Basic Structure of Constitution – Myth or Reality

Basic Structure of the Constitution, sometimes also called as “Basic features” of the Constitution, this doctrine was laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Keshavananda Bharti v. State of Kerala, AIR 1973 SC 1461: (1973) 4 SCC 225.

A brief overview of the doctrine of ‘Basic Structure of Constitution’ may show that it is just what the hon’ble Supreme Court has held to be as the Basic Structure of the Constitution in various cases that consists of the Basic Structure of the Constitution. But such a case would give rise to ambiguity, as it implies that there is no definite yard-stick to determine whether a particular provision is part of the Basic Structure or not. Such an ambiguity gives rise to wide discretionary powers of the Judge who is to decide as to a provision being a part of the basic structure or not as it would mean that it is solely dependant upon what the person sitting as Judge, in his personal opinion, thinks as to whether the provision is part of the basic structure or not. Such wide discretionary powers have been provided against by the Constitution by way of Article 14 which guarantees Right to Equality. Hence, such a case would mean that the doctrine is itself contradictory to the provisions of the very Constitution which it seeks to protect from ‘harm’. Hence, the doctrine becomes ultra vires and hence, void. So it would mean that the Doctrine of the Basic Structure is nothing but a myth created by the hon’ble Supreme Court.

But a deeper and closer look at the doctrine and the case laws of the hon’ble Supreme Court clearly shows that there is more to it than just what first meets the eye. When we speak of the Basic Structure, we don’t speak of the Articles of the Constitution or its provisions, but the principles which they enshrine. It may be said that Basic Structure consists of the principles keeping which in mind, the Constitution was framed. As for example, Objectives specified in the Preamble, Right to Equality, Right to Life and Personal Liberty, Right to Freedom of speech and expression, Separation of Powers, etc., may be called as some of such Principles and hence may be said to form the Part of Basic Structure of the Constitution. The provisions which enshrine these principles if changed in such a way that they serve the same purpose in the same way or in a better way, it would not imply changing the Basic Structure of the Constitution. To make my point more clear, I would like to cite the following example: “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.” These words don’t form part of the Basic Structure but the Principle of Right to Life and Personal Liberty which is guaranteed to every person through these words is what the Basic Structure consists of. So, if they were changed to, say “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to due procedure established by law.”, such a change doesn’t affect the essence of the original Article/Provision and still preserves the Right to Life and Personal Liberty in the way it was intended to be. It only makes the point as to the kind of procedure to be followed, more clear and precise. Hence, though an Article which forms the Basic Structure of the Constitution is changed, it does not imply changing the Basic Structure of the Constitution. But if it were changed to, say “No citizen shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.” or “No person shall be deprived of his life except according to procedure established by law.”, any such amendment or change would mean changing the Basic Structure of the Constitution because it tries to change the provision and make it in such a way which was not intended by the framers of the Constitution; as in this case, to limit the scope of the provision and hence take away the Right from a particular class of persons (in the former case), or to eliminate the Right to Personal Liberty (in the latter case). And these Principles can be clearly made out by a thorough reading of the provisions of the Constitution.

From the above discussion, it can be concluded that the Basic Structure is, in fact a reality, and there is more to it than just the Supreme Court case laws. Like the Doctrine of ultra vires which seeks to prevent any law/rule that violates the provisions of the Constitution, this Doctrine seeks to negate any attempt to change the Constitution in a ‘negative’ way and hence, preserve the sanctity of the Constitution. In the end, I would like to conclude by saying that the doctrine of Basic Structure of Constitution was framed and has been very rightly implemented by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the various cases to protect the very Principles this great Nation is built upon.

The concept of constitutionalism is that of a polity governed by or under a constitution that ordains essentially limited government and rule of law as opposed to arbitrary authoritarian or totalitarian rule. Constitutional government, therefore, should necessarily be democratic government.

In other words, Constitutionalism is a political philosophy in which the functions of government of a state must be in accordance with the provisions of the constitution meaning thereby the actions of government must reflect constitutionality.

As the constitutionalism is a political spirit or philosophy, so it is not necessary that the states who have a constitution must be embodied with the concept of constitutionalism. According to Douglas Greenberg

, Constitutionalism is a commitment to limitations on ordinary political power, it revolves around a political process, one that overlaps with democracy in seeking to balance state power and individual and collective rights, it draws on particular cultural and historical contexts from which it emanates and it resides in public consciousness.

Now to identify that whether constitutionalism is present in India or not. It can be analyzed with the help of various provisions of constitution that are:-

• Preamble
• Judicial Review
• Rule of law
• Separation of power
• Checks and balances and so on.

There is no exhaustive list of features by which the validity or existence of constitutionalism can be tested; but the every feature which limits the government and proves helpful to establish a position of sovereignty under fundamental principles of constitutional jurisprudence may be a considerable point for constitutionalism.

In Indian context,
Preamble may be a point to check the presence of constitutionalism. Our Constitution enacted on 26th November,1949, since then, a question always a matter of great concern that whether preamble is a part of Indian constitution or not. However, in 1960, In Re Beru Beri case, it was held that preamble is not a part of constitution but after a long time, In case of Keshavanand Bharti v State of Kerala, AIR 1973 SC 1461

, 13 judges largest bench of Indian constitutional history rejected previous contentions and declared that

“Preamble is a part of Indian Constitution”.
Preamble explains the objectives of constitution in two ways, one about the composition of bodies of governance and other about the objectives sought to be achieved in independent India. Objectives explained in preamble as follows:-
• To constitute India into Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, Democratic Republic (words Socialist and Secular inserted by 42nd constitutional Amendment,1976) Other provisions of preamble that are;-
• Justice – Social, Economic, and Political;
• Liberty – of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;
• Equality of status and opportunity;
• Fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the nation (word unity inserted by 42nd constitutional Amendment,1976) may be invoked to determine the ambit of Fundamental rights and Directive principles of state policy.

According to Justice Subbarao,
Preamble is the soul of the constitution, without which a body in the form of state cannot be survived. The objectives of constitution ensure the dignified conditions for the people of India and provide them all rights and liberties within ambit of fundamental spirit of constitutionalism embodied in entire body of the constitution. E.g. Dr. Radhakrishnan, former President of India, has explained secularism in this country, as follows:-
When India is said to be a secular state, it does not mean that we reject the reality of an unseen spirit or the relevance of religion to life or that we exalt irreligion. It does not mean that secularism itself becomes a positive religion or that the state assumes divine prerogatives…..we hold that not one religion should be given preferential status…This view of religious impartiality, or comprehension and forbearance, has a prophetic role to play within the National and International life.

In other words,
Secularism, which reflects no state religion, means every citizen has a right to profess religion of their own choice, which promotes automatically liberty of faith and worship.

In this way, It can be surmised that preamble hold the spirit of constitutionalism. Second feature is Judicial Review, however, this doctrine is not clearly stated in Indian
constitution but its reflection is somewhere found in Article 13(2), Actually, this doctrine was firstly introduced in 1803 by Justice Marshall in Marbury v Madison(3) case, In USA
where he clearly said that ‘It is the duty of judge to annul the law made by the legislature which violated the constitution or contrary to it.

The similar spirit found in Article 13(2) of Indian Constitution that the laws “which are inconsistent to part III of constitution shall be declared null and void”, but it is not clearly defined that if any contrary law made, then who will check its validity, then an answer comes into light in reference to Justice Marshall that Judiciary can check such contrary acts of legislature and also can review the laws made by legislature.

And also a concept of “Higher law” emerged from this doctrine, because a judge has to follow the mandates or directions of Higher law while checking the consistency of provision. In written constitution, Higher law depicts constitution as Supreme but where there is no written constitution; there are some principles which can be regarded as Supreme or Higher law principle. In Gopalan V State of Madras (1950) SCR 88(100) has upheld that it is difficult to restrict the sovereign legislative power by judicial interference except so far as the express provision of written constitution. It is only the written provisions of constitution which may restrain legislative power, but where there is no written constitution, then, who restrain legislative power, and then its answer is judiciary by following various principles, precedents, customs, usages, and different statutes can check the consistency.

It clearly signifies that in absence of power of judicial review in hands of judiciary, judiciary is only a puppet of legislators.

Justice Frankfurter (4)(USA)…. said that judicial review, itself a limitation on popular government, is a fundamental part of our constitutional system; means if there is no power of judicial review then the constitution merely becomes a draft for the code of conduct for government as well as citizens, It also signifies as a

“Law without Sanction”.
However, this type of situation has been prevalent in India, till 2007, in different cases, such as Shankari Prasad case, Sajjan Singh case, Golak Nath case, Keshavanand Bharti case, N.Ramchandra case, traced a picture of conflict between legislature and judiciary, no clear cut demarcation of powers under which organs of government can overview the validity of their actions for upholding the true spirit of constitutionalism in a political entity could be realized. But the Raja Ram Pal case and I.R.Coelho v State of Tamil Nadu case 2007 have reshaped the whole demarcation and establish superiority of principles such as Basic Structure Theory enhancing the spirit of constitutionalism.

In this way, by exercising Appellate and Advisory jurisdiction, judiciary can secure uniformity in the interpretation and application of the constitution as amongst the states.

Third provision is “Rule of Law”, on its basis spirit of constitutionalism can be present in a state. This doctrine is given by dicey (a well known constitutionalist of England) in 1865 wrote a book titled

“An Introduction to the law of the constitution” in which the term “Rule of Law” was given a comprehensive amplitude. In reality, it is a doctrine of England where there is no written constitution, so it is placed as a higher law there to check the validity of any law made by legislature. This doctrine shows that whatever law is present in our state, must be ruled over everyone, meaning thereby the law is supreme in all respect and in every sphere. It clarifies that “No one above the law”. Now a question arises, what the law is? The answer of this question resides in two principles that are-

• Due Process
• Procedure established by law.
Due Process is a doctrine of USA, and its ambit is not defined comprehensively, but its sphere is to be explained by judges as per the facts and circumstances of the case. It represents judicial supremacy and also there is a danger for judicial autocracy because the court if not self restrained may go beyond the limits set by the constitution.

