law, civil law, and the law of torts. The stipulation for public nuisance under these laws enfolded noise, air, and water pollution and a suit against such environmental pollution could only be initiated by a person or a party that is directly strained by it. There was no stipulation for a person other than the influenced party to prefer a suit to the courts as the courts only acknowledge the violation and the re-establishment of rights of the infected party and did not take a mass of anonymous people that are affected by environmental pollution into reflection. Through PIL, a person or society, not infected by environmental pollution may bring a suit against the same. The dawn with the Dehradun lime stone objecting case in 1983, shadowed by the Ganga Water Pollution case, Vehicular Pollution case, Vellore leather industry pollution case, Delhi, Oleum Gas Leak case, Narmada Dam case, Dahanu Thermal Power Plant case, Bichhri village industrial pollution case, T.N.Godavarman case, and Tehri Dam case, all of them came to Court’s attention through PIL. These cases were established not by the affected parties but by numerous Non-governmental Organizations and environmental campaigners, on behalf of the people affected.

JUDICIARY AND ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION

Citizens have started using Public Interest Litigation as a tool to restore their fundamental rights under Article 32 and Article 226 of the Constitution of India which are being affected by environmental pollution and degradation. Public interest litigation against environmental pollution can be filed in the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India and Article 226 in the High Court. Dehradun v State of Uttar Pradesh raised issues relating to ecological imbalance and the right to a pollution-free environment. The Supreme Court included the right to a healthy environment within the purview of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and can be claimed by the citizens against the state. Under Article 32, a petition was filed seeking closure of the limestone quarry as the explosion of the mines caused ecological imbalance and health hazards to the people and the environment. The Supreme Court ordained the shutting down of the mine but did not proceed with an ultimate order and cited it as a matter that the Government must settle on.

In Tehri Bandh Anti-Sangharsh Samiti and others. v. UP and other states¹, Tehri Dam Pratishtha Sangharsh Samiti filed a petition to stop the construction of a dam as the construction endangered the lives of the people as well as the ecology and environment of the whole of North India as construction was being done in an earthquake-prone area. The Supreme Court, after examining the matter, said that the government was conscious of the danger and damage caused and had taken steps to ensure the safety of people and the environment. Thus the Supreme Court, satisfied with the efforts of the government, dismissed the petition.

In M. C. Mehta v. Union of India², an oleum gas leak caused injury to a large number of persons. After considering the welfare of the people, negligence of the management, the impact on the unemployment rate on the plant shutdown, and the dangers of the technology, the court allowed the Shriram Chemicals plant to continue conditionally. The procedure of “sustainable development” was alleged in this case. This theory expresses that the polluter will have utter liability to alter the degeneration or vandalism done to the ecology as well as the individual or the mob of individuals swayed by the industry which caused such damage. Further, in the case, Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India³, the court held that the precautionary standards and the polluter payment ethic are vital to the process of “sustainable development”.

THE SUBTLETY OF PUBLIC INTEREST ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION

The establishment and evolution of PIL in the Indian Judiciary have not only introduced and given the rise in environmental cases attacking the public at a wide range but have also revealed many stumbling blocks of the concept. Giving the right to “public-spirited” citizens to move to court on behalf of the affected society or majority of individuals has shown a hike in cases related to private suffering and has become more customized and grabbed attention. The method of PIL was to furnish cheap and speedy redressal of subjects uplifting the environment and the public at large, but this has not happened.

T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad vs Union Of India & Ors⁴ is a classic example of how the court has occupied this problem for more than a decade and a final solution has a long way to go. The petition was filed in 1996, endeavoring the intervention for the conservation and preservation of the Nilgiri forest land from desertification and logging, proved to be a case of enormous shares which led to disputes in administrative functions, traditional ways of forest management, and insufficiency of acknowledging the rights of the forest habitat. It is also seen that the Court has discarded or dismissed most of the PILs stimulating groundwork projects and considered it as the impugn of PIL, in the Narmada Bachao Andolan v Union of India.⁵ In some cases, the Court has also held that, if a project is stalled on account of a PIL that is subsequently dismissed, the petitioner shall be made liable to pay for the damages caused by the delay in the project needed.

CONCLUSION

India being a developing country has witnessed environmental degradation and an increase in pollution, for which PIL on Environment Protection has proved to be an effective mechanism for restoration and redressal of the environment and the citizens of the country. With the amended environmental law and new PIL procedures, any citizen or organization, whether directly or indirectly affected, can file a petition against ecological and environmental imbalances that not only harm citizens but also contravene their fundamental rights. It has demonstrated to be a new dawn for the criticized citizens who are inadequate to voice their beliefs on the act of brutality committed on them as well as the environment by several industries and also the Government. Through judicial activism as an instrument of public interest litigation, courts investigate the functioning of the government and provide remedies and re-enforcement of violated fundamental rights of citizens. Thus, the introduction of PILs for environmental issues by the Indian judiciary has been a boon to the citizens of the country.

