For Admissions Contact @ 9133527733

Menu

Leave a Comment / By /

APPSC CARE 25th September 2025 Current Affairs

News at a Glance

Female foeticide and decoy operation in Andhra Pradesh

Source: The Hindustan times

APPSC Relevance: Social Justice

Context: Female Foeticide

Why in News?

Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh Health Departments jointly conducted a decoy operation in Kurnool district to curb female foeticide and illegal sex determination practices.

Introduction

  • Karnataka Health Department, in coordination with Andhra Pradesh counterparts, conducted a joint decoy operation in Kodumuru taluk of Kurnool district to curb the practice of female foeticide.
  • The operation exposed a nexus of agents and private medical practitioners engaged in illegal sex determination and abortion.

Background

  • Female foeticide refers to the deliberate abortion of a female foetus after sex determination, violating both legal and ethical standards.
  • Despite legislative safeguards such as the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (PCPNDT Act), such practices persist due to deep-rooted son preference and gender discrimination.
  • India’s skewed sex ratio at birth (SRB) remains a major concern, with states like Haryana, Punjab, Rajasthan, and parts of South India historically reflecting disparities.

Details of the Operation

  • A 30-year-old woman from Malavalli, Mandya district (Karnataka), already a mother of three daughters, was found to have undergone an illegal sex determination test in Andhra Pradesh.
  • Her husband allegedly contacted an agent at Guntakal bus stand (August 31) who facilitated the procedure.
  • Acting on the tip-off, a decoy operation was launched on September 21, 2025 in a private nursing home at Kodumuru taluk, where:
  • ₹9,000 was handed over for abortion.
  • Agent Seethamma collected ₹7,500, of which ₹2,000 was paid to a medical store, ₹5,500 kept with herself, and ₹1,500 returned to the couple.
  • She also revealed that the abortion would be carried out by a doctor in Guntakal.
  • The evidence was handed to AP State Nodal Officer Dr. KVNS Anil Kumar for further probe and legal action.

India abortion: Police find 19 female foetuses - BBC News

(Image Source: BBC)

Legal and Administrative Measures

  • PCPNDT Act, 1994 (amended in 2003):
  • Prohibits sex determination and sex-selective abortions.
  • Provides for punishment (imprisonment up to 3 years and fine up to ₹50,000).
  • MTP Act, 1971 (amended in 2021):
  • Allows abortion under specified conditions, but not for sex selection.
  • State-Level Enforcement:
  • Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh health departments are actively conducting decoy operations.
  • Use of state nodal officers to monitor cases.

Social Dimensions of Female Foeticide

  • Son Preference: Driven by patriarchal inheritance, dowry system, and social status attached to male heirs.
  • Economic Factors: Families view sons as future breadwinners and daughters as financial burdens.
  • Cultural Practices: Continuity of family lineage is often tied to male children.
  • Technological Misuse: Easy availability of ultrasound technology has facilitated illegal sex selection.

Consequences of Female Foeticide

  • Demographic Imbalance: Declining sex ratio (as per NFHS-5, India’s SRB improved to 929 girls per 1,000 boys, but skew persists in many districts).
  • Marriage Squeeze: Shortage of women leads to increased trafficking, polyandry, and forced marriages.
  • Social Insecurity: Gender imbalance fosters crimes against women.
  • Erosion of Values: Reflects systemic failure in ensuring gender equity.

Government Efforts to Combat Female Foeticide

  • Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao (2015): Focus on awareness and improving SRB.
  • Awareness Campaigns: Collaboration with NGOs, community leaders, and media.
  • Decoy Operations: State health departments conducting sting operations to trap offenders.
  • Strict Monitoring: Regular audits of ultrasound clinics and medical establishments.

Way Forward

  • Strengthening Implementation: Stricter monitoring of ultrasound centres and cross-border cooperation between states.
  • Community Engagement: Mobilizing local communities, panchayats, and women’s self-help groups to spread awareness.
  • Education and Empowerment: Promoting girls’ education, financial independence, and reducing dowry practices.
  • Behavioral Change: Social campaigns to alter attitudes towards daughters.
  • Technology Use: Digital tracking of ultrasound machines and real-time monitoring of medical records.

Conclusion

  • The joint Karnataka–Andhra Pradesh decoy operation is a significant step in exposing the nexus of illegal sex determination and abortion. While laws like the PCPNDT Act provide a strong framework, social awareness and attitudinal change remain the ultimate solutions.

CARE MCQ

Q1.  With reference to the issue of female foeticide in India, consider the following statements:

  1. The Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (PCPNDT) Act, 1994 prohibits both sex determination and sex-selective abortions.
  2. The Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, 1971 (as amended in 2021) allows abortion up to 24 weeks under certain conditions, but does not permit sex-selective abortion.
  3. Decoy operations conducted by state health departments are part of the enforcement mechanism to check violations under the PCPNDT Act.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3

Answer 1- d

Explanation

  • Statement 1 is correct: The PCPNDT Act, 1994, later amended in 2003, explicitly bans the use of prenatal diagnostic techniques for sex determination and prohibits sex-selective abortion. It also prescribes penalties including imprisonment and fines.
  • Statement 2 is correct: The MTP Act, 1971, amended in 2021, expanded the upper limit for legal abortions to 24 weeks in certain cases (e.g., rape survivors, minors, or women with fetal abnormalities). However, it strictly disallows abortion for sex selection, ensuring consistency with the PCPNDT Act.
  • Statement 3 is correct: State health departments regularly conduct decoy or sting operations to trap agents and medical practitioners engaging in illegal sex determination practices. The joint Karnataka–Andhra Pradesh operation (Sept 2025) is a recent example of this enforcement mechanism.
  • Therefore, option d is the correct answer.