But in India, there is a “Procedure established by law” doctrine prevails, adopted from

Constitution of Japan
and clearly enshrined in Article 21 of Indian Constitution. It shows parliamentary sovereignty because in India, law is made by the legislature, it restricts the judicial supremacy and only infers right to do literal interpretation not statutory construction of laws.There are also some other elements embedded in Rule of law, such as

• Absence of arbitrary power on the part of government, which is undoubtedly present in form of judicial review in which judiciary always look after the actions of other organs of government.

• Equality of all persons in the eye of law, which can be justified on the basis of provisions of Article 14-18 with some reasonable restrictions.

• Rules of constitutional law are the results of the ordinary law of the land means the laws made by legislature must not be contrary to the provisions of constitution, otherwise it will be declared as null and void.

In England, Rule of Law flourished sovereignty of legislature, being unwritten constitution there is no higher law to circumscribe the plenary powers of the sovereign legislature but in India, there is written constitution and the concept of judicial review also present, so the doctrine of Rule of Law cannot be assigned a paramount place. But to promote the spirit of constitutionalism, the shadow of this doctrine reflects in various provisions of Indian Constitution in the form of fundamental principles of natural justice.

Next provision is Separation of Power
Among organs of government. In India, under Article 245,246 and Schedule VII there is a clear demarcation of legislative power among union and state government, under Articles 256-263 administrative relations are also clearly defined, and under Article 254 if there is any inconsistency between centre and state laws, then central law prevails, under Article 264-291 fiscal relation between centre and state is given, meaning thereby there is a rare chance of clash between union and states, so that public policies can be properly implemented as per the requirements of the people. As the powers of centre and state clearly divided, so there is no space to use arbitrary powers over any subject. Generally, subjects which have national importance vests in Union list and those have regional importance vests in State list and for the establishment of unity and integrity in the nation, Concurrent list is made in which for universalization of laws, central government made law but according to the requirements of a particular region, state and legislature may make any a difference.

In this way, this feature also promotes the spirit of constitutionalism.

And other provisions as Fundamental rights defined in Articles 12-35, provide some rights to the citizens and to every person for whose infringement people may approach towards Courts of Justice under Articles 32 and 226 respectively of Indian Constitution, which shows that citizens also have some rights to protect themselves from the arbitrariness of government. And Directive Principles of state policy under Articles 36-51 connotes that these principles should be in consideration of government while framing of its policies, because its trend helps to provide or flourish social, economic equality among people. As the aim of government cannot touch their destination without the contribution of public at large. That’s why the Fundamental duties of citizens also explained in Article-51A which should be obeyed by every citizen of nation.

In this way , these provisions shows the checks and balances among the actions of governmental organs and the public. The Emergency provisions under Articles 352, 356 and 360 also shows the spirit of constitutionalism by restraining the exclusive powers of state organs at the time of external aggression, armed rebellion, failure of constitutional machinery in particular state, financial crisis etc. It signifies the curtailment of powers of state functionaries in favour of public interest and all powers vests in union government to deal with such sort of situations. To uplift weaker sections of society, concept of reservation is also present in Indian constitution under Articles 330-342, in these provisions Doctrine of Appeasement is present by providing some reserved seats to lower society people in every functionary organ of government. Such as-under Articles 330 & 332, Reservation of seats for SC and ST in House of People and legislative assembly of states. With the help of this clause, the problems related to SC and ST comes in front of legislature and proves helpful to protect the interest of particular community.

Conclusion
The brief discussion of provision of constitution provides us a vision to see the process going on in the political system of country, in which we find that there are very detailed description of powers of organs of government so that they can exercise their powers within the boundaries of constitution i.e. Higher law in India, owing to which governmental organs become unable to entertain arbitrary powers and also these provisions provide a paramount place to laws whose main aim is to protect the interest of individuals in the country. In this way, In India constitutionalism is undoubtedly present but there is only one exception that the doctrine of Rule of Law does not prevail in India as in England (regarding parliamentary sovereignty). It exists in India in form of natural justice principles to govern administrative functions, since the rule of law and judicial review in a single system cannot be realized easily. It would create a conflict between parliament and constitution (The Guardian of constitution i.e. judiciary).Judges are to promote the value of constitutionalism emanating from a legal draft, drafted by constituent assembly constituted of representatives expressing their public opinion. Although, Secondary public opinion cannot overrule primary public opinion, But every provision has its own importance and if any provision is not explicitly present in a constitution but its reflection is found in some clauses, then it will be sufficient to promote the spirit of constitutionalism.

The Indian judiciary plays an important role in interpreting and applying the law. In a country where gender disparity is so common whether be it in the education sector, health sector or employment sector to name a few, the judiciary plays a pivotal role in empowering women and filling this gender gap.

Although several provisions have been embodied in our Indian Constitution for protecting and preserving the rights of women and for safeguarding their interests, but many are still unaware or ignorant about their rights, which are provided to them by the law. Even if , they are made aware or well versed with the whole scenario , a very few have economic resources and courage to obtain legal redress.

No one can ignore the significant role being played by the judiciary in this direction helping her to get what is due to her as a matter of right. In many judicial pronouncements , the judiciary has shown its innate desire to help the deprived and underprivileged section of the society i.e. the women who face the brunt of sexual violence in silence while giving a whole new dimension to justice itself[1].

There should be no discrimination between men and women. Women should know their fundamental and social rights which they get once they are born[2]. There should be respect and dignity towards women and they should have equal rights in society and other judicial works.

Mahatma Gandhi, once quoted that:
There is no occasion for women to consider themselves subordinate or inferior to men.

Indian Constitutional law and ordinary law through judiciary has been working as a saviour of women from atrocities. The principle of gender equality is enshrined in the Indian Constitution in its Preamble, Fundamental Rights, Fundamental Duties and Directive Principles. The Constitution not only grants equality to women, but also empowers the state to adopt measures of positive discrimination in favour of women.

Gender Gap Index:

For India to maintain its position as a global growth leader, more concerted efforts at local and national levels, and by the private sector are needed to bring women to parity with men.

While increasing representation of women in the public spheres is important and can potentially be attained through some form of affirmative action, an attitudinal shift is essential for women to be considered as equal within their homes and in broader society.

World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index 2019-2020 measures the extent of gender-based gaps in economic participation and opportunity, educational attainment, health and survival, and political empowerment. The report particularly brings to light the alarmingly low level of women’s participation in the economy.

It says:
Among the 153 countries studied, India is the only country where the economic gender gap is larger than the political gender gap. Only one-quarter of women, compared with 82% of men, engage actively in the labour market (i.e. working or looking for work):
one of the lowest participation rates in the world (145th). Furthermore, female estimated earned income is a mere one-fifth of male income, which is also among the world’s lowest (144th).

India dropped four places, from 2018, to take the 112th rank in the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index 2019-2020. In the health and survival parameter, India’s performance is dismal, ranking 150th out of 153 countries. The Global Gender Gap report states that it will take us almost 100 years to achieve gender parity worldwide.

Case laws:
Practically, there has been a very little change in the status of women compared to the various discussions and debates held on women empowerment, or the enactments and laws made in favour of women.

There have many cases of sexual harassment against women in India. Various landmark judgments have been delivered by the Supreme Court wherein the legal aspect of the nation has seen a great deal of milestone decisions.

The historic judgment of Vishaka vs. State of Rajasthan[3] was the outcome of a writ petition filed by certain social activities and NGOs to an incident of brutal gang rape of a government development worker in a village of Rajasthan. In this case, the Supreme Court observed that , in the absence of domestic law occupying the field, to formulate effective measures to check the evil of sexual harassment of working women at all work places the contents of International Conventions and norms (CEDAW) are significant for the purpose of interpretation of the guarantee of gender equality, right to work with human dignity in Articles 14[4], 15[5], 19 (1) (g)[6] and 21[7] of the Constitution and the safeguards against sexual harassment implicit therein. The recent Sexual Harassment Act[8] as published in the Gazette of India had derived its origins from this case.

The Vishaka case is, unique in many ways wherein the court not only acted as the active guardian of fundamental rights and also provided temporary respite to working women. The guideline extended the responsibility to eliminate discriminatory sexual conduct to a larger society , in this case , the workplace and obligated the employer to ensure a safe and healthy environment for women employees.

The main aim of the court, while evolving these guidelines , was to ensure a fair, secure and comfortable work environment to the extent possible , and also, to eliminate situations where the protector could abuse his position and turn predator[9]. Vishaka’s case was a quantum leap in expanding the principle of fairness in procedure after Maneka Gandhi case[10] wherein the court, for the first time, had observed that right to equality would also include the right not to be treated in an arbitrary manner. It was for the first time in Vishaka case that the principle of fair and just procedure was expanded further to include a gender justice procedure in furtherance of the constitutional goals of equality.‖

The critical advance made by the Vishaka judgement is the expansive interpretation given to Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India[11] , insofar as sexual harassment at the workplace has been held to be in violation of the fundamental freedom of all women , as citizens , to pursue the business, trade or profession of one‘s choice. It is within the framework of constitutional law that the judgment operates , holding that:

“Each such incident results in violation of the fundamental rights of Gender Equality and the Right to Life and Liberty. It is a clear violation of the rights under Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the constitution. One of the logical consequences of such an incident is also the violation of the victim‘s fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g) to practice any profession or to carry out any occupation , trade or business.

However , post-Vishaka case, and now with the passage of the 2013 Act, sexual harassment at the workplace is categorically prohibited across all workplaces, whether in the public or the private domain, whether rural or urban, whether in the organised or unorganized sector.

In another case of Radha Bai vs. Union Terriority of Pondicherry[12], the apex court awarded a lumpsum compensation of Rs. 3 lakhs for the loss of reputation and honour of Ms. Radha Bai and for the agony she had to suffer in the long battle against the Government of Pondicherry and the then Home Minister of Pondicherry within one month from the date of the order. Thus we can draw an inference that Supreme Court is taking these matters seriously.