---

CITATIONS

¹ 1990 SCR, Supl. (2) 606 1992 SCC Supl. (1) 44.

² 1988 AIR 1115, 1988 SCR (2) 530.

³ (1995) 5 SCC 647.

⁴ 2002) 10 SCC 606 (627).

⁵ (2000) 10 SCC 664.

This article is written by Ashmita Dhumas, who has completed her BA LLB from Agra College and is doing a diploma in Corporate Law from Enhelion.

About Adv. Anchit Jain

Adv. Anchit Jain works in litigation and dispute resolution. He is employed in Shivpuri, his hometown (MP). He frequently appears before the Madhya Pradesh High Court and its benches, the District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum in Shivpuri, the Madhya Pradesh State Information Commission in Bhopal, and the Central Information Commission in New Delhi.

About the Responsibilities  

As an intern you are required to:-

• The nature of work would be researching, drafting, writing and filing. Command and previous experience w.r.t. these skills must be reflected in the cover and CV.

Location

The office address is ’77, New Block, Shivpuri, Madhya Pradesh.’

Time Period

30 days, at least.

Eligibility

• 3rd year or above students may apply by mailing their Cover letter, accompanied by a CV (not exceeding 2 pages). The subject line should be “Application for Internship, (Name), (Duration and Dates)”.

Perks

• A certificate would be provided on the successful completion of the internship. Hard & smart work would be appreciated with a stipend.

Deadline for Applying

12th July 2022

How to Apply?

Interested candidates may apply from here: – 3rd year or above students may apply by mailing their Cover letter, accompanied by a CV (not exceeding 2 pages). The subject line should be “Application for Internship, (Name), (Duration and Dates)”.

Email: anchitjain9@gmail.com

Disclaimer: All information posted by us on Lexpeeps is true to our knowledge. But still, it is suggested that you check and confirm things on your level.

For regular updates, we can catchup at-

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/G4bxdgRGHY8GRzOPSHrVwL

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

https://www.linkedin.com/company/lexpeeps-in-lexpeeps-pvt-ltd

About Dr. Shashwat Bajpai

Dr. Shashwat Bajpai practises law before the Supreme Court, High Courts, and Statutory Tribunals with a focus on international taxation and business litigation. transferring prices Arbitration on both a national and global scale. Resolution of Civil Disputes (Ad hoc & Institutional). He founded and is the owner of DRSB LAW Chambers.

About the Responsibilities  

Dr Shashwat Bajpai is expanding his team and looking to hire 2 Associates at his Law Chambers at New Delhi

Eligibility

• Candidates must be experienced in arbitration and be qualified lawyers (POE+1 or POE+2).
• The candidate should be well-versed in local and international arbitration law, commercial law, and construction law, as well as possess strong research and writing skills.

Deadline for Applying

Hiring to begin from 13th July 2022

How to Apply?

Interested candidates may apply from here: – chambers@drsblawchambers.com

Disclaimer: All information posted by us on Lexpeeps is true to our knowledge. But still, it is suggested that you check and confirm things on your level.

For regular updates, we can catchup at-

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/G4bxdgRGHY8GRzOPSHrVwL

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

https://www.linkedin.com/company/lexpeeps-in-lexpeeps-pvt-ltd

About the Company

Some of the top entertainment channels in India, including SET SAB MAX, PAL PIX, Sony BBC Earth, and Yay! Sony SIX, Sony Marathi Sony TEN and Sony TENI For example, Sony Tenz, Sony Ten3, and Sony Ten4! With one of the most promising streaming platforms, it entered the OTT market. It moves one step closer to being a progressive, digital-led entertainment powerhouse with the addition of Sony LIV. With unique TV and digital media IPs, it has already established a name for itself through its independent production company, Studio Next. Its mission to Go Beyond, however, continues. It also doesn’t succeed in finding people who can transport it there.

About the Responsibilities  

A Senior Associate – Legal is being hired by the company, primarily for production agreements. The applicant will be in charge of providing legal support for the Network Channel’s Production and the production vertical “Studio Next,” reporting to ga Assistant Legal Counsel.