Andhra Pradesh Assembly passes Bill to amend Aquaculture Development Authority Act

Source: The Hindu

APPSC Relevance: Governance

Context: Aquaculture Development Authority Act

Why in News?

The Andhra Pradesh Assembly amended the APSADA Act, 2020, reducing lifetime licences to 1-year (business operations) and 5-years (aquaculture activities).

Introduction

  • Andhra the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly passed a Bill to amend the State Aquaculture Development Authority (APSADA) Act, 2020.
  • The amendment seeks to streamline aquaculture operations, simplify licensing procedures, and strengthen governance in the sector.

AP State Aquaculture Development Act – AquaExchange

(Image Source: AquaExchange)

Aquaculture in Andhra Pradesh:

  • Andhra Pradesh is India’s leading aquaculture hub, contributing over 60% of the country’s farmed shrimp exports and a major share of inland fish production.
  • The APSADA Act, 2020 was enacted to regulate and promote sustainable aquaculture. However, over time, stakeholders raised concerns regarding complex procedures, outdated provisions, and lack of flexibility.
  • Need for Amendments:
    • Feedback from aquaculture farmers and industry operators.
    • Operational difficulties under the existing Act.
    • Requirement to align state law with the Central Coastal Aquaculture Authority (CCAA) Act, 2005.
    • Need for financial sustainability and improved compliance.

Key Amendments Proposed

Licensing Validity Period Revised

  • Earlier: Lifetime licences were issued for aquaculture business operations and related activities.
  • Now:
  • One year validity for aquaculture business operations (such as seed production, feed mills, hatcheries, etc.).
  • Five years validity for aquaculture farming activities.

Rationale:

  • Aligns with provisions of the CCAA Act, 2005.
  • Ensures periodic review of compliance.
  • Provides a steady revenue stream for APSADA.

2. Endorsement of Old Registrations

  • Many farmers failed to register within the stipulated time under the 2020 Act.
  • The amendment allows endorsement of old registrations on payment of:
  • Licence fee + 50% late fee.
  • Benefit: About 20% of aquaculture farmers who missed the initial deadline can now regularise operations.

3. Simplified and Updated Procedures

  • Outdated terminology in the 2020 Act has been revised.
  • Licensing and renewal processes made simpler and farmer-friendly.
  • Emphasis on digital compliance and transparency.

4. Strengthened Governance

  • APSADA empowered to monitor and enforce sustainability standards.
  • Stronger mechanisms to prevent illegal or unregulated aquaculture practices.
  • Ensures balanced growth of the aquaculture sector without ecological damage.

Significance of the Amendments

1. For Farmers and Operators

  • Provides an opportunity to regularise operations for those who missed initial deadlines.
  • Reduces bureaucratic hurdles in licensing and renewals.
  • Encourages compliance culture.

2. For the State Economy

  • Aquaculture is a key foreign exchange earner for Andhra Pradesh.
  • Ensures financial sustainability of APSADA through periodic licence renewals.
  • Boosts export competitiveness by aligning with national aquaculture regulations.

3. For Governance and Sustainability

  • Strengthens monitoring of environmental and coastal regulations.
  • Encourages sustainable farming practices.
  • Prevents misuse of aquaculture licences and illegal expansion.

Challenges Ahead

  • Ensuring that annual licence renewals do not become burdensome for small-scale operators.
  • Balancing economic growth with ecological sustainability, especially in sensitive coastal regions.
  • Effective enforcement by APSADA to prevent corruption and arbitrary decision-making.
  • Need for capacity-building and digital infrastructure to implement simplified processes.

CARE MCQ

Q2. With reference to the amendments made to the Andhra Pradesh State Aquaculture Development Authority (APSADA) Act, 2020, consider the following statements:

  1. The validity of aquaculture business operation licences has been reduced to one year.
  2. The validity of aquaculture activity licences has been fixed at five years.
  3. Farmers who missed the initial registration period can now regularise operations by paying only the standard licence fee, without any penalty.
  4. The changes align the State Act with provisions of the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005.

Which of the above statements is/are correct?

(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 1, 2 and 4 only
(c) 3 and 4 only
(d) 1, 2, 3 and 4

Answer 2- B

Explanation

  • Statement 1 is correct: The amendment reduced the validity of aquaculture business operation licences (like hatcheries, feed mills, seed production units) from lifetime to one year.
  • Statement 2 is correct: The validity of aquaculture activity licences (farming) has been fixed at five years instead of lifetime.
  • Statement 3 is incorrect: Farmers who failed to register earlier can regularise their operations by paying the licence fee + 50% late fee, not just the standard fee.
  • Statement 4 is correct: These changes align the State law with the Central Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005, ensuring uniformity in aquaculture regulation.
  • Therefore, option B is the correct answer.

India-Pak Religious Pilgrimages Visit Protocols Amid Diplomatic Strain

Source: Indian Express

UPSC Relevance: GS2 International Relations

Context: Protocol on India-Pakistan Religious Visits

Why in News?

The Union government denied permission for Sikh jathas to visit Nankana Sahib in Pakistan for Guru Nanak’s birth anniversary in 2025.

Introduction

  • The Union government recently denied permission for Sikh jathas (pilgrim groups) to visit Nankana Sahib in Pakistan for the upcoming celebrations of Guru Nanak’s birth anniversary.
  • This marks the second successive denial in 2025, reflecting how religious visits are deeply intertwined with India-Pakistan diplomatic relations, security concerns, and bilateral agreements.