In the case of Apparel Export Promotion Council v. AK. Chopra[13], it was for the first time when Supreme Court had applied the guidelines laid down in Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan. In this case, the Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of an officer from Apparel Export Promotion Council. He was found guilty of harassing at women at his workplace on the ground that it violated Article 21 of Indian Constitution.

The court decisions in the Vishaka case and AK Chopra case were followed by various High Courts in a number of cases on this sensitive issue for example , in Shehnaz case[14] wherein it was probably for the first time that any High Court applied the court‘s guidelines with regard to sexual harassment at workplace.

Conclusion:
Gender-based disparity in income is serious in India and exists across the organised and unorganised sectors. In agriculture, building construction, etc., women are paid far less than men. Their employers justify this wage gap citing differences in capability. And this discrimination continues in every aspect whether in the education or health sector, the girl child is always treated unequally. Indian society still hasn’t been awakened to the importance of empowering the women. The statistics still narrate a grim story of female foeticide, girl child discrimination and gender bias .

The need of the hour is to make a change in the mindset of the society. It is not easy to change the culture of disregard for women which are so deep- rooted in the Indian society. But it also does not mean that it is impossible to do so. Only revolutions bring changes in a day, but reforms take their time. The idea of women empowerment might sound hard. The Government of India is running various welfare schemes and policies, both at State and Central levels for the empowerment of woman.

Some of the major programs and measures include Swadhar (1995), Swayam Siddha (2001), National Mission for Empowerment of Women (2010) etc. All such policies and programs focus on social, economic and educational empowerment of women across various age groups. Women should have access to resources, rights, and entitlements. They should be given decision-making powers and due position in governance.

Gender inequality has been a social issue in India for centuries. Although, there has been no dearth of social, economic, political, legal and Constitutional efforts made for the empowerment of women both prior to and post- Independence; however, women in India continue to face atrocities such as rape, dowry killings, acid attacks, human trafficking, etc. According to a global poll conducted by Reuters, India is the “fourth most dangerous country in the world for women.

In the words of Late Kofi Annan who served as the seventh Secretary- General of the United Nations, There is no tool for development more effective than the empowerment of women.

Hence all we need is a concentrated effort focused in the right direction that would recreate the society better.

Serial killing is different from mass murder. Serial killing is when a person kills more than two persons in a different period of time where mass murder means killing a bunch of people in the same place and time. They call these murders as serial killing because there is a series of murders involved. Serial killers could be anyone like our father, mother, friend, husband or other closed people.

Though we may have noticed some difference in their behavior in some cases we may not have any clue that they taking the lives of many people. The gaps between one murder and the other may be a day, a month or even a year. According to the view of people, they portray a serial killer as an evil monster with unusual appearance, but actually, they are a normal human being with normal appearance. But we people fail to learn why they are involved in these activities.

To understand serial killers studying psychology is more important than studying criminology. Not all the serial killers but the majority of the serial killers has psychological reasons to do such a big crime. Our Indian law also doesn’t treat them any differently. When we try to find what was the reason behind those murders, we may get a response which is either silly or sexual based reasons.

Every human in this world has sexual and silly problems but what triggers them to kill a person? Are they really criminals or one among the people who have a mental illness? Why do they have such thoughts? What makes them kill the other person? Does every serial killer have the same mentality? How does our Indian law treat them? How should they be treated? These are a few common questions that pop in our mind which are unanswered. Our paper will throw lights on all these questions.

Who Is A Serial Killer?

Every serial killer drive to kill multiple victims may be unique, dependent on his/her history and experiences. There is no general definition for the serial killers. Serial killing is the rarest form of homicide. It occurs when an individual has killed more than two or three people who were previously unknown to him or her. There is always cooling off period between each murder. The serial killer can be defined in a simple term as a person who kills more than three people without any personal reasons. The above-mentioned definition has been accepted by both police and academic experts and provides a useful frame for reference.

This definition narrows the analysis of such crimes as it fails to incorporate with many similar characteristics of a serial killer. Serial killing is considered in relation to broad historical changes that have occurred over the past 400-500 years. The historical setting and broader social intimately tied with serial killing. When we go through human history there have probably always been an individual who engaged in serial predation. But in previous eras, it was not possible for an individual to be a serial killer.

Serial killing is a distinctly modern phenomenon. The recent social and cultural conditions to which criminologists can provide fresh insight by accentuating the broad institutional frameworks, motivations, and opportunity structures within which serial killing occurs. When it comes to public knowledge, the serial killer is a product of Hollywood productions. To heighten the interest of the audience’s story lines are created, rather than to accurately portray serial murder.

The pubic is captivated by the criminal and their crimes by focusing on the atrocities inflicted on the victims by deranged offenders. This lends more confusion to the true dynamics of a serial killer. This information also misleads law enforcement professionals from a different source. Professionals who are all involved in serial murder cases such as investigators, prosecutors, and pathologists may have limited exposure to serial murder.

Those professional experience may be based upon a single murder series and the factors, in that case, are extrapolated to other serial killers. Certain stereotypes and misconceptions take root regarding the nature of serial killer and their characteristics. Most of the serial killers are not reclusive, social misfits who live alone. We should remember that they are normal human with families and homes, are gainfully employed, and appear to be normal members of the community. They blend in so effortlessly and they are oftentimes overlooked by the law enforcement and the public.

Classification Of Serial Killers:

The serial killers can be classified according to their character and their behavior. Various criminologist, law enforcement officials, mental health professionals and social scientists have attempted to discover the true motive behind the serial killers.

They try to classify serial killers based on the typologies, which will gain information’s to further assist law enforcement officers in profiling and investigating cases related to serial killers. After making various researches the researchers have come up with a typology to determine the making of a serial killer.

According to the typology the serial killers are classified as:

What Makes A Serial Killer?

1. The organized killer:These types of offenders lead methodical lives that are also replicated in the way they commit crimes. They are triggered to kill someone by their intimate relationship, finances or employment problems. These offenders are normal person, who is skilled in employment and they have average to a high level of intelligence and they are also being socially proficient. They always restrain victims and reflect a level of control in the situation. Usually organized offenders communicate or use a verbal approach with their potential victims before the violence. The victims are chosen by the offenders based on certain characteristics such as age, physical appearance, gender, hairstyle or even based on their hair color.
   
2. Disorganized killers:These offenders are completely different from organized offenders. Disorganized offender’s crime scene and their characteristics suggest chaos and little premeditation before the offence. It may include evidence such as semen, blood, fingerprints or murder weapon. The offenders are incompetent to carry out or maintain social relationship or interaction and the disarrayed crime scene reflects this. This lack of intimate relationship may increase the chances of potential sexual or sadistic acts as a part of the murder.
   
3. Mixed killers:These killers are the one who cannot be easily identified as organized or disorganized. Those who are falling under this category are said to have both organized and disorganized characteristics. Mixed killing may involve more than one offender. They always have some sort of planning and there are unforeseen events. The unforeseen events may include a victim resisting or offender escalating into a different pattern of violence. The offender leaves the victim’s body poorly covered. These offenders may be young and/or involved in drugs or alcohol.

Unlike normal people, serial killers are relatively charming. They appear to be one among us but they aren’t. Not only they have a motive to kill someone but they are manipulative and aggressive too. But what are the reasons behind it? How does a man transform into a serial killer? Now let’s see the causes of serial killers.

1. A study has found that every serial killer has common emotional development issues and an above average intelligence.
    
2. Pregnancy: Doctors say that a child in a womb could hear everything that the mother hears and experience few emotions that the other’s experience. If a woman is so stressed, depressed or any other emotion then the child also experiences the same. It may reflect in not only the child’s growth in the womb but also it affects its mental growth which may lead to many mental disorders.
    
3. Infancy: It is the period of every human being to be given more attention and love. The first twelve months in our life is the period in which our basic emotions develop. The child should experience more affection and physical touch or else the child may experience many disorders in future. When we compare these theories to our real life, we could observe that most of the serial killers are adopted or abandoned children.
    
4. Childhood: Most of the serial killers have experienced bullying and loneliness in their childhood. It is said that commonly they had dyslexia which makes them less concentrative in their studies. They have also experienced abnormal weight, height, etc. due to which they bullied and ignored by their peers. There are also serial killers who had experienced sexual abuse, harassment which leads them to any mental disorders.
    
5. Parenting: The parents of the serial killers also ignored, bullied, shouted, etc. Their parents tend to be an alcoholic who drinks and forces their children to involve in the same activity. Some parents are workaholic who doesn’t check on their child properly and fails to give attention even if they try to contact. In the worst situation, few parents have harassed their children physically, mentally and sexually too.
    
6. Chromosomes: Recent studies had proved that one’s chromosome abnormality can trigger them to become a serial killer. For example, if any person is born with one extra X chromosome or Y chromosome it may lead to abnormality.
    
7. Fantasy: We people have our own fantasies but we know our reality but serial killers tend to live in their own fantasy every second. Their emotions are designed by their fancies. They are controlled by their imagination. They just follow their imagination and do whatever the fantasy orders them to do.
    
8. Sadist: Few people are addicted to hearing the pain, sorrow, screaming, etc. Their emotions are mixed up. They would love to see blood. There are serial killers who have the habit of having sexual intercourse with a dead body of the person whom they killed. This is the extreme level of sadism.
    
9. Mission: These serial killers are not psychotic. They would have missions which are mostly immoral and illegal. Their guilt and own pressure to complete the desired task leads them to do aggressive things.
    
10. Lust: Sexual gratification is the main aim of these killers. Serial killers who kill for lust would like to have total control and dominance over their victims. So, to ensure that they have control over their victim they kill them.

Some serial killers are psychotic and some are not. Mostly their attitudes and motive depend on their parenting and childhood.