Eligibility

• LLB (undergraduate law degree) from an Indian university that has gained recognition.
• 7-8 years POE. Experience as an in-house attorney or in legal firms should be relevant.
• The incumbent must have substantial experience in the media and entertainment industry, specifically in transactions connected to content generation, licencing, and purchase. Private legal practise experience in courts is not admissible. content, which will be given the most weight.
• Should be well-versed in the Copyright Act of 1957 Diplomas in legal professions or areas, such as media and entertainment, are desirable experience.
• Although they are not required, intellectual property rights, etc., shall be given weight.

How to Apply?

Interested candidates may apply from here: –

https://spni.skillate.com/jobs/11429?utm_source=LINKEDIN&utm_medium=SOCIAL_MEDIA&source=linkedin

Disclaimer: All information posted by us on Lexpeeps is true to our knowledge. But still, it is suggested that you check and confirm things on your level.

For regular updates, we can catchup at-

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/G4bxdgRGHY8GRzOPSHrVwL

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

https://www.linkedin.com/company/lexpeeps-in-lexpeeps-pvt-ltd

NLU JODHPUR is making a call for papers for its CALJ(2022)VOLUME 7 ISSUE I.

ABOUT

The Comparative Constitutional Law and Administrative Law Journal (ISSN: 2582-9807) [“CALJ“] is the flagship journal of the Centre for Constitutional Law and Administrative Law, published under the guidance of Prof. (Dr.) I.P Massey, Dean, Faculty of Law, National Law University Jodhpur.  It is an open-access online journal published bi-annually,  aiming to foster debate on contemporary issues in comparative constitutional law and administrative law, with a comparative perspective. The first issue of CALJ was published in 2013. The issues of CALJ are indexed on SCCOnline and Manupatra.

CALJ aims to promote scholarly excellence in the area of comparative constitutional and administrative law with a diligent editorial board, an eminent advisory board and an institution known for its academic excellence. Each issue contains articles, notes, case comments and book reviews based on contemporary issues of comparative constitutional and administrative law.

THEME

COMPARATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL LEGAL STATUTES

JOURNAL SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

General Guidelines:

• The Comparative Constitutional Law and Administrative Law Journal [“Journal”] attempts to initiate and foster academic dialogue concerning the subject of Administrative Law and Constitutional Law keeping in mind a global perspective. Please note that all submissions must be topical to the scope and theme of the Journal.
• All submitted manuscripts shall be original. Any form of plagiarism would lead to immediate rejection of the submission.
• Submission of solicited manuscripts, upon invitation from the Journal’s editors, guarantees publication of the same. However, if such solicited manuscript does not meet the Journal’s standards of quality scholarship, final discretion to publish the solicited manuscript vests with the Editorial Board [“Board”].
• The author(s) must inform the Board if the manuscript has also been submitted to another journal, website, or forum. The Board must be notified immediately if an offer for publication from another journal, website, or forum is accepted by the author(s).
• After the first publication of a manuscript with the Journal, permission for any subsequent publication in another forum must be obtained from the Board.
• All correspondence must be via e-mail and should be addressed to the Editorial Board at editorcalq[at]gmail[dot]com.

Specific Guidelines:

• Author(s)

1. Each manuscript may have up to two authors, however, co-authorship is not permitted for Book Reviews and Case Comments
2. In case of joint authorship, the author from whom a submission is received by the Board shall intimate the Board of the name, credentials, and contact details of the intended co-author.

• Manuscripts

The Journal accepts submissions in the following categories:

1. Articles: Articles must deal with issues of interest and relevance and must demonstrate a high level of analysis. Articles of a purely descriptive nature are not preferred.
2. Notes: Notes should cover a recent development or should be issue-specific. A Note functions as a more condensed and succinct Article.
3. Case Comments: Case comments entail a critical analysis of recent case laws and policy developments.
4. Book Reviews: Book Reviews entail providing critical analysis and review of any book that deals with the subject matter of the Journal.
5. All manuscripts must necessarily be accompanied by an abstract of not more than 350 words.

• Word Count

1. Articles- Not exceeding 10,000 (Ten Thousand) words.
2. Notes- Not exceeding 4000 (Four Thousand) words.
3. Case Comment- Not exceeding 3000 (Three Thousand) words.
4. Book Reviews- Not Exceeding 2000 (Two Thousand) words.

Please note that the word limit would be considered excluding the footnotes, except when speaking footnotes are used. The journal may accept shorter or longer submissions depending on the quality of the submission.

• Formatting Specifications

1. The manuscript must be word-processed in Garamond.
2. The main body text should be in font size 12 and footnotes in size 10.
3. There should be a line spacing of 1.5 between paragraphs and headings in the main body and line space of 1.0 in footnotes.
4. Verbatim quotes must be put in double quotes and italicized with a 0.5” indent.
5. The entire document, including footnotes, must be justified.

