An Analysis of the Education Sector Budget of India 2020-2021

In a very famous speech given by the former and the first black president of South Africa, Mr. Nelson R. Mandela, he quoted, “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.” Indeed, education can transform one’s life and nation completely, getting inspiration from different parts of the world, say as Japan who fought its way through the deadly nuclear attack through education and is the only developed nation among the Asian countries presently. Being evident in the fact that how education can change the lives of the common man, in the sector of health, employment, trade, and arm-forces, etc.
We will try to analyze the Educational Sector Budget of the financial year 2020-21 with graphs and the empirical research method, we have conducted an online survey, with professionals and students which is based on observed and measured phenomena that are qualitative and quantitative and derive knowledge from experiences rather than theories.

Perusing the Doctrine of Res Judicata

In our daily lives, ‘limitation’ is the word that always refrains a person from doing things that are not to be done, and when we analyze the origin of Law, it is always observed by some of the famous jurists that Law evolves from the society. Doctrine of Res Judicata is also a form of limitation that is based on the constructive idea that prohibits the re-adjudication of any matter i.e. to Bar re-litigation of a case which is decided in the most legitimate manner. The aim of this article to acquaint the reader with the idea of Res Judicata in toto and its application in Indian laws with special reference to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Keywords: Legal theory, Re-adjudication, CPC.

The Infringement of Trademark in the E-commerce Sphere – A Comparative Analysis of USA, European Union, United Kingdom & India

This research paper deals with the trademark’s infringements specifically in the e-commerce circle. Generally, the e-commerce industries evolved during the late 20th century, and it was the time where even many people didn’t even used the internet in many developing countries. The infringement of trademarks was seen as a common problem in offline shopping. Counterfeited goods can be easily found in the local markets even now with a low price in many developing countries. Still, the irony is even in this era of advancement of technology and more usage of the internet in this 21st century, many counterfeited consumer goods were found on online shopping websites. It needs to be prevented efficiently through due diligence obligations. The online business has paved an easy and straightforward path for infringing the trademark in the e-commerce sphere. Nowadays, e-commerce websites are assisted with artificial intelligence software, which sometimes recommends counterfeited goods to the customers. This leads to the question of liability for the infringement of trademarks. The e-commerce websites worldwide are just one of the platforms of shopping that must always be under the security check of the law enforcing authorities to prevent the infringement of trademarks.
Keywords: Trademark, Infringement, Counterfeit, E-Commerce, Online, Goods

Privacy and Surveillance: A Constitutional Conundrum of Essence of Right and Justification for its Denial

With the growing threats to national security, interest etc. often measures are adopted by the state to address these concerns by intercepting information, placing the privacy of citizens at a risk. While the technological revolution already continues to threaten people’s privacy, surveillance further reduced the notion of ‘privacy’ to a myth.
This paper seeks to resolve the constitutional obfuscation of privacy as a constitutional right and surveillance by state as a reason for its breach. The paper first traces the evolution of the concept of privacy in India and in US, both jurisdictions where the constitutional right of privacy is a result of judicial construct. It then examines the essence of privacy as a right as it exists in India and the US by delving into the interpretation of ‘privacy’ and statutory provisions supporting privacy in both the jurisdictions. The paper analyses the conflict between surveillance and privacy by examining the surveillance laws in India and US. The paper highlights the existing judicial safeguards which if extended to all surveillance measures, create a model surveillance framework that serves the interest of national security perfectly and also limits the extent of surveillance to only that which is justifiable. The paper also examines the Personal Data Protection Bill,2019 and its potent role in reconciling privacy and surveillance.

Third Party Funding in Arbitration: An Overview

World has not been the same since the dawn of last decade. With increasing number of cross-border transactions international commercial and investment arbitrations have also increased concurrently. Arbitration is more efficient and time saving procedure (compared to domestic jurisdiction), but various expenses such as legal fees, arbitrator’s fees, attendant costs, venue costs, regular fees, miscellaneous expenses etc. makes arbitration a difficult process for parties. In order to help the weaker financial claimants, the concept of third-party funding came into existence. Third party funding is a concept in which a party which has no prior interest in the legal dispute provides finance to one of the parties with a hope getting a share in the damages awarded or a part of the settlement. The evolving phenomenon of third-party funding has taken the legal world by storm. However, it is important to note that India has been silent spectator with regard to this issue and continues to maintain the same stance. While many developing countries have made changes in their legislations in order to accommodate this process, India is yet to make a move. In this paper we have a discussed the concept of third-party funding in detail along with its pros and cons, practices in foreign countries and the status of third-party funding in India.

Weaponisation of Sedition and the UAPA to Curb Free Speech in India

In recent times, the UAPA and Sedition laws have been used against journalists, politicians, and students who criticize the central government or its leaders. This article discusses the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act before and after the 2019 amendment, and the Section 124A of the Indian Penal code that criminalizes Sedition in India. This article throws light on how the central government under the UAPA has the power to (A) Label an INDIVIDUAL as a terrorist (B) How the REVIEW COMITEE (established under SECTION 37) for reviewing the decision of the Central government is constituted by the central government itself, and also about the abuse of Section 124 A by Private citizens against people who criticize the central government or its leaders through speeches, tweets, or other forms of social media posts. Most people charged under this section have no prior Criminal record and are often acquitted by the court. However, people are subjected to long pretrial custody and expensive legal battles.
Data from National crime records bureau have been cited as evidence. Recent cases after the NCB report of 2019 was published too have been cited. The article concludes with a quote from a Special Rapporteur criticizing the actions of the government, and how these laws could threaten democracy in the future.
Keywords: UAPA, Section 124A, Free Speech, Government