Case Number

810

Bench

Hon’ble Justice Koshal, A.D. Koshal; A.D. Singh, Jaswant, Kailasam, P.S.

Decided On

15 September, 1978

Equivalent Citation

1979 AIR 185

Relevant Acts

Section 375 and 376 of Indian Penal Code

Facts

This case is basically the Mathura Rape Case in which the three courts gave different judgements and finally justice was delivered in a landmark controversy. In this case, a young girl named Mathura used to live with her brother Gama. Their parents had died during their childhood because of some accident which shook the life of the entire family all around. Since they had no one who could earn at their family, Mathura used to work as a house maid at the house of Nunshi. One day, Mathura met Nunshi’s sister’s son Ashok. Mathura and Ashok started developing feelings for each other. Their bond of feelings was there for quite a lot of days. Mathura and Ashok had sexual intercourse with each other and after that they decided to get married to each other. The things were going quite normal for quite a long. On 26th March, 1972 Gama lodged a Police Complaint because his sister Mathura was missing for quite a lot of days. He told police that he suspected Nunshi, her husband Laxman and Ashok for the kidnapping. All the statements given by Gama were recorded by The Head Constable of Police Baburao, who was the 1st Appellant at around 10:30pm. After few moments, Mathura and Ashok came to the police station. The police constable also took the statements of Ashok and Mathura also with full details regarding the tragedy that happened. After all the investigation, the constable had asked Gama to bring any entry which contained the birth date of Mathura for some police record reasons. As soon as Gama went to complete some formalities, Baburao had asked Mathura to stay at the Police Station. She was not allowed to go before all the formalities were completed. As everyone left the police station i.e. all the officers and the rest of the staff, Baburao had closed the door and switched off the lights of the police station. He took Mathura to the washroom and then he raped her. After Baburao, there was another person (Appellant 2) who stroked at her private parts and tried to rape her but he could not do it because he was highly intoxicated due to Alcohol. Nunshi, Ashok and Gama were waiting for Mathura to come out after completing all the process which was left. As Mathura came out of the police station, she revealed all the story which happened with her inside to all three of them. After that they immediately tried to file a complaint at the police station. She was examined by Dr. Kamal Sashtrakar on 27th March. Doctor said that there were no signs of rape and injury at her private parts. The doctor did not even find any sort of semen or pubic hair. But there was some semen found on her clothes.

Issues

  1. Whether there was any sort of consent given by the girl for Sexual Intercourse?
  2. Whether the acts committed by the police officers amounts to rape?
  3. Whether both the appellants are liable under sections 375 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code?
  4. Whether the High Court made any sort of reversal order of the judgement that was given by the Sessions Court?

Ratio Decidendi

This case is based on Mathura Rape Case and it comes under Section 375 and 376 of IPC

Judgment

The Judgement in this case was totally divided into three different parts based on the opinion of various courts.

If we look into the judgement given by the Session Court, the Judges said that both the appellant were not liable of the rape offence. The judges said that Mathura had given consent for sexual intercourse and thus she was making false stories to Ashok, Gama and Nunshi. Mathura was habituated to sexual intercourse. It was also said that Mathura was a shocking liar who was filled with falsehood and fake story. If there would have been rape, the doctors would have got some evidence of it. In the end the judges said that Mathura did not made any sound because of the fact that she was afraid of Gama, Ashok and Nunshi.

If we look into the judgement of the High Court, the judges had reversed the order of the Sessions Court and said that this was not at all a case of consensual intercourse but it was a case of rape which was committed by both the appellants. A critical distinction was made by the judges between consent and passive submission. The judges also stated one fact that both the accused were strangers and it was obvious that they were not there in order to satisfy her sexual desire. It had been also observed that her statements immediately after the incident to her relatives and crowd clearly states that she was subjected to “forcible sexual intercourse”. The Court further held that the “absence of semen on the vaginal smears and pubic hair” was because of the fact that she was examined 20 hours after the incident and it is presumably for her to have taken a shower in the meantime.

Now, if we look into the judgement delivered by none other than Supreme Court, it was a very comprehensive judgement delivered by them. Their judgement was the same which was delivered by the Sessions Court. The Supreme Court had clearly held that this was a case of consensual sexual intercourse and not at all a case of rape. There was no such evidence of battle found at her private parts and she did not raise any sort of alarm because of which it is clear that Mathura had completely made a false story and tried to deceive all three of them on false grounds and nothing else. It has been also observed that Mathura’s mistake to point out the exact appellant who had raped her further worked against her because the Court stated that if she could go against her initial testimony by changing the accused from Tukaram to Ganpat, it was possible that she had lied about everything else too.

Latest Posts


The article is written by Khan Mahe, a student of Rizvi Law College. Picture credits to Rappler

What is a Narcotic Circumstance?

The term narcotic initially known as any scientifically compound with sleep-prompts properties, with semi-synthetic substitutes and also euphoric properties .In Layman language ,a narcotic substances is an addictive drug that decreases pain, produces sleep and change personality or behavior of the person who consumes it , which leads in changes of person’s mental or physical health. On the other hand it can have impact on the way persons brain projects ,and  also ability to understand your senses.