Background

  • Sikh Jathas: Organised groups of Sikh pilgrims who travel to Pakistan to visit gurdwaras of historical importance, particularly associated with Guru Nanak.
  • Nankana Sahib: Located in Pakistan’s Punjab province, it is the birthplace of Guru Nanak (1469), making it one of the holiest sites for Sikhs.
  • Recent Context:
    • Denials followed the Pahalgam terror attacks (April 2025) and subsequent border hostilities.
    • Earlier in June 2025, another Sikh jatha was denied permission to visit Pakistan for Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s death anniversary.
    • The Kartarpur Corridor, opened in 2019, has also been temporarily suspended after Operation Sindoor (May 2025) citing security reasons.

Legal & Institutional Framework

1. Simla Agreement (1972)

  • Included a clause on promoting exchanges in science, culture, and religion.
  • Non-binding, but provided the initial basis for people-to-people contacts.

2. 1974 Protocol on Visits to Religious Shrines

  • A formal bilateral framework between India and Pakistan.
  • Key features:
  • Recognised religious sentiments of communities in both countries.
  • Allowed Visitor Category Visas for pilgrims.
  • Identified shrines across both countries (e.g., Nankana Sahib in Pakistan, Ajmer Sharif in India).
  • Promised non-discriminatory access.

3. Visa & Jatha Quotas (under protocol)

  • About 3,000 Sikh pilgrims for Guru Nanak’s birth anniversary (November).
  • 1,000 for Guru Arjan Dev’s martyrdom day (June 16).
  • 500 for Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s death anniversary (June 27).
  • Hindu jathas also visit sites like Shree Katas Raj Temples (Punjab, Pakistan) and Shadani Darbar (Sindh).
  • Similarly, Pakistan sends Muslim jathas annually to Indian shrines (Ajmer Sharif, Nizamuddin Auliya, etc.).

(Image Source: Indian Expres):

Significance of Sikh Jatha Visits

  • Religious & Cultural Significance
  • Nankana Sahib, Kartarpur, and other shrines are central to Sikh identity and devotion.
  • Pilgrimages foster continuity of religious tradition.
  • Diplomatic & Soft Power Angle
  • Such visits have historically served as channels of people-to-people diplomacy.
  • They often continue even during strained bilateral ties, reflecting the sacredness of faith.
  • Community Sentiment
  • Denials often lead to resentment among Sikh organisations (SGPC, Akali Dal, etc.), who argue that faith should not be held hostage to politics.

Challenges & Reasons for Denials

  • Security Concerns
    • Risk of cross-border terrorism and unrest.
    • Potential for jathas being targeted during tense periods.
  • Diplomatic Strains
    • Retaliatory suspensions, e.g., after terror attacks.
    • Pakistan itself has previously denied entry to Indian pilgrims (e.g., 2021 Covid-related restrictions).
  • Protocol Limitations
    • The 1974 Protocol is non-binding and subject to security clearances.
    • Political developments often override commitments.
  • Kartarpur Corridor Suspension
    • Though symbolically significant, the corridor remains vulnerable to closure during security crises.

Recent Precedents

  • 2021: India denied a special jatha’s visit to Nankana Sahib citing security and Covid-19 protocols.
  • 2021 (Pakistan): Pakistan also denied permission to two Sikh jathas during Covid restrictions.
  • 2025: Two denials in succession (Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s death anniversary in June and Guru Nanak’s birth anniversary in November).

Broader Implications

  • Religious Freedom vs National Security: Balancing the right to religious pilgrimage with national security concerns is a recurring dilemma.
  • Impact on Bilateral Relations: Faith-based exchanges often serve as confidence-building measures (CBMs); suspensions deepen mistrust.
  • Community Diplomacy: Sikh diaspora and religious groups actively push for reopening of pilgrimage routes, highlighting the role of community diplomacy.
  • Future of Kartarpur Corridor: Its suspension reflects the fragile nature of India-Pak religious diplomacy despite earlier optimism.

Way Forward

  • Structured Engagement: Both nations could re-establish a joint working mechanism to regulate pilgrim visits while ensuring safety.
  • Technological Measures: Enhanced surveillance, secure travel corridors, and intelligence-sharing can reduce security risks.
  • Decoupling Faith from Politics: Long-term stability of religious visits requires insulating them, as far as possible, from diplomatic tensions.
  • Legislative/Policy Clarity: Codifying pilgrim protocols beyond the 1974 agreement may provide a more robust framework.

CARE MCQ

Q1.  Consider the following statements regarding the India-Pakistan Protocol on Visits to Religious Shrines, 1974:

  1. It provides for reciprocal visits of pilgrims to identified shrines in both countries.
  2. The protocol legally binds both governments to permit pilgrim visits irrespective of security concerns.
  3. Nankana Sahib in Pakistan and Ajmer Sharif in India are among the shrines covered under the protocol.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only
(b) 1 and 3 only
(c) 2 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3

Answer 1- B

Explanation

  • Statement 1 is correct: The 1974 Protocol facilitates reciprocal visits of pilgrims to shrines in both India and Pakistan.
  • Statement 2 is incorrect: The protocol is not legally binding; permissions depend on prevailing security and diplomatic conditions.
  • Statement 3 is correct: The protocol includes important shrines such as Nankana Sahib in Pakistan and Ajmer Sharif in India.
  • Therefore, option B is the correct answer.