Laws In India
The concept of serial killers doesn’t have its mark in the Indian Code. The only sections to deal with it are Section 299 and Section 300.

Section 299 of The Indian Penal Code says:
Whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death, commits the offence of culpable homicide.

And Section 300 of The Indian Penal Code explains that:
“Except in the cases hereinafter excepted, culpable homicide is murder, if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death, or

(Secondly) -If it is done with the intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender knows to be likely to cause the death of the person to whom the harm is caused, or

(Thirdly) -If it is done with the intention of causing bodily injury to any person and the bodily injury intended to be in­flicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, or

(Fourthly) -If the person committing the act knows that it is so imminently dangerous that it must, in all probability, cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, and commits such act without any excuse for incurring the risk of causing death or such injury as aforesaid.”

Culpable homicide and murder have only a thin line of difference. Generally, if a person kills someone, they will the have motive and intention to kill them. Motive leads to intention. A motive is a malicious mind which is the ultimate object. Intention refers to the immediate act caused. In the case of these serial killers, they will have the intention to kill those persons but there is no motive. It is said that mens rea is partially absent in their cases. Some have argued with this partial mens rea and Section 84 of The Indian Penal Code.

According to Section 84 of The Indian Penal Code:
“ Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.”

But the same rule was absent in the Criminal Procedure Code and Mental Health Act of 1987. The Bombay High Court in the case of State of Maharashtra vs Sindhi Alias Raman, S/O Dalwai quoted that the medical insanity that the criminals have might not be the same insanity said in Section 84 of The Indian Penal Code. Though the insanity is same as quoted, these criminals are able to identify the consequences of the committed act. Though they do not have a guilty mind they knew that they were committing a wrong or illegal act. Automatically Section 84 of the Code doesn’t apply here.

There were many cases in India regarding serial killers. In the famous Auto Shankar case, Shankar and his associates were found guilty of six murders committed over a period of two years between 1988 and 1989. The victims’ remains were either charred or found within 12 homes.

In Joshi- Abhyankar case, four commercial art students have committed ten murders within January 1976 and March 1977. At times they have also robbed and drank alcohol. These are only two examples. In all the serial killer cases the killers are hanged or given life imprisonment. But in all these cases there was no question regarding psychopathy was raised.

Conclusion:
To summarize the discussion above mentioned many factors plays an important role in the development of these serial killers. There has not been one sole factor or no one major factor for the development of characteristics of the serial killer, it is a combination of several factors and incapability to cope up with a healthy life. Even though the factors may be overlapping or independent but they do not guarantee each other existences and do not guarantee that the person with these characters will become a serial killer. One of the notable disturbing aspects of the serial killer is that virtually everyone is at risk.

Even a person who is cautious is not safe from the serial killer. There are various motivation theories are relevant to the exploration of a serial killer, but readers are not to place excessive explanatory on one theory. A continuous investigation would benefit from an interdisciplinary approach which allows for consideration of genetic, psychological and social influence upon the serial killer.

An analysis of the 7,160 single-bias incidents by bias motivation revealed that 54.7 percent were motivated by a racial bias, 17.1 percent were triggered by a religious bias, 14.2 percent were motivated by a sexual-orientation bias, and 13.2 percent of the incidents were motivated by an ethnicity/national origin bias. Nearly 1 percent (0.7) involved bias against a disability.
There were 5,190 hate crime offenses classified as crimes against persons in 2005.
Of the 3,109 hate crime offenses classified as crimes against property.
Of the 6,804 known offenders reported in 2005, 60.5 percent were white, and 19.9 percent were black. The race was unknown for 12.3 percent, and other races accounted for the remaining known offenders.
The majority (30.0 percent) of hate crime incidents in 2005 occurred in or near residences or homes.
If we analyze the above data we would find that in modern America racial bias form a greater cause for Hate Crimes and among those the White offenders were much more than the black ones, may be because the white possess an ancient sense of Supremacy.

This can be confirmed by the statistics provide by the Government of UK
Nationally, in 2006-07, police reported 5,619 hate crimes in which someone was injured, 4,350 hate crimes without injury, and 28,485 cases of racially or religiously motivated harassment. There were also 3,565 cases of criminal damage related to hate crimes. The typical hate offender is a young white male (most homophobic offenders are aged 16-20, and most race hate offenders under 30). The majority of hate crimes happen near to the victim’s home while they are going about their daily business, and an offence is most likely to be committed between 3pm and midnight. Most hate criminals live in the same neighbourhood as their victims.

One can encounter great similarities in the above statistics; this shows that under same of similar socio-cultural background, the structure of hate crimes is almost the same. But for India the Story is different, India forms a totally different socio-cultural background with regards to its European neighbours.

Causes that cause Hate Crimes
The roots of hate violence are broad, but most causes come back to one element in the end: fear. This fear is most often rooted in ignorance: fear of the unknown, fear of the “other,” fear of perceived competitors; all of these hold the potential to generate a violent reaction under the right conditions or rather wrong conditions. Prejudice is, at a basic level, instinctual. Many studies have been conducted to show that people habitually, instinctually are drawn to notice differences and similarities between themselves and others. This is a natural function of our desire to create order out of the chaotic world around us. But in comparing ourselves to others, we tend to label others’ similar attributes to be desirable and others’ dissimilar attributes undesirable. Soon we are judging whether a person is “good” (that is, we react positively to them), or “bad” (we react negatively). It is only a short jump for a stressed person from thinking “that person is bad because they are different from me” to “those people caused all my problems, and I’m going to do something about it.”[10]
The effort of groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, the White Aryan Resistance (WAR), Shiv Sena, and other ethnic groups, to preach violence against racial, religious, and other minorities continues unabated today. They have hate hotlines, computer bulletin boards, hate propaganda distribution networks, youth groups, street gangs, etc. active throughout the state, pumping out a steady drone of messages designed to transform the fears of the economically distressed, the paranoid and the ignorant into violent reaction. The recent lynching of UP youth in Maharashtra shows that India is no difference place. These kinds of crime are also rising in India. The North Indian is being thrown from every region of the country. These Groups function very systematically. They recognize very clearly the psychology of the issues they raise. This helps them to gain local support. They indoctrinate people to believe that minorities are a threat to their way of life, to their very existence, and that the only choice is to fight back in as violent a fashion as possible. What is more disturbing and dangerous is the rise and empowerment of hate groups such as Hindu Janjagran Samiti and Bajrang Dal. These issues which were once a concern of Sangha, have now gone out of its control. One other basic cause is politicians. Some political figures today are willing to fan the flames of bigotry in order to advance their own interests and careers. We have seen rampant examples in recent years of political campaign ploys that are permeated with racist and religionist connotations. The appearance that political figures and even some government leaders approve of these views gives them a coating of respectability that they do not deserve.

Economic causes
There are other causes too in earlier times hate crimes were because of lack of knowledge of other cultures, narrow mindedness but now the reasons have changed now they are economic. Economic insecurities. They feel they are left out of economic progress and left out of the political mainstream. There are millions of individuals who even at age 35 get nowhere in life. Their small business packs up or their promotions are denied. In an earlier time these bitter men would have become sadhus. Now, they get recruited to the cause of Hindu rage. The persistent perception of failure in a success-oriented society, the daily humiliation of being the loser when everyone around seems to be winning, the factory of glossy cultural products like ads and movies that scream “I have it and you don’t,” is creating armies of recruits to Hindu “rage”.

The thousands of underemployed or semi-employed youths who are perpetually available to be part of screaming “nationalist” mob against “minorities”, are not just protesting about Muslims: they are screaming out their own economic and cultural deprivation. Thus, the fashion show, St Valentine’s Day, the English-speaking “pseudo secularists” all the demonstrable symbols of the economy that are new and which appear successful, must be met with hatred and violence because “success” is the enemy. And this is not limited to Hindus and India only it is happening around the world, and with this growing economic recession it is bound to rise.

Hate Crime Laws
With rise in globalization we have seen a rise in hate crimes, especially in fast growing and extraordinary economies and in those nations which have traditionally been very diverse such as India and Unites States. So it’s high time when we should categorize Hate Crimes as a distinct category of crime and form strict rules in order to control them. Many nations have penalty enhancement acts which enhance the punishment in case of such crimes. The US has all together a separate category of crime.

The reason that we need a separate consideration for such types of crimes is that hate crimes cause greater individual and societal harm. In Wisconsin v. Mitchell, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously found that “bias-motivated crimes are more likely to provoke retaliatory crimes, inflict distinct emotional harms on their victims, and incite community unrest” As Blackstone said long ago, “it is but reasonable that, among crimes of different natures, those should be most severely punished which are the most destructive of the public safety and happiness.”

People do have their arguments against the legislation of such acts. The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously found that hate crime statutes which criminalize bias-motivated speech or symbolic speech conflict with free speech rights because they isolated certain words based on their content or viewpoint .Some have argued hate crime laws bring the law into disrepute and further divides society, as groups apply to have their critics silenced. Some have argued that if it is true that all violent crimes are the result of the perpetrator’s contempt for the victim, then all crimes are hate crimes. Thus if there is no alternate rationale for prosecuting some people more harshly for the same crime based on who the victim is, then different defendants treated unequally under the law, which violates the Constitution.

Moreover practically it is very difficult to prove a Hate Crime because they are not very much different from ordinary crimes, the only difference they are accompany is that of a hate speech which the criminal often gives before committing a crime.

In the modern era with the development of science and technology we encounter with large number of sources for “information” while using such information from respective sources, some moral ethics must be taken into consideration; works created by other people is rightfully their intellectual property and if we use that work we are bound to acknowledge that.

The word “plagiarism” is derived from the Latin term “plagiare” This means to kidnap or abduct.[2] Plagiarize is copy another person’s idea, words or works and pretend that they are your own. It is infecting more than simply copying someone else’s work. However internet and subsequent proliferation of information has made the problem more serious. Plagiarism usually discovered by scholars and researchers during the continuance of their research work. Plagiarism is one of the most severe violations of academic writing. It may have serious consequences for a student even expulsion from college/ University.