The effects of such  drugs varies from person to person depending on the persons trait and how it has being taken and the  depends upon environment a person is in when using the drug ,however  it often leads to people becoming more depressed, angry, aggressive, sleepy, unmotivated, paranoid, anxious or loquative. Its use can also have impact on social and emotional problems and negative effects on relationships with family and friends.

Effects of Consumption

It’s consumption often leads to the rise in the crime rates of the country, In this modern  time, drug abuse and addiction are among the largest and most strenuous problem facing society today, An estimated 208 million people internationally consume illegal drugs and Drug use which is  responsible for 11.8 million deaths each year, however  Consumption of which has been declared illegal by many countries however Drug prohibition law is being adopted by many countries in the world .

Drugs in India

The essentials laws of India relating to the drug consumption are the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (1985) and the Prevention of Illicit Trafficking in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (1988)

History :

The constant use of drugs in many forms were prevalent in India long before any other country of the  modern world. Earlier, society was self-adjusting and did not need precise law  for effective narcotic drugs. However it’s  consumption was fetch out openly, which was later got  legitimized by cultural groups ,not restricted by traditional demand. With  International intervention and various internal pressure by treaties indigenous controls have been displaced by a single model, developed primarily for the  West.

In the Indian context, the imposition of this model has  resulted in the replacement of culturally sanctioned use by secular use and of traditional suppliers by criminal networks.  Furthermore, adherence to the United Nations Drug Control  Conventions ensures that most nation states adopt a similar  prohibition-oriented approach when formulating their  national drug control legislation. Thus  The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Bill, 1985 was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 23 August 1985.Later on, It came into force as The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS ACT) , As on The Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) was established and become  the chief law enforcement and intelligence agency of India responsible for fighting drug trafficking and the abuse of illegal substances in India. The rules and law made by NCB would be applicable to all states and union territories.

Analysis of the Act

As per the Bare act “The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 is an Act of the Parliament of India which prohibits the person for manufacturing ,cultivation ,possession, production, sale, purchasing, transport, storage, and or consumption of any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance.

The Act  was passed  to bring India’s narcotics control law as per  with international standards and to reach  the goals of international treaties,moreover the  main agenda of the act is to have a control on manufacture, possession, sale and transport of such narcotic and psychotropic substances The act  however bans around  200 psychotropic substances resultant upon these drugs are not available over the counter for any walk in individual over a prescription. 

Under the or provision of NDPS Act,  Various specialized courts was established to deal with offenses relating to any narcotics,further the act empowers the government to set up as many Special Courts as it deems fit for the expeditious resolution of disdisputThe Special Court consists of a single judge who is appointed with the concurrence of the Chief Justice of the High Court and who must be a sitting Sessions Judge or Additional Sessions Judge at the time of his appointment.

The  level of punishment of Person concerned with consumption and smuggling  of drugs depends not only on nature but also in quantity with a sentence extending as long as 20 years and a fine as much as Rs.2 lakh. Violation of which  may result into punishment including rigorous imprisonment or fine or both If the drugs are used for personal use then the punishment may be lesser. Although since the establishment of the law, it has been amended time and again. But due to the availability of   drugs and issues relating to local  drugs and modern drugs, the problem in dealing with new drugs having properties of substance of abuse is a not an easy task .

As per the NDPS  Maximum of 1  year rigorous imprisonment or a fine up to Rs 10,000 or Both for small quantities of drug (1g to 100g) for the drug fieser /dealer and Rigorous imprisonment from  10 years (min) to 20  years (max) and a fine from Rs 1 lakh to  2 lakhs would be awarded if the quantity exceeds up-to kilos According to Sections 19, 24 or 27A of the NDPS Act and those relating to commercial quantities of drug would not get bail under any circumstances .

Various amendments have been made since of its enforcement  ,in 2014 new  amendment came into  force or Under section 71 of NDPS act  which explains the management  of drug dependents cases and the rules for treatment facilities was incorporated. And also , the amendments increased  penalties for low-level offences and continued to criminalize the consumption of drugs.

The amendment has ensure a uniform regulation for the whole country, by eliminating state wise Altercation. The very important Narcotics Drugs which are used in scientific preparations includes Morphine, Fentanyl  and Methadone, have relaxed for easy   availability among  younger generations. The death sentence for repeated conviction for trafficking large quantities of drugs has been diluted with giving courts to give Sentence for 30 years. On the other hand, punishment has been increased for “small quantity” offences from a maximum of 6 months to 1 year imprisonment after this amendment.

Conclusion

I believe that organization working towards narcotics approach and laws around the world have proven to be largely incompetent  in controlling the production of illegal narcotics. 

Latest Posts


About the Competition

The All India Journal on Analysis of Contemporary Legal Affairs (AIJACLA) Competition Quest for “Next Best Legal Analyst” by Aequitas Victoria aims to unearth the Best Legal Analyst in India.