UPSC PYQ

Q.   With reference to the Indus River system, of the following four rivers, three of them pour into one of them which joins the Indus directly. Among the following, which one is such a river that joins the Indus direct? (2021)

(a) Chenab

(b) Jhelum

(c) Ravi

(d) Sutle

Ans: (d)

Centre Prioritises Water Conservation under NREGS in Groundwater-Stressed Blocks

Source: Indian Express

UPSC Relevance: GS2 Polity and Governance

Context: 65% NREGS Spending on Water Conservation

Why in News?

The Centre has amended Schedule I of MGNREGA (2005), mandating minimum 65% spending on water conservation works in ‘over-exploited’ and ‘critical’ rural blocks to address groundwater depletion.

Introduction

  • The United Nations (UN The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), 2005 is India’s flagship rural employment programme, providing at least 100 days of wage employment to rural households.
  • Schedule I of the Act lists the permissible categories of works, which include natural resource management, agriculture-related works, and rural infrastructure.
  • To address the mounting crisis of groundwater depletion, the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD) has now amended Schedule I, prioritising water conservation in groundwater-stressed areas.

(Image Source: Indian Express)

Key Features of the Amendment

  • Groundwater-linked allocation of NREGS works
    • 65% of NREGS spending in blocks classified as ‘Over-exploited’ (>100% groundwater extraction) and ‘Critical’ (90–100%) must go to water-related works.
    • 40% in ‘Semi-critical’ blocks (70–90% groundwater extraction).
    • 30% in ‘Safe’ blocks (≤70% groundwater extraction).
  • Priority Areas for Intervention
    • Categories are based on the Dynamic Ground Water Resources Assessment Report of the Central Ground Water Board (CGWB).
    • The classification ensures scientific targeting of interventions where water stress is most severe.
  • Scope of Works Covered
    • Water conservation structures (check dams, farm ponds, recharge pits).
    • Water harvesting projects (percolation tanks, contour bunds).
    • Afforestation and watershed development.
    • Renovation of traditional water bodies.

Groundwater Scenario in India (CGWB Report, 2024)

  • Over-exploited blocks: 11.13%
  • Critical blocks: 3.05%
  • Semi-critical blocks: 10.54%
  • Safe blocks: 73.39%
  • This shows that about one-fourth of India’s rural blocks face some level of groundwater stress.

Significance of the Reform

Tackling Groundwater Depletion

  • India is the largest user of groundwater in the world, withdrawing nearly 25% of global extraction.
  • Over-dependence on tube wells, especially in Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, has led to unsustainable exploitation.
  • Mandating funds ensures supply-side (recharge) and demand-side (efficiency) management.

Strengthening Climate Resilience

  • Rural communities are highly vulnerable to droughts, erratic rainfall, and climate change.
  • Enhancing water security helps in stabilising agriculture and reducing distress migration.

Productive Use of MGNREGA Funds

  • Instead of short-term asset creation, funds will go into durable and ecologically beneficial works.
  • Links livelihood generation with resource regeneration.

Decentralised Planning

  • District Programme Coordinators and Programme Officers will implement works as per block-specific hydro-geological conditions.
  • Ensures localised and need-based solutions.

Challenges

  • Quality of Implementation: Many water-related NREGS works suffer from poor technical design and lack of maintenance.
  • Data Reliability: CGWB assessments are periodic; real-time monitoring of groundwater is still limited.
  • Convergence with Other Schemes: Requires coordination with Jal Jeevan Mission, Atal Bhujal Yojana, PMKSY (Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojana).
  • Institutional Capacity: Panchayats and district officials may lack adequate expertise in hydrogeology.

Way Forward

  • Capacity Building: Train local engineers and panchayat functionaries in scientific water management.
  • Community Participation: Involve local water user groups for maintenance and monitoring.
  • Technology Use: Employ GIS, remote sensing, and IoT sensors for groundwater mapping.
  • Demand-Side Measures: Promote micro-irrigation, crop diversification, and water-use efficiency along with supply-side recharge.

CARE MCQ

Q2.   With reference to the recent amendment to Schedule I of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), 2005, consider the following statements:

  1. In ‘over-exploited’ and ‘critical’ rural blocks, at least 65% of NREGS expenditure must be on water conservation and harvesting works.
  2. In ‘semi-critical’ blocks, the mandated minimum share of expenditure on water-related works is 40%.
  3. Blocks with a groundwater extraction stage of 70% or below are classified as ‘critical’.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A. 1 and 2 only
B. 2 and 3 only
C. 1 and 3 only
D. 1, 2 and 3

Answer 2- A

Explanation

  • Statement 1 is correct: In ‘over-exploited’ (>100% extraction) and ‘critical’ (90–100% extraction) rural blocks, the amendment mandates at least 65% of NREGS expenditure on water conservation and harvesting works.
  • Statement 2 is correct: In ‘semi-critical’ blocks (70–90% extraction), the notification fixes a minimum of 40% expenditure on water-related works.
  • Statement 3 is incorrect: Blocks with ≤70% groundwater extraction are categorised as ‘safe’, not ‘critical’. The mandated spending for these ‘safe’ blocks is 30%, not 70%.
  • Therefore, option A is the correct answer.

UPSC PYQ

Q.    Among the following who are eligible to benefit from the “Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act”? (2011)

(a) Adult members of only the scheduled caste and scheduled tribe households
(b) Adult members of below poverty line (BPL) households
(c) Adult members of households of all backward communities
(d) Adult members of any household

Ans: (d)

Personality Rights in India and Judicial Safeguards for Indian Celebrities

Source: The Hindu

UPSC Relevance: GS2 Polity and Governance

Context: Personality Rights

Why in News?

The Delhi High Court has recently reinforced personality rights of Bollywood celebrities, protecting them against misuse of their images, voices, and likeness through AI-generated content, deepfakes, and unauthorised merchandise.