The Internet’s popularity has continued to grow since it first emerged; shocking the world with it’s never before seen technological capacities. It allowed for the communication of ideas and provided people with a wealth of information only a click away. More widely used now than ever before, the Internet supplies users with easy access to various kinds of information. With the unlimited availability of information on the web today, plagiarism has become a growing problem. The abundance of information available makes it easier and increases the temptation to steal other’s ideas. Plagiarism, which is taking credit for someone else’s ideas, is sometimes committed intentionally and other times accidentally. Often, copyrights are violated. In order to prevent this crime form being committed it is necessary that society is educated about copyright law and understands how to properly cite source material. Today, large number of people uses the Internet as a reference source as it contains a plethora of information, and documents found on the web can be of great use when doing research. However, if ideas, concepts, or words are taken from another author’s work, they must be properly cited. If they are not properly cited this is plagiarism, which is considered to be unethical act by society; it also violates copyright law, and thus is punishable by law. Often people do not realize that even if they are only paraphrasing or summarizing someone else’s work, idea, or concept and not directly quoting it they are still plagiarizing. Borrowing another person’s idea is permissible if credit is given to whom it is due. However, stealing someone else’s work or idea and acting as if it were your own is not. Thus, it is pertinent that proper citation is always used. If one fails to use proper citation, one is guilty of plagiarism, and may face legal charges for copyright violations.

Plagiarism is not always committed intentionally, but the people who purposely attempt to deceive others by stealing someone else’s ideas should take into account the seriousness of their actions and the consequences they may face if caught. For those people who are guilty of plagiarism, but did so unintentionally and were simply unaware of what they were doing should also take into consideration their actions to try to prevent this act from occurring again in the future. With a ready availability of information on the Internet, it is extremely easy to take someone else’s idea without using proper citation and giving credit to the owner, thus it is necessary that everyone be extremely cautious when borrowing an idea and use proper citation to avoid any disputes over copyrights. With the ever increasing rise of Internet usage, the Web has become a means of communication and sharing ideas. Its popularity has continued to grow since its first emergence and today it is uncommon for a household to be without some sort of Internet service. It is used by people of all ages, children, adults, and seniors, for entertainment, and as a reference tool. The Internet supplies users with easy access to various kinds of information. With the wealth of information available on the web today, plagiarism becomes an even bigger problem. Let us have a view on available forms of plagiarism.

Forms of Plagiarism:
Types of plagiarism
1. Copy and Paste Plagiarism
Any time you lift a sentence or significant phrase intact from a source, you must use quotation marks and reference the source.

2. Word Switch Plagiarism
If you take a sentence from a source and change around a few words, it is still plagiarism. If you want to quote a sentence, then you need to put it in quotation marks and cite the author and article. But quoting Source articles should only be done if what the quote says is particularly useful in the point you are trying to make in what you are writing. In many cases, a quotation would not really be useful. The person who plagiarizes is sometimes just too lazy to synthesize the ideas expressed in the Source article.

3. Metaphor Plagiarism
Metaphors are used either to make an idea clearer or give the reader an analogy that touches the senses or emotions better than a plain description of the object or process. Metaphors, then, are an important part of an author’s creative style. If you cannot come up with your own metaphor to illustrate an important idea, then use the metaphor in the Source Article, but give the author credit for it.

4. Idea Plagiarism
If the author of the source article expresses a creative idea or suggests a solution to a problem, the idea or solution must be clearly attributed to the author. A WORD ABOUT “COMMON KNOWLEDGE” Students seem to have a hard time distinguishing author’s ideas and/or solutions from common knowledge, or public domain information. Common knowledge or public domain is any idea or solution which people in the field accept as general knowledge. For example, what a black hole is and how it is defined is general knowledge. You do not need to reference a general description of a black hole. The escape velocity of earth is also general knowledge and needs no reference. The distance to the center of the Galaxy is also general knowledge. However, a new idea about how to look for black holes or a new solution to a physics problem needs to be attributed to the authors. If you don’t know what is accepted as public domain in a particular field, ASK.

5. Reasoning Style/Organization Plagiarism
When you follow a Source Article sentence-by-sentence or paragraph-by-paragraph, it is plagiarism, even though none of your sentences are exactly like those in the Source article or even in the same order. What you are copying in this case is the author’s reasoning style.

Plagiarist can be differentiated on the basis of the degree to which the copying has been done. Following are some of the identified categories of plagiarism…
1. Patch – work Plagiarism:-
Copying different people’s words and work and presenting them as your own.

2. Global Plagiarism:-
Taking or copying a whole piece of a particular work of another person.

3. Incremental Plagiarism:-
It involves quoting or paraphrasing one’s statement without awarding credit to the originator. It has to do with quotation or paraphrase.

4. The Ghost Writer:-
Plagiarist turns in another’s work, word for word, as his or her own. This can be called verbatim copy of another person’s work.

5. The Photocopy:-
The plagiarist copies significant portions of texts straight from a single source, without doing any alteration.

6. The Potluck Paper:-
Where one tries to disguise plagiarism by copying from several different sources, altering a few sentences and paragraphs here and there to make them fit together while retaining most of the original phrasing.

7. The Self Plagiarism:-
Where the plagiarist borrows generously from his or her previous work. This is common phenomenon among the writers that they publish the same material through different mediums without referencing it correctly. Moreover self plagiarism or recycling of an old work in a new guise is also a theft since the author leads the book-buyer to think that there is a new book of his on the market. The author is misleading his/her readers. Self plagiarism is fraud if not outright theft.

It is axiomatic that in present scenario plagiarism has become very quite a common phenomenon. But there are cases where even though the author has never read on article or the piece, but commits plagiarism inadvertently. One may choose to write on the same topic as the other but the odds are that he may even convey the same ideas and express them similarly in his paper also. If this does happens it is highly unlikely that one will be accused of plagiarism. But one has to be definitely careful of accidental plagiarism where one could have read a piece and forgotten that he had actually read it somewhere. This is because if one’s ideas turn out to have been influenced by a source that you read but failed to cite for any reason, you could be guilty of plagiarism.

Why do people Plagiarize?
Present era is the era of science and technology where the intellectual of the person had marched a long way and attained a highest, and it is much disgraceful for the reverent writer of modern era that they become victim of plagiarism. Does it mean that our generation is so much unable to transmit and produce something of their own without looting the cherished intellectual property of others?

Firstly, the main reason behind plagiarism is to achieve and propping of one’s ego. There are number of writers, scholars, who even do not aware about what they have written in their prestigious article. It is pertinent to mention here that there are so many more researchers who are incapable of producing good work and they claim to have written themselves many articles and columns in their journals, magazines.

Secondly, laziness and fecklessness of writer, authors is next important factor of plagiarism. There are the few writers who have innate desire to innovate new ideas. Many of the writers believe in cut copy and paste.

Thirdly, Ignorance, Most of the writers are unaware that their simply copy paste will amount to commission of crime. They are committing it ignorantly.

After academic arena another area of concerned is journalism industry where plagiarism flourishes. Journalism main currency is public trust if a journalist indulges in plagiarism it undermines its very basis the trust. If a journalist is accused of plagiarism they are stripped off from their job and consequences have to be faced by news organization.

Famous cases of plagiarism:-
One of the famous cases of plagiarism that involves the well known historian and biographer of us Presidents Dwight Deisenhofer and Richard Nixon, Stephen Edward Ambrose.1 in 2002 Ambrose was found to have plagiarized several passages in his book, “The wild blue” Fred Barnes in “the weekly standard” reported that Ambrose had taken passages from “wings of morning”. The story of the last American bomber shot down over Germany in World War II by Thomas Childers (a history professor at the University of Pennsylvania) Ambrose and his publisher release an apology as a result.

Recently there was dispute between B.R films and Hollywood studio 20th century Fox. B.R films were accused of plagiarism by 20th century fox. However , the case has been settled out of court for an undisclosed amount .it has also been alleged that the Indian production house’s upcoming film “Banda yen bandanas hay” was a copy of Oscar winning “my cousin vinyl” but the matter did not go to the court of law. There are lots of cases of plagiarism all most in all spheres that are going on all around the world.

Plagiarism is intellectual property theft[3]:-
Bill gates in his article intellectual property theft mention plagiarism as intellectual property theft. With the multitude of possibilities of the Internet and the computer, the concept of safeguarding IP reaches far past text and essays. Today the computer is used to commit crimes of IP theft including those of images, music, sound, software, and many others. Theft of IP with the use of computers/the Internet can be broken into three main categories: 1. stealing with the web; 2. stealing within the web; 3. stealing from the web.

1. Stealing with the Web
As stated above the Internet makes available a wealth of resources to an extremely large population of people. With this wealth of information comes a wealth of opportunity to create illegal acts of theft of IP. Today many people have been able to use the web in order to gain access to material without payment to the originator. Sites such as Napster (recently shut down) and Kazaa allow people to access, download and “share” music, literature and images without payment to the artists responsible. Sites such as these utilize the “community” aspect of the web in order to connect users with each other in order to share such pieces of IP freely. Such sites use “shareware” in order to pass along IP unregulated. For more information on shareware please visit the site by the Association.

Recently such sites have come under fire from both artists and politicians for what they consider theft of IP even though many of these sites maintain that they cannot control the actions of the users of the sites and that the software/site has legal ramifications. Court actions and legal issues of Napster can be accessed at the “Find Law” web site.

Recently, Congress has switched their aim not only at the creators of these sites but the users as well. Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee has even suggested that the computers of users who continue to commit theft of copyright materials via web should be destroyed. (USA Today, 6/03)

In addition to theft of literature and music, the Internet has also been a hot spot for illegal downloads of copyrighted software again without payment. Some sites even make available to people free copies of copyrighted computer games, graphics software and movies. Websites such as Pirated Warez has lists of software and movies users can download with the touch of a button. Sites such as these deny the makers of such copyrighted material the payment owed to them as stated by law.