The organizers believe that the legal research scenario in India should be molded in such a way that new researchers are encouraged, recognized and appreciated for their work. They believe that these researchers have the ability to take central stage in policy making. This competition will engage with students to develop their research skills and will foster their

abilities. Further. This competition is expected to provide a scope for exposing the skills of the participants in Policy Analyzing; Case Commentary and Book/Article Review in the field of Law.

Theme

The Authors are free to write on any topics related to law; however topics on contemporary legal affairs will be given more priority.

Category of Submission and Word Limit

Research Papers (2,000-3,000 words): Research Papers must focus on a particular problem related to any topics in the field of law and must address the Research Questions along with the Objectives for doing the Research in the Introduction itself. They must also provide a specific Conclusion based on the Research Questions along with the suggestions, if any for addressing the Research Problem.

Legal Essays (1,500-2,000 words): All essays must bring a factual analysis on the topic of law dealt upon, in a comprehensive manner. Unlike Research Papers, it is not essential for essays to have a particular Research Problem or Research Questions assuch, but all such essays shall make a proper analysis of the topic chosen.

Legislative Analysis (1,000-1,500 words): This Section will include analysis of any Laws, Bills, Policies, Rules, Regulations, By-laws, etc. having the source of law, or passed by any Authority defined as State under Article 12 of the Constitution of India, along with personal comments from the Author(s) on such Laws, Bills, Policies, Rules, Regulations, By-laws, etc. provided such comments shall be an Academic one and not merely Activists or Political opinions.

Case Commentaries (500-1000 words): This Section will include analysis made on Case Laws passed by any Judicial or Extra-Judicial Bodies from across the world, established by a well-defined source of law along with personal comments of the Author(s), provided that such personal comments shall be an Academic one and not merely Activists or Political Opinions. All Case Commentaries must include- Facts of the Case, the Judgments as well as Conclusion along with other necessary topics.

Note: However, no submissions shall be accepted on matters pending before any Court of Law across the Globe.

Book/Article Reviews (up to 500 words): This Section shall deal with Reviews made on popular Law Books or Law Articles published in Reputed Journals.

Submission Guidelines

  • Co-Authorship is limited to a maximum of two, but in no way Authorship shall increase more than 3.
  • The permissible limit of Plagiarism is 15% beyond which, submissions shall be summarily rejected.
  • All submissions shall be original, unpublished and shall also not be under consideration anywhere else. The decision of the Editorial Board regarding the acceptance and rejection of Articles shall be final.
  • All submissions must contain proper citations referring to the sources used in writing the concerned Articles and must adhere to the formatting guidelines strictly, failing which will result into summarily rejecting the Articles.
  • Submissions of Research Papers as well as Legal Essays shall include an Abstract within 100-150 words highlighting the novelty of the idea of the Research as well as the Conclusion derived in brief.
  • The Manuscript submitted must not contain any details regarding the Author(s) for which a separate cover letter shall be submitted along with the manuscripts mentioning the details as regards- the name, designation, institution, email id as well as phone numbers of all the Authors, in case the submissions consists of Co-Authors.
  • Note: all such information shall be used only for the purpose of the Journal and for nothing else.
  • All the submissions must also contain a Declaration, the format of which is provided herein at the last
  • The last date for submitting the Articles shall be 30th September, 2020, 11:59 PM.

How to Submit?

All submissions must be mailed to submissions.aijacla@gmail.com.

Formatting Guidelines

  • All the Contents in the Article including Footnotes, shall be typed in Times New Roman.
  • The Heading of the Articles shall be In Font Size 14, Central Aligned, Bold and must be written in Capital Letters.
  • The Abstract must be in Font Size 11, Justified Aligned, Single-line spacing and must be written in Bold and Italics.
  • The Main Body of the Articles must be in Font Size 12, justified aligned, 1.5 line-spacing and must not be in Bold and Italics.
  • The Citations must be provided as Footnotes, with Font size 10, justified aligned with single-line spacing.
  • Bluebook 20th edition shall be used as a mode of citation.

Registration Details

Registration for the competition shall be Free of Cost.

Submission of the papers shall automatically register the participant(s) for the competition.

Awards

  • The Best Research paper with the highest score will be declared “Best Researcher” and the author(s) will be awarded a merit certificate.
  • The Research paper with the second-highest score will be declared as “Second Best Researcher” and the author(s) will be awarded a merit certificate.
  • The Research paper with the third highest score will be awarded as “Third Best Researcher” and the author(s) will be awarded a merit certificate.
  • The Next Ten Best Research papers will be awarded the title of the “Honorary Mention”.
  • All the Research Papers of the above-mentioned 13 candidates will be published in our Journal and a Certificate of Publication will be provided to them separately signed by the Founder of the Organization along with a Professor from the field of Law.
  • The same criteria will be followed for the other categories also, via- Legal Essays; Legislative Analysis; Book/Article Revivers and Case Commentary, where the top 13 candidates will be awarded in the same manner provided for the Researchers.
  • Certificate of Participation will be provided to all the participants.

Contact Details

E-mail ID: submissions.aijacla@gmail.com

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