Introduction

  • The In September 2025, the Delhi High Court granted relief to actors Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Abhishek Bachchan, protecting them against misuse of their images and voices through AI-generated content and merchandise.
  • Similar protections were extended to filmmaker Karan Johar, following earlier orders safeguarding the rights of Amitabh Bachchan, Anil Kapoor, and Jackie Shroff.
  • These rulings signal a growing judicial recognition of personality rights, particularly in the digital and AI era.

What are Personality Rights?

  • Definition: Rights protecting an individual’s name, likeness, image, voice, signature, and other traits from unauthorised commercial exploitation.
  • Not codified in a single statute but derived from:
  • Common law doctrines → privacy, defamation, publicity rights.
  • Judicial precedents → courts provide injunctions, damages, takedown orders.
  • Statutory protection (fragmented):
  • Copyright Act, 1957:
  • Section 38A → performers’ exclusive rights.
  • Section 38B → moral rights (control over reproduction, protection against distortion).
  • Trade Marks Act, 1999: allows registration of names, signatures, or catchphrases.
  • Passing Off (Section 27, TM Act): protects goodwill from false endorsement.
  • Constitutional Basis: Rooted in Article 21 (Right to Privacy, Autonomy, and Dignity).

The Judicial Reasons of Personality Rights..

(Image Source: IP and Legal Filings)

Judicial Evolution of Personality Rights

1. R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu (1994)

  • Supreme Court recognised right to control use of identity under Article 21.
  • Clarified that private details may be published without consent if already in public record.

2. Rajinikanth Case (Madras HC, 2015)

  • Actor restrained unauthorised use of his name, image, and style in Main Hoon Rajnikanth.
  • Court: infringement occurs if the celebrity is readily identifiable, even without proof of deception.

3. Anil Kapoor Case (Delhi HC, 2023)

  • Injunction against misuse of his name, voice, likeness, and catchphrase “jhakaas.”
  • Court distinguished between legitimate free speech (satire, parody) and commercial exploitation.

4. Jackie Shroff Case (Delhi HC, 2024)

  • Protection extended against e-commerce misuse and AI chatbots.
  • Court: unauthorised use dilutes brand equity.

5. Arijit Singh Case (Bombay HC, 2024)

  • Court restrained AI-based voice cloning, recognising it as violation of personality rights.
  • Observed: performers are especially vulnerable to generative AI misuse.

Balancing Personality Rights with Free Expression

  • Article 19(1)(a): Protects freedom of speech, satire, parody, art, news, scholarship.
  • Courts’ Approach:
  • DM Entertainment v. Baby Gift House (2010): Daler Mehndi dolls were restrained as unauthorised exploitation, but court upheld legitimacy of parody/caricature.
  • Digital Collectibles PTE v. Galactus Funware (2023):
    • Court refused to expand rights at cost of free speech.
    • Public domain material and satire remain outside infringement.
  • Principle: Rights are not absolute; they must be balanced against creative freedom and public interest.

Concerns and Challenges

  • Lack of Comprehensive Law
    • Reliance on piecemeal precedents → inconsistent enforcement.
    • No clear codification like in the US (Right of Publicity laws).
  • AI and Deepfake Threats
    • Misuse of celebrity personas through voice cloning, deepfakes, morphing.
    • Difficult to track and remove at scale.
  • Ordinary Citizens’ Vulnerability
    • Not only celebrities: women are disproportionately targeted by deepfakes, revenge pornography, and impersonation.
  • Risk of Overreach
    • Expansive protection could chill free speech, satire, art, and criticism.
    • Courts must carefully draw boundaries between artistic creation vs. commercial exploitation.

Way Forward

  • Comprehensive Legislation: A dedicated law on personality and publicity rights with clear definitions, exceptions, and remedies.
  • Digital Regulation: Stronger frameworks to address AI misuse, deepfakes, and online impersonation.
  • Balance of Rights: Explicit recognition of exceptions for satire, parody, critique, and journalism.
  • Technological Tools: Use of AI-driven monitoring to detect unauthorised use.
  • Awareness and Enforcement: Celebrities and ordinary citizens must be able to access fast-track remedies and takedown mechanisms.

CARE MCQ

Q3.  With reference to personality rights in India, consider the following statements:

  1. Personality rights are explicitly codified under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 as a standalone statute.
  2. The Copyright Act, 1957 grants performers both exclusive rights and moral rights to control the use of their performances.
  3. Courts in India have recognised personality rights as part of the right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A. 1 and 2 only
B. 2 and 3 only
C. 1 and 3 only
D. 1, 2 and 3

Answer 3- B

Explanation

  • Statement 1 is incorrect: Personality rights are not codified in a standalone statute; they are protected through common law, constitutional provisions, and scattered intellectual property laws like the Copyright Act and Trade Marks Act.
  • Statement 2 is correct: The Copyright Act, 1957 under Sections 38A and 38B provides performers with exclusive and moral rights to control reproduction and object to distortion or misuse.
  • Statement 3 is correct: Personality rights derive constitutional protection from Article 21 (Right to Privacy, Autonomy, and Dignity), as recognised in R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu (1994).
  • Therefore, option B is the correct answer.

UPSC PYQ

Q. Right to Privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of Right to Life and Personal Liberty. Which of the following in the Constitution of India correctly and appropriately imply the above statement? (2018)

  1. (a) Article 14 and the provisions under the 42nd Amendment to the Constitution.
  2. (b) Article 17 and the Directive Principles of State Policy in Part IV.
  3. (c) Article 21 and the freedoms guaranteed in Part III.
  4. (d) Article 24 and the provisions under the 44th Amendment to the Constitution.