2. Stealing within the Web
Stealing within the web includes the publication of plagiarized material on the web from other web sites or other outside sources. Just as students can plagiarize material found on the web, so can the authors of websites plagiarize within the content of the site. Most common offenses of such nature are those sites that publish copyrighted text/literature either as their own or without proper consent or notification.

Sometimes parts of text are published, but in many cases the literature is published in its entirety without rights given to the author. Such is the case of the following site. A seemingly harmless site focusing on the book The Rainbow Fish by Marcus Pfister, none the less the author of the site has published the book in full length without making note of the original Author’s copyright or even name; it can be viewed at Fish2UK.

Another commonly seen act of stealing within the web is the theft of visual imagery. With the invention of clipart came the misconception that any image published on the web is considered public domain or fair use. Such is the case with the site listed below which openly states that images used within the site have been illegally copied. This is a common practice of beginner webpage designers. Unless specifically noted as public domain or fair use all images published on the web are copyrighted and therefore illegal to reproduce without consent.[4]

3. Stealing from the Web
This last category of IP theft is the one that is of utmost importance for educators and the one that will be focused upon throughout this paper. This new technology has lead to something called “cyber-plagiarism” which is the process by which students either copy ideas found on the web without giving proper attribution or the process of which students download research papers from the web, In whole or in part, and submit as their own. (University of Alberta, 2002)

In recent times plagiarism has been seen in high-profile charges of plagiarism against scholars such as Pulitzer Prize winner Doris Kearns Goodwin and Stephen Ambrose. Even with this rise into the scrutiny of plagiarism we cannot assume that plagiarism is on the rise; however, it may lead to certain assumptions. (Sanford, 2002) The use of the web to plagiarize IP within student work is more prevalent today than ever before. In the past teachers have always had to worry about students outright plagiarizing text and or paraphrasing with the intent to deceive, most often in essays or reports. Today students are not only able to copy down paragraphs or lines from the libraries numerous books, now students can simply download entire term papers with the click of a mouse.

Prevention of Plagiarism
In order to prevent plagiarism from occurring people must be cautious and careful when borrowing someone else’s ideas and make sure to use proper citation. For those who are intentionally guilty of plagiarism they are advised to take into account the seriousness of their actions and think about the possible consequences. To avoid plagiarism you should start documenting the sources as early as you start doing your researching your draft mark the ideas that are your own and those which are drawn from other sources. Underline; italicize someone else’s words in your notes. As you are paraphrasing, try not to peep into the primary source, write form memory. Then you will check and correct the possible inaccuracies. Start paraphrasing with acknowledging the author: According to…..,. If you want to keep a particular phrase, do not fail to use quotation marks with it. For preventing plagiarism the steps must be taken at two levels. First at student’s level, it is the duty and moral obligation of the student writing that he does not copy from other sources. For this the first step will be to consult the instructor for guidelines and clarifications about the topic. Next comes the planning of do this have to be taken at two levels. One is the student himself who is the paper which goes a long way towards preventing plagiarism. A proper outline helps in drawing a line between one’s own ideas and others’ ideas. Also helpful is then proper taking of notes which helps in prevention of any misquotations and wrong citations. The UNBC Learning Skills Centre has laid down a ten step guideline of preventing plagiarism by a student. Its basic highlights include, along with those given above that, the student should try writing a short version of his paper in thirty minutes to have his own ideas clear in his mind. When copying from any source, the author should clearly and simultaneously make a list of the bibliography. The major responsibility is that of the institutions for it is on them to lay down the policies and rules for the students and others. Talking of the institution’s role in preventing plagiarism, it is of great importance that the institution, which can either be a college, university or even a funding agency, needs to lay down the rules to be followed by all. These should include means of preventing plagiarism. Such rules should be explained in a clear manner to all the students’ writing papers, dissertations, etc. It is the responsibility of the institution to educate the students about plagiarism. The students should be taught the correct and accepted way of citing sources and benefits thereof. Next, and lastly, all institutions should lay down penalties for this crime which shall dissuade anybody from committing such acts.

Copyright Infringement vs. Plagiarism
While many people think that copyright infringement and plagiarism is more or less the same thing that is not the case. In a sense, there is some connection between plagiarism and copyright infringement in many situations, but the use of the two terms interchangeably is not correct. Here is some information on how the two are related, as well as how they differ.

Copyright infringement is the unauthorized use of the creation of another individual. Just about any type of created art form could be included in this category. Such items as articles, stories, books, songs, movie clips, and photographs are all examples of creative works that are copyrighted. Unauthorized use takes place when someone chooses to utilize these copyrighted creations without obtaining permission from the owner. In situations where authorization would involve providing compensation to the owner, the failure to do so would also fall under the heading of copyright infringement.

Plagiarism shares some elements with copyright infringement. Both situations can involve the unauthorized use of intellectual property. However, it is possible to plagiarize without infringing on a copyright. For example, if a student preparing a report chooses to use a quote from a source and does not properly cite the original source, he or she is essentially claiming the quote to be his or her own words. This amounts to stealing the words of another person. While the quote may be from a work in the public domain and is not subject to any claims of compensation, plagiarism has still taken place. Federal laws in many countries protect the interests of citizens who hold copyrights. When those copyrighted works are used without permission, the owner has legal recourse to collect damages as well as receive a share of any revenue generated from the unauthorized use. In some countries, it is possible for the punishment to include a prison sentence if copyright infringement is proven in a court of law.

By contrast, plagiarism is usually more a matter of ethics than of law. The failure to provide a proper citation for a direct quote will not necessarily carry any type of legal punishment. However, engaging in plagiarism often leads to censure by academic institutions and employers. For example, a writer who presents the work of another writer as his or her own and is caught in the act of plagiarism is likely to be dismissed from the workplace. Freelance writers, who plagiarize often find that word gets around and it becomes extremely difficult to secure assignments. While the chances of going to jail for plagiarism are somewhat limited, the negative impact can have repercussions that will last for years.

Conclusion & suggestions:-
Stealing is a crime although it is easy to identify when someone is stealing money or tangible items, stealing words, illustrations, tables, figures, thoughts or ideas can be harder to recognize. This type of stealing is called “Plagiarism”, and it is happening more frequently these days.

In above study the researcher tried to trace out most of the common types of plagiarism, which are popular among students, researchers, and writers. The some of the reasons of plagiarism are laziness, fecklessness, and ignorance. But there are the cases when plagiarism is committed inadvertently .one may choose to write on the same topic as the other odds are that he may even convey the same ideas and express them similarly in his paper also if this does happened it is highly unlikely that one will be accused of plagiarism.

In 1927 seems to be true as Chief justice of one country is forcibly removed from chair and apex Court of another has duly exercised its power on several occasions to declare the decisions of other two pillars of government as ultra vires, dictator of previous roared “Constitution is a 12 page book which can be torn anytime” whereas Supreme Court of latter sent a former dictator to imprisonment for suspending the constitution that is why the former is on 12th position in the “Failed States Index” of Foreign Policy Magazine whereas the latter is Emerging Superpower.

This is the tale of two countries namely India and Pakistan, both of them gained independence from slavery of centuries and with wounds of partition, communal hatred, riots and poverty but judiciary of latter thereby upholding the faith of people in the values of democracy declared the dissolution of even a provincial assembly as unconstitutional on the other hand the former had a history of every elected government being toppled by the dictators before completing its term.

The reason for all this is that one has the longest constitution of the world and the constitution of the other has been changed entirely twice since independence which is the reason that the latter is the largest democracy of world and the former had seen Marshal Law in 35 out of 60 years of independence i.e. majority of time as a nation it has been ruled by dictators.

Our constitution provides clear separation of powers of all the three wings of government namely legislature, executive and judiciary with all having separate domains and measures of checks and counter checks on each other. Our national leaders of freedom struggle realized that “No free government can survive that is not based on the supremacy of law” as in scripted on the Justice department building in Washington states so they felt the need of an impartial, sovereign and responsible institution to which the powers to administer justice and the function to uphold the supremacy of law could be delegated and which would be vigilant to other organs encroaching on citizens’ rights and subverting the Constitution.

This resulted in founding of The Supreme Court and a judiciary which is completely separated from legislature and executive in exercising its judicial functions and thereby deviating from the tradition of U.K. as our entire parliamentary system is taken from U.K. where the Supreme Court is the House Of Lords and is a part of legislature.

Comparing this setup with our setup, our Supreme Court is not a part of legislature so it can not only preside over dispute between the Union and State but can also review the executive as well as legislative action of arbitrariness and thereby can protect the voice of minority section of society rising against the atrocities committed on them by the government and thereby uphold the principles of natural justice that one can’t be a judge in its own cause.

To realize this goal of theirs the framers of the Constitution took infinite care to provide for an independent and impartial judiciary as the interpreter of the Constitution and the custodian of the rights of the citizens and Indian Constitution, which executes the said function through the process of judicial review over the acts of the legislature and the executive, which gives the mandate to the judiciary to interpret the laws but it should not be misunderstood as the Constitution does not contemplate a Super-organ nor confers an over-riding authority on any one organ.

No organ has any power to superintend over the exercise of powers and functions of another, unless the Constitution strictly so mandates. It is obvious that all organs of the State should act only according to the constitutional mandate and should not be astute to find any undisclosed source of power or authority to expand its own jurisdiction, which will give rise to avoidable conflicts and affect the harmonious functioning of the different organs of the State.

Judiciary: Savior of The Rights of Destitute and Commoner Supreme Above All
“The supreme court is the living voice of the constitution – that is of the will of people expressed in the fundamental laws they have enacted. It is the conscience of the people. it is guarantee of the minority who when threatened by the impatient vehemence of the majority, can appeal to this permanent law finding the interpreter and enforcer there of in a court set high above the assault of the factions.”