• Language

The Journal shall follow British English.

• Citations and References​

1. All relevant sources shall be duly acknowledged as footnotes.
2. Speaking footnotes are allowed.
3. The text and citation styles shall conform to the rules prescribed in The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation (20th edition).

• Submission Procedure

1. The Author/s are required to email the manuscript to editorcalq[at]gmail[dot]com.
2. The manuscript may be mailed in Microsoft Word (‘.doc’ or ‘.docx’) format.
3. The manuscript shall not contain any details of the author, and anonymity must be maintained.
4. The subject of the mail must clearly mention, ‘Submission for CALJ_Volume 7.1 [Article/Note/Case Comment/Book Review]’.
5. The mail must be addressed to the Managing Editor, providing the name of the author/s with the name of the institution affiliated to and the contact details in the body of the mail.
6. A mail confirming the receipt of the manuscript and subsequently its acceptance for publication would be duly conveyed to the author/s through the email id used by the author/s for correspondence.
7. The last date for submission is 11:59 p.m. (IST) on July 31, 2022.

• Copyright Notice

Authors, upon submission, communicate their acceptance of the following conditions:

1. The work, upon publication, becomes the property of the Journal.
2. Permissions for subsequent publication/reprint and/or derivative works must be obtained from the Editors of the Journal.

EDITORIAL POLICY

https://www.calq.in/_files/ugd/6cd5fc_08ad73f9fd454d0e883c0f2d36210889.pdf?index=true

CONTACT DETAILS

editorcalq@gmail.com

Disclaimer: All information posted by us on Lexpeeps is true to our knowledge. But still, it is suggested that you check and confirm things on your level.

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/G4bxdgRGHY8GRzOPSHrVwL

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

https://www.linkedin.com/company/lexpeeps-in-lexpeeps-pvt-ltd

ICFAI LAW SCHOOL is organizing a Three Day International Conference on Legal Contours of Victimology.

ABOUT

This conference is an attempt to provide a platform for meaningful interaction in the field of victimology, more so with regard to victim rights and victim justice in the administration of the criminal justice system. This conference aims to bring together discussions on various aspects of the subject of victimology. Further, the event is aiming to amalgamate theory and practice in the field of victimology. The objective of these three days international conferences is to assemble different actors and academicians, including scholars conducting research in the said field to give rise to sound deliberations on the subject in the study of victimology in the criminal justice system. We aspire to make it a holistic event with the active participation of all the stakeholders.

THEME

1. Jurisprudential Facets and Legal Framework
2. Realities and Visions of Victimology
3. Gender-Based Victimization
4. Digital Victimization

SUB-THEMES

● Legal responses to Victimization
● Victimization and Victims’ rights
● Victims and Restorative Justice
● Victim participation in Criminal Justice System
● Global Dimensions of Victimology
● Violence and Victims
● Victimization of Vulnerable groups and Indigenous people
● Socio-psycho and legal implications of Victimology
● Positive and Radical Victimization
● Forensic Victimology
● Gender-based Victimization
● Cost and Consequences of Gender-based violence
● Sexual orientation Victimization

SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

• Submissions for paper presentations at the conference are to be mailed in the form of an abstract of 300 words and full research papers (Not more than 6000 words) with footnotes in bluebook 20th edition format.
• The Abstract has to be sent to email ID: cenexcrime@ifheindia.org.
• The research paper is to be typed in font Times New Roman with font size 12 and line spacing 1.5, headings to be typed in font size 14 Bold, and footnotes in font size 10.
• The abstract should be 300 words with a minimum of five (5) keywords and must be accompanied by a cover page consisting of the author’s/co-author’s details.
• After acceptance of the abstract, the full paper has to be submitted to the same email ID: cenexcrime@ifheindia.org
• Selected papers may be facilitated for publication with a reputed publisher.

REGISTRATION LINK

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdc1gJg78Gi8zwOJQaLGvQM0340VJ9gmzZMg2D5uXhEhl-Wng/viewform?usp=sf_link

IMPORTANT DATES

• Last date for Abstract submission: 1st July 2022
• Intimation of Abstract Acceptance: 15th July 2022
• Last date for registration: 1st August 2022
• Last date for full paper submission: 1st August 2022

CONTACT DETAILS

cenexcrime@ifheindia.org

Disclaimer: All information posted by us on Lexpeeps is true to our knowledge. But still, it is suggested that you check and confirm things on your level.

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/G4bxdgRGHY8GRzOPSHrVwL

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

https://www.linkedin.com/company/lexpeeps-in-lexpeeps-pvt-ltd