Ans: c

Karnataka High Court Rules Against X Corp, Backs IT Act Blocking Orders

Source: The Hindu

UPSC Relevance: GS2 Polity and Governance

Context: IT Act

Why in News?

The Karnataka High Court upheld the authority of Indian regulators to issue take-down orders under Section 79 of the IT Act,

Introduction

  • Manipur the Karnataka High Court dismissed a petition filed by X Corp. (formerly Twitter Inc.), which had challenged the legality of content take-down orders issued by Central and State authorities under Section 79 of the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000.
  • The Court emphasized that liberty must coexist with responsibility and that social media cannot be left in a state of anarchic freedom as it directly affects citizens’ dignity and democratic order.

Key Highlights of the Judgment

  • 1. Regulation of Social Media
    • The Court described social media as the “modern amphitheatre of ideas” but warned that it cannot be left unchecked.
    • Regulation is necessary, especially in cases involving offences against women, where unregulated content undermines the right to dignity.
  • 2. Liberty and Accountability:
    • Platforms operating in India must acknowledge that freedom of expression is not absolute.
    • “Liberty is yoked with responsibility” — access to Indian users comes with the duty of compliance with Indian laws.
  • 3. Global Precedents
    • The cited the U.S. “Take It Down Act”, where X Corp itself complies with take-down obligations, but resisted similar obligations in India.
  • 4. Sahyog Portal
    • The Court upheld the Sahyog Portal, through which government agencies and local police can issue take-down requests under Section 79(3)(b).
    • It called the portal “an instrument of public good”, enabling cooperation between citizens, intermediaries, and the State to combat cybercrime.
  • 5. Shreya Singhal Case Distinction
    • X Corp argued that the take-down orders violated the Supreme Court’s Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) judgment, which upheld Section 69A of the IT Act with safeguards.
    • The High Court rejected this argument, holding that Section 79 deals with intermediary liability and content removal requests, not “blocking orders” under Section 69A.

(Image Source: The Hindu)

Section 79 of the IT Act: A Quick Recap

  • Provides “safe harbour protection” to intermediaries (like X, Meta, Google) from liability for third-party content.
  • This protection is conditional — intermediaries must remove unlawful content if directed by the government or courts under Section 79(3)(b).
  • Failure to comply removes the safe harbour, making the platform liable.

Centre’s Stand in Court

The government argued that Section 79 is a balanced regime aligning with global best practices, balancing:

  • Free speech of citizens,
  • Business interests of intermediaries, and
  • Legitimate state interests (security, public order, women’s safety).
  • The Centre accused X Corp of misleading terminology, by equating content removal requests with blocking orders.

Broader Implications

1. Constitutional Dimensions

  • Balances Article 19(1)(a) (freedom of speech) with reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) (public order, morality, decency).
  • Upholds Article 21 (right to dignity) against online harms.

2. Democratic Order

  • The Court reinforced that regulated speech preserves both liberty and order, which are the twin pillars of democracy.
  • Unregulated speech, under the guise of liberty, can descend into lawlessness.

3. Impact on Intermediaries

  • Platforms like X, Meta, and YouTube must comply with Indian legal frameworks and cannot claim exemption.
  • India joins the global trend of assertive regulation of Big Tech (like EU’s Digital Services Act and U.S. laws).

CARE MCQ

Q4.  With reference to recent social media regulation in India, consider the following statements:

  1. Section 79 of the IT Act provides conditional safe harbour protection to intermediaries, requiring them to remove unlawful content on government or court directions.
  2. The Sahyog portal allows only Central Government authorities to issue take-down requests to intermediaries.
  3. The Karnataka High Court held that social media platforms cannot claim exemption from Indian laws while operating in India.
  4. The judgment rejected all take-down mechanisms under Section 79, citing the Shreya Singhal verdict.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A. 1 and 2 only
B. 1 and 3 only
C. 2 and 4 only
D. 1, 3 and 4 only

Answer 4- B

Explanation

  • Statement 1 is correct: Section 79 grants conditional safe harbour to intermediaries, which is lost if they fail to remove unlawful content as per government or court directions.
  • Statement 2 is incorrect: The Sahyog portal allows both Central and State authorities, including local police, to issue take-down requests under Section 79(3)(b).
  • Statement 3 is correct: The Karnataka High Court affirmed that social media platforms cannot claim exemption from Indian laws while operating in the country.
  • Statement 4 is incorrect: The judgment upheld take-down mechanisms under Section 79 and clarified that they are not in conflict with the Shreya Singhal verdict.
  • Therefore, option B is the correct answer.

UPSC PYQ

Q.  In India, it is legally mandatory for which of the following to report on cyber security incidents? (2017)

  1. Service providers
  2. Data centres
  3. Body corporate

Select the correct answer using the code given below:

(a) 1 only
(b) 1 and 2 only
(c) 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3

Ans: (d)

ndia’s UIP Success and Challenges: Insights from Vaccination Drive

Source: The Hindu

UPSC Relevance: GS1 Public Health

Context: Universal Immunisation Programme (UIP)

Why in News?

India’s Universal Immunisation Programme (UIP), strengthened through Mission Indradhanush, digital tracking platforms, and expanded vaccine coverage.

Introduction

  • The Vaccination remains one of the most cost-effective public health interventions, saving millions of lives worldwide.
  • India’s Universal Immunisation Programme (UIP), the world’s largest, annually vaccinates 2.6 crore infants and 2.9 crore pregnant women, contributing significantly to the decline in under-5 mortality from 45 to 31 per 1,000 live births between 2014 and 2021 (Sample Registration System 2021).