– As quoted by James Bryce, the then British ambassador to US in the American commonwealth in 1888 was understood to the deepest of its meaning by the framers of our Constitution as they assigned the judiciary in India to play a significant role of safeguarding the supremacy of the Constitution by interpreting and applying the provisions of the Constitution and acts as its guardian by keeping all authorities i.e. legislature, executive, administration, judicial and quasi judicial authorities within bounds of Constitutional framework and thereby maintaining the rule of law in the country and assures that the government runs according to law.

“Those who wrote our Constitution well knew the danger inherent in special legislative acts which take away the life, liberty or property of particular named person because the legislature thinks them guilty of conduct which deserves punishment. The authors of the Constitution intended to safeguard the people of this country from punishment without trial by duly constituted courts.”

– This was quoted by Felix Frankfurter, US Supreme Court Justice in US v. Lovett[2] in 1945 and to bring this reality they entitled the judiciary to scrutinize under Article 13 of the Constitution any governmental action in order to assess whether or not it conforms to the Constitution and the valid laws made there under.

It has power to protect people’s fundamental rights from any undue encroachment by any organ of the government. The Supreme Court acts as the guardian and protector of the fundamental rights of the people by invoking its power of writ jurisdiction conferred on it under Article 32 of the Constitution and thereby acts as sentinel on qui vive to protect the fundamental rights as was held by the Supreme Court in Pathumma v. State Of Kerla.

As in the words of Justice Untwalia in Union Of India v. Sankalchand Himatlal Sheth[4]: “Judiciary is a watching tower above all the big structure of the other limbs of the state from which it keeps a watch like a sentinel on the functions of the other limbs of the state as to whether they are working in accordance with the law and the Constitution where the Constitution being supreme.” [4]

It has also to dispense justice between the state and the citizens i.e. between seat of power and the commoner where the former is armed with all the privileges and power and support of majority of countrymen and the latter is bare hands belonging to the handful of people whose rights are infringed by the governmental action but with firm belief and faith in the principles of democracy in their heart and mind.

As it was quoted by Felix Frankfurter, US Supreme Court Justice in Earl Katcher & Warren: A Political Biography, 1967:

“The Supreme Court authority possessed neither of the purse nor the sword but ultimately rest on sustained public confidence in its moral sanctions. Such a feeling must be nourished by the court’s complete detachment, infact and appearance, from political entanglements and by abstention from injecting itself into the clash of political forces and political settlements.”

So in order to realize this and to enable judiciary to discharge their functions impartially without fear or favor, our forefathers armed the constitution with certain provisions not only to safeguard judicial independence but also to ensure the judicial accountability from lower to topmost tier. The judges of these courts are appointed by the central executive in accordance with the advice of chief justice himself and this mechanism for maintaining this independence was ensured after the landmark judgment in Supreme Court Advocate’s On Record v. Union Of India[5] case. Once appointed, the judges hold office till they reach the age of superannuation as fixed by the Constitution under Article 124(2) because of which their tenure is independent of the will of the executive and further there is a special and complex procedure that has been laid down in Article 124(4) of the Constitution for removing the judges on the grounds of incapacity or misbehavior which ensures that their power is checked and they do not function in an arbitrary manner.[5]

There is one more significant role that the judiciary has to play in a federation i.e. to act as the balance wheel of federalism by deciding the controversies between the constituent states inter se, as well as between the centre and state as this power is conferred to judiciary under Article 131 of the Constitution under the heading of original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

Further adding weapons to its armoury the framers of our Constitution has provided the Supreme Court with jurisdiction to punish contempt of its authority under Article 129 of the Constitution. Such a power is very necessary to prevent interference with the course of justice and in maintaining the authority of law as administered in the court and to ensure the confidence of people in the integrity of the judges as the same was observed by the court in Om Prakash Jaiswal v. D.K. Mittal[6] that: “Any act or omission which undermines the dignity of the court is therefore viewed with concern by the society and the court treats it as an obligation to zealously guard against any onslaught on its dignity.”[6]

It is not so that only an individual can be held liable for contempt of court but executive branch of government also bears a grave responsibility for upholding and obeying judicial orders as the same was ruled by the apex court in Md. Aslam v. Union Of India[7] and Vineet Kumar Mathur v. Union Of India[8] to name few but this responsibility is many times is not fulfilled in many cases and in many cases government officials are found guilty by the Supreme Court of contempt the most famous of which is Indira Sawhney v. Union Of India[9] where the Chief Secretary of Kerela was guilty of contempt of court. [9][8][7]

In this regard parliament has the power to enact laws but such laws are limited only to prescribe the procedure to be followed and the maximum duration of the punishment and can make provisions for appeal but parliament has no legislative competence to abridge or extinguish the jurisdiction or power conferred on this court by the Constitution. The two rulings namely Delhi Judicial Services Association, Tis Hazari Court v. State of Gujrat[10] and Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union Of India[11] in this respect are significant where in the former the Supreme Court held that parliament’s power to legislate in relation to law of contempt is limited and in the latter Supreme Court ruled that the Constitutional vested right under Article 129 can’t be either abrogated, abridged or cut down by any legislation such as Contempt of Court Act or C.P.C. [11][10]

The above mentioned provisions of the Constitution is the place from where judiciary attributes its supremacy over the other 2 pillars of Indian democracy namely the legislature and executive and any act done by judiciary for upholding the principles of democracy can’t be labeled as encroachment of judiciary over the domain of legislature and executive as many times in recent past top notch of legislature and executive had given statement in open against judiciary of not to cross its limits which clearly attracts contempt of court proceeding against themselves.

Talking about the recent major face off between the judiciary on one side and legislature and executive on the other side are on the issues of directions of Supreme Court to conduct floor test in Jharkhand Assembly, summons to Lok Sabha Speaker in expulsions of M.P.’s case and considering the constitutionality of dissolution of Bihar Assembly.

Regarding the direction of Supreme Court to conduct floor test in Jharkhand Assembly, it is no where in violation of Article 212 of Constitution because although the courts can’t interfere with the working of a house on grounds of irregularity of procedure but they may scrutinize the proceeding of house on grounds of illegality or unconstitutionality. The same was the case here as the courts didn’t interfered in the procedure of floor test but it only directed to conduct a floor test because formation of JMM government was unconstitutional as it was in minority and was formed without the floor test. Similar verdict of Supreme Court was there to conduct floor test in case of Jagdambika Pal v. State of U.P.[12]. It is all wrong to say that Constitution prohibits judiciary to look into matters of violation of Constitution when it is concerned with legislative act instead it is vice versa as in Keshav Singh v. Speaker, Legislative Assembly[13] the court had interpreted the Constitution as: “Article 212(1) seems to make it possible for a citizen to call in question in the appropriate court of law, the validity of any proceeding inside the legislative chamber, if his case is that the said proceeding suffer not from mere irregularity of procedure, but from an illegality. If the impugned procedure is illegal and unconstitutional, it would be open to be scrutinized in a court of law.” [13][12]

Coming to the topic of summon to Speaker of Lok Sabha and his subsequent remarks on that clearly invites contempt of court proceedings against him as he had laminated the Supreme Court to be overstepping its limits which was not the case of overstepping of limits, but is a jurisdiction conferred to it by Constitution as laid down in: Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking v. Basanti Devi[14] where it was ruled that under Article 142(1) that Supreme Court in exercise of its jurisdiction is entitled to pass any decree, or make any order, as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause of matter pending before it and it was under same provision it was deemed fit by Supreme Court to summon the Speaker and ask him that under which provision of law the legislature has power to expel its members elected by people when it doesn’t have power to appoint them as representative of people. [14]

It must also be brought in light that it was not only under Article 142(1) but it was also under an express provision of Constitution for this purpose i.e. under Article 142(2) of Constitution Supreme Court have all and every power to make any order for securing attendance of any person and Speaker should be reminded of Article 361 of Constitution which protect only President and Governor from being answerable to any court in course of exercise and performance of powers and duties of his office or for any act done and the post of Speaker Of Lok Sabha is not in the ambit of this provision of not being answerable to any court of law and it should also be reminded to him that his denial to summons of court is in ambit of guidelines laid down by apex court in Hira Lal Dixit v. State of U.P.[15] in which it was held that any willful disobedience or non compliance of court order is considered as contempt of court as his act hampers administration of justice and erodes faith of people from the temple of justice and brings administration of justice into deep disrespect.[15]

Lastly dissolution of Bihar Assembly which was dissolved on the recommendation of Governor of Bihar and on advice of Union cabinet of ministers by The President was held unconstitutional is also not violation of Article 361 of Constitution as the court hadn’t seek any answer either from The President and The Governor of Bihar but from this it shouldn’t be construed from this provision that this prohibits the court to initiate any proceedings against the Government Of India as the same Article 361 further states that nothing in this clause shall be implied as restricting right of any person to bring appropriate proceeding against Government Of India. Further in this matter it should be taken that in the cases of Rao Birinder Singh v. Union Of India[16] and Madhav Rao Scindia v. Union Of India[17] and other such cases court held that appropriate proceeding can be brought against Government Of India and only President personally is not amenable to a court process with reference to act in question yet when question arises that whether in a given situation the President has acted rightly or wrongly it may be decided only against Government Of India without questioning president’s conduct.[17][16]

Conclusion
Finally it should be kept in mind that such Constitutional blunder as that of dissolution of Bihar Assembly case should be avoided in which the President’s office was indirectly brought under criticism by bringing an amendment in Article 74(1) of Constitution and thereby amending it as there shall be Supreme Court with Chief Justice at its head to aid and advice President who shall, in exercise of his functions, act in accordance with such advice so by this all his acts will be in ambit and accordance with laws of country where Constitution being supreme and there will be no any such Constitutional blunder as that of indirect criticism of President’s office.