Universal Immunisation Programme (UIP) Overview

  • Provides free vaccination against 12 diseases — 11 vaccines nationwide, 1 in endemic areas.
  • New vaccines added in the past decade:
    • Tetanus and Adult Diphtheria
    • Inactivated Poliovirus
    • Measles-Rubella
    • Rotavirus
    • Pneumococcal Conjugate
    • Japanese Encephalitis
  • Impact: Full immunisation coverage increased from 62% in 2014 (NFHS-4) with efforts to achieve 90% coverage through Mission Indradhanush (MI) and Intensified MI (IMI).

(Image Source: The Hindu)

Mission Indradhanush (MI) and Intensified MI (IMI)

  • Launched 2014: Target low-coverage areas and missed populations.
  • IMI (2017): Strategic targeting of pockets with low immunisation.
  • By 2023:
    • 12 phases completed
    • 5.46 crore children and 1.32 crore pregnant women vaccinated
    • Integration: With Gram Swaraj Abhiyan to enhance outreach.
    • Result: Full immunisation coverage improved in 2024–25.
  • Challenges:
  • Remote and migratory populations
  • Vaccine hesitancy and clusters with low awareness
  • Strategies: Zero-dose outreach, digital tracking, infrastructure improvements

Vaccine Coverage Achievements

  • Polio-free status maintained since 2011.
  • Maternal and neonatal tetanus eliminated (2015).
  • Yaws-free (2016).
  • Measles-Rubella (MR) Campaign 2017–2019:
  • 34.8 crore children aged 9 months–15 years vaccinated
  • MR vaccine added to UIP
  • COVID-19 Impact:
    • Disruption of routine immunisation, creating immunity gaps
    • Measles outbreaks 2022–24 prompted IMI 5.0 (2023) and Zero MR Elimination Campaign (2025)
  • Goal: Achieve >95% national MR coverage for herd immunity

Technology Integration in Vaccination

  • Cold Chain & Logistics: Strengthened under Pradhan Mantri Ayushman Bharat Health Infrastructure Mission
  • Digital Platforms:
  • U-WIN: End-to-end digital vaccination, tracking for pregnant women and children up to 16 years
  • CO-WIN: Model for nationwide digital vaccination management
  • Electronic Vaccine Intelligence Network (eVIN): Vaccine stock management
  • National Cold Chain Management Information System (NCCMIS): Real-time cold chain tracking
  • SAFE-VAC module: Vaccine safety reporting
  • Objective: Improve coverage, particularly for migratory populations

COVID-19 Vaccination in India

  • Programme launched: January 16, 2021
  • By January 2023:
  • 220+ crore doses administered
  • 97% received at least one dose, 90% fully vaccinated
  • Domestic manufacturing: India relied on indigenous vaccine development and production
  • Vaccine Maitri initiative: Supported LMICs, reflecting Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam

Global Recognition and Achievements

  • India: World’s largest vaccine manufacturing hub
  • Awards: Measles and Rubella Champion Award (March 6, 2024) from Measles & Rubella Partnership
  • Model: India’s immunisation program is globally recognised for coverage, surveillance, and public trust

Challenges and Way Forward

  • Access Gaps: Remote and migratory populations remain under-vaccinated.
  • Vaccine Hesitancy: Requires community engagement and awareness campaigns.
  • Disease Surveillance:
  • Must be linked with immunisation
  • One Health Approach: Integrate human, animal, and environmental disease surveillance
  • Digital Solutions: Expand platforms like U-WIN and eVIN for efficient monitoring.
  • Pandemic Preparedness: Continuous innovation in vaccine logistics, stock management, and safety tracking is essential.

CARE MCQ

Q5. With reference to India’s vaccination initiatives, consider the following statements:

  1. Mission Indradhanush (MI) and Intensified MI (IMI) were launched to achieve 90% immunisation coverage by targeting low-coverage and missed populations.
  2. The U-WIN platform enables digital tracking of vaccinations for children up to 16 years and pregnant women.
  3. India achieved polio-free status in 2015 and Yaws-free status in 2016.
  4. The Vaccine Maitri initiative focused exclusively on domestic immunisation and did not include vaccine exports.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A. 1 and 2 only
B. 1, 2 and 3 only
C. 2 and 4 only
D. 1, 3 and 4 only

Answer 5-A

Explanation

  • Statement 1 is correct: MI (2014) and IMI (2017) targeted low-coverage areas and missed populations to achieve high immunisation coverage.
  • Statement 2 is correct: The U-WIN platform enables end-to-end digital vaccination tracking for children up to 16 years and pregnant women, building on CO-WIN’s success.
  • Statement 3 is incorrect: India achieved polio-free status in 2011, not 2015. Yaws-free status was correctly achieved in 2016.
  • Statement 4 is incorrect: The Vaccine Maitri initiative also included exporting vaccines to low- and middle-income countries, reflecting the global outreach of India’s vaccination programme.
  • Therefore, option A is the correct answer.

UPSC PYQ

Q.    With reference to recent developments regarding ‘Recombinant Vector Vaccines’, consider the following statements: (2021)

  1. Genetic engineering is applied in the development of these vaccines.
  2. Bacteria and viruses are used as vectors.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct? 

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 only

(c) Both 1 and 2

(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Ans: (c)

AIGCC Report Flags Just Transition Challenges in India’s Coal States

Source: Down To Earth

UPSC Relevance: GS3 Environment and Ecology

Context: Just Transition

Why in News?

The AIGCC 2025 Place-Based Just Transition Report highlights the need for socially inclusive energy transitions in India and South Asia.

Introduction

  • In As the world accelerates its shift from fossil fuels to renewable energy, India and South Asia face the dual challenge of decarbonisation and social equity.
  • According to the Asia Investor Group on Climate Change (AIGCC) Place-Based Just Transition Report 2025, failure to plan at the community level risks exacerbating inequalities, causing labour unrest, and leaving vulnerable regions behind.

Understanding Just Transition

  • Definition: A Just Transition ensures that climate action and social justice are pursued simultaneously, protecting workers, empowering local communities, and directing investments where needed.

Key Components:

  • Worker protection: Reskilling, income support, and livelihood diversification.
  • Community empowerment: Local participation in energy and industrial planning.
  • Investment targeting: Directing green investments to affected regions to avoid stranded economies.

(Image Source: Down To Earth)

India’s Energy Transition Challenge

  • Current Status: India is the third-largest emitter globally, with 27 million people employed directly or indirectly in fossil-fuel industries.
  • Coal-dependent States at Risk:
    • Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Odisha — high coal dependence, low alternative industry presence.
    • Without proactive planning, these states risk becoming stranded economies with major job losses.
  • Renewable Energy Expansion:
    • Installed 251.5 GW of non-fossil capacity.
    • Uneven growth: Solar hubs in Gujarat and Rajasthan cannot replace coal jobs in eastern states automatically.

Challenges Across South Asia

  • Labour Displacement: Millions in coal mining, thermal power, and transport sectors are vulnerable to sudden livelihood shocks.
  • Energy Security vs Equity: Countries like Bangladesh and Sri Lanka rely heavily on imported fossil fuels but lack fiscal space for worker compensation or reskilling.
  • Climate Vulnerability: Coastal and low-lying areas face rising sea levels, stranded infrastructure risks, and higher social costs of energy shifts.
  • Poverty-aligned Transition: Decarbonisation strategies must consider poverty alleviation, as economic insecurity can amplify social unrest.

AIGCC Recommendations for a Place-Based Just Transition

  • Local Economic Diversification: Focus on affected districts rather than national averages; promote alternative industries to absorb displaced labour.
  • Reskilling and Workforce Development: Provide targeted training programs to coal-sector workers for renewable energy, green manufacturing, or service sectors.
  • Dedicated Transition Funds:
    • Managed by central and state governments.
    • Supported by international climate finance to ensure social cushioning.
  • Social Dialogue:
    • Engage trade unions, women’s groups, local governments to design bottom-up plans.
    • Avoid top-down directives that ignore local realities.
  • Investor Engagement: Governments should provide clear signals, frameworks, and credible roadmaps to attract green capital.

Policy and Strategic Implications for India

  • Net Zero by 2070: India’s long-term pledge requires immediate decade-long planning, as fossil fuels will dominate in the near term.
  • Attracting Green Investment: A socially inclusive approach can mobilize domestic and foreign green financing, while disorderly transitions may deter investors.
  • Global Leadership: India has an opportunity to define Just Transition models for emerging economies, potentially setting a precedent for the Global South.

Significance for Governance and Policy Making

  • Ensures climate action does not exacerbate inequalities.
  • Integrates energy, industrial, labour, and social policies for sustainable development.
  • Supports SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), and SDG 13 (Climate Action).
  • Encourages inter-ministerial coordination, combining Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC), Ministry of Labour, and Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE).

Way Forward

  • Develop district-level Just Transition plans integrating energy, social, and economic factors.
  • Expand reskilling programs with renewable energy and green manufacturing employment pathways.
  • Establish transparent transition funds backed by public and climate finance.
  • Strengthen community engagement to ensure social acceptance and minimise unrest.
  • Use digital tools and data analytics to track economic and labour impacts of energy transitions.

CARE MCQ

Q6. With reference to India’s energy transition and the AIGCC 2025 report, consider the following statements:

  1. India has installed over 250 GW of non-fossil fuel capacity, but clean energy growth is unevenly distributed across states.
  2. Just Transition emphasizes community-level planning, reskilling, and local economic diversification to protect workers and vulnerable regions.
  3. The AIGCC report suggests that Net Zero by 2070 can be achieved without any proactive labour or social policy interventions.
  4. Dedicated transition funds supported by international climate finance are recommended to aid regions affected by the fossil-fuel to renewable energy shift.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A. 1 and 2 only
B. 1, 2 and 4 only
C. 2 and 3 only
D. All of the above

Answer: B

Explanation

  • Statement 1 is correct: India has 251.5 GW of non-fossil capacity, but eastern coal-dependent states cannot automatically replace fossil fuel jobs.
  • Statement 2 is correct: Just Transition requires place-based planning, reskilling, and local economic diversification to avoid social unrest and protect vulnerable workers.
  • Statement 3 is incorrect: Achieving Net Zero by 2070 requires proactive social, labour, and economic policies; passive approaches are insufficient.
  • Statement 4 is correct: The report recommends dedicated transition funds backed by central/state governments and international climate finance to aid affected regions.
  • Therefore, option B is the correct answer.

UPSC PYQ

Q. In India, ‘extend producer responsibility’ was introduced as an important feature in which of the following? (2019)

(a) The Bio-medical Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998
(b) The Recycled Plastic (Manufacturing and Usage) Rules, 1999
(c) The e-Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011
(d) The Food Safety and Standard Regulations, 2011

Ans: (c)

APPSC CARE 26th September 2025 Current Affairs
APPSC CARE 24th September 2025 Current Affairs
Scroll to Top