Further the cases like that of P.N. Duda v. P. Shivshanknkear[18] should be dealt with an iron hand and no one should be allowed to walk away freely in any way or other despite criticism of courts only on the grounds that he or she belongs to power corridors of country as we don’t further want constitutional blunder as that of Justice Beg and Justice A.N. Ray nor brain drain from judiciary as that of protest resignation in the form of Justice Khanna.[18]

In a much awaited observation on live-in relationships, the Supreme Court opined that a man and a woman living together without marriage cannot be construed as an offence. “When two people want to live together, what is the offence? Does it amount to an offence?” a special three-Judge Bench constituting the Chief Justice of India, K.G. Balakrishnan and Justices Deepak Verma and B.S. Chauhan observed. The Supreme Court said that there was no law prohibiting live-in relationships or pre-marital sex. “Living together is a right to live” the Supreme Court said, apparently referring to Article 21 of the Constitution of India which guarantees right to life and personal liberty as a fundamental right. The Supreme Court made the observation while reserving its judgment on a Special Leave Petition filed by a noted South Indian actress, Khushboo seeking to quash 22 criminal cases filed against her after she allegedly endorsed pre-marital sex in interviews to various magazines in 2005[1].

Meaning
Live-in relation i.e. cohabitation is an arrangement whereby two people decide to live together on a long-term or permanent basis in an emotionally and/or sexually intimate relationship. The term is most frequently applied to couples who are not married.

Today, cohabitation is a common pattern among people in the Western world. People may live together for a number of reasons. These may include wanting to test the compatibility or to establish financial security before marrying. It may also be because they are unable to legally marry, for instance, if they are of the same sex, some interracial or inter-religious marriages are not legal or permitted. Other reasons include living with someone before marriage in an effort to avoid divorce, a way for polygamists or polyamorists to avoid breaking the law, a way to avoid the higher income taxes paid by some two-income married couples (in the United States), negative effects on pension payments (among older people), philosophical opposition to the institution of marriage and seeing little difference between the commitment to live together and the commitment to marriage. Some individuals may also choose cohabitation because they see their relationships as being private and personal matters, and not to be controlled by political, religious or patriarchal institutions.

Position Of Live-In Relationships Abroad
With the Supreme Court declaring that the right to live together is a part of the right to life, it is necessary to look at the legal rights and obligations for live-in couples around the world. While heterosexual couples who are in a live-in relationship are called “cohabitant”, same sex couples are legally defined as “civil partners”. But the law on cohabitation rights is largely evolving and many participants are still unaware of their rights and duties to each other.
• Scotland
Family Law (Scotland) Act, 2006, for the first time identified, and in the process by default, legalized live-in relationships of over 150000 cohabiting couples in the country. Section 25(2) of the Act states that a court of law can consider a person as a cohabitants of another by checking on three factors; the length of the period during which they lived together, the nature of the relationship during that period and the nature and extent of any financial arrangements.

• France
Live-in relationships in France are governed by the Civil Solidarity Pact of ‘pacte civil de solidarite’ or PaCS, passed by the French National Assembly in October 1999. Cohabitation is defined as a “de facto stable and continuous relationship” between two persons of different sexes or of the same sex living together as couple. The pact defines the relationship as a contract, and the couples involved as “contractants”. The contract binds “two adults of different sexes or of the same sex, in order to organize their common life.” For a valid contract to exist, the contractants “may not be bound” by another pact, “by marriage, sibling or lineage.”

• United Kingdom
Live-in relationships in the United Kingdom are largely covered by the Civil Partnership Act, 2004. Though a man and woman living together in a stable sexual relationship are often referred to as “common law spouses”, the expression is not wholly correct in law in England and Wales. The Government feels that live-in partners owe each other more than that to be worthy of the term. As per a 2010 note from the Home Affairs Section to the House of Commons, unmarried couples have no guaranteed rights to ownership of each other’s property on breakdown of relationship. If a cohabiting couple separates, the Courts have no power to override the strict legal ownership of property and divide it as they may do on divorce. Unmarried partners have no automatic inheritance over their partner’s assets on death. Cohabiting couples are treated as unconnected individuals for taxation purposes.

• Canada
Living together in Canada is legally recognised as “common law marriage”. In many cases common law couples have the same rights as married couples under the federal law of the country. A common law relationship gets legal sanctity if the couple has been living in a conjugal relationship for atleast 12 continuous months, or the couple are parents of a child by birth or adoption, or one of the persons has custody and control of the child and the child is wholly dependent on that person for support.

• Ireland
Though living together is legally recognised in Ireland, news reports says the public is up in arms against a new legislation to introduce legal rights for “separated” live-in couples to demand maintenance or share their property with their dependent partners. The scheme will apply to both opposite sexs and same sex unmarried couples who have been living together for three years, or two years in the case of a cohabiting couple with children. The Government, with this legislation, intends to provide legal and financial protection for the vulnerable and financially dependent cohabitants in the event of death or the break up of a relationship.

• Australia
The Family Law Act of Australia states that a “de facto relationship” can exist between two people of different or of the same sex and that a person can be in a de-facto relationship even if legally married to another person or in a defacto relationship with someone else.

• United States
Cohabitation was illegal in the United States prior in 1970, but went on to gain status as a common law, subject to certain requirements. The American legal history was then a witness to several consensual sex legislations, which paved the way for living together contracts and their cousins, the “prenuptial agreements”. The country later institutionalized cohabitation by giving cohabiters essentially the same rights and obligations as married couples, a situation similar to Sweden and Denmark. Those living together are not recognized as legal parents.

Position Of Live-In Relationships In India
In India, cohabitation had been a taboo since British rule. However, this is no longer true in big cities, but is still often found in rural areas with more conservative values. Female live-in partners have economic rights under Protections of Women and Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

The Maharashtra Government in October 2008 approved a proposal suggesting that a woman involved in a live-in relationship for a ‘reasonable period’, should get the status of a wife. Whether a period is a ‘reasonable period’ or not is determined by the facts and circumstances of each case.

The National Commission for Women recommended to the Ministry of Women and Child Development in 30th June, 2008 that the definition of ‘wife’ as described in section 125 of Cr.P.C., must include women involved in a live-in relationship. The aim of the recommendation was to harmonise the provisions of law dealing with protection of women from domestic violence and also to put a live-in couple’s relationship at par with that of a legally married couple. There was a Committee set up by the Supreme Court for this purpose, called the Justice Malimath Committee, which observed that “if a man and a woman are living together as husband and wife for a reasonable long period, the man shall be deemed to have married the woman.”

The Malimath Committee had also suggested that the word ‘wife’ under Cr.P.C. be amended to include a ‘woman living with the man like his wife’ so that even a woman having a live-in relationship with a man would also be entitled to alimony. On 16.09.2009, the Supreme Court in a case[2] observed that it is not necessary for a woman to strictly establish the marriage, to claim maintenance under section 125 of Cr.P.C.. A woman in a live-in relationship may also claim maintenance under section 125 Cr.P.C..

In a case[3] the Allahabad High Court ruled out that “a lady of about 21 years of age being a major, has the right to live with a man even without getting married, if both so wish”. The Supreme Court observed that a man and woman, if involved in a live-in relationship for a long period, they will be treated as a married couple and their child would be considered as legitimate.

Pros And Cons Of Live-In Relationships
The Supreme Court’s controversial observation okaying live-in relationships and pre-marital sex has generated fierce debate across the country. The historic observation has made to upset many orthodox groups fearing that it would destroy the sanctity of marriage. A fragment of the society including noted social activists and prominent dignitaries have stepped ahead and shared their precious views on this.

“We hope the Government shall take proper steps to safeguard Indian women’s rights and dignity and save the society from chaos”, said Maa Ghara Foundation Trustee, Rutuparna Mohanty. “It will start unraveling the fabric of Indian family life”, she said. She also viewed that it would give rise to child pregnancy and has far reaching ramifications, adding despite its aim to restrict multiple partners; it would have an adverse impact on the youths and result in the spread of HIV/AIDS. “Children born out of living together relationships would not be properly brought up,” Mohanty rued.

Social scientists have already identified grave social problems like young age pregnancy of adolescent girls, drug abuse, violence and juvenile delinquencies and in the wake of the controversial ruling, the erstwhile objectionable social behavior gets legalized, many felt. This way, the new generation will be more spoilt. They will prefer live-in relationships to marriages arranged by their parents. There is no guarantee that the male in such relationship will turn out to be a loyal partner in the long run or would not leave the woman with their issues and run away without prior notice.

BJP spokesperson Shaina, expressed that, according to the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, there is no provision for a second wife among Hindus. Hence, enabling the mistress to get the status of a legally married wife in all matters, including share in property, inheritance, and maintenance is contrary to the Act as well as Hindu customs.”

When the Maharastra Government approved a proposal suggesting that a woman involved in a live-in relationship for a ‘reasonable period’, should get the status of a wife, Shaina said that the Government on one hand has banned dance bars because they are spoiling the social atmosphere, while on the other it is promoting illicit relationships through such amendments. Senior BJP leader Jaywantiben Mehta also opposed the amendment. “It will have adverse effect on our values. The amendment will prove to be a loss for the women instead of gain,” she said.

On the other hand, the section advocating freedom of choosing live-in relationship has hailed it as a pragmatic move. The recent observations, as they see, should be welcomed because it lays down emphasis on individual freedom. It opens frontiers to understand the personality traits of their partner well. Since there are no legal complications in a live-in relationship, walking out of such a relationship would be much easier than walking out of a marriage. Metro life that throws floodgates of challenges also supports this kind of an arrangement. The individuals should be free to live as they think best, subject only to the limitation that their actions and choices should not cause harm to others. It is a very radical attitude. Some people are of the view that women should be given the liberty to choose their life partners and should not be forced into marriages if they are not ready.

As expected, women from various walks of life have welcomed progressive moves on live-in relationships. Jaishree Misra, a New Delhi based author says, “India has changed. If people think youngsters are losing their values, then I would say they are becoming more pragmatic. In today’s times, it is better for them to know what they are getting into”.

This is not the first time live-in relationship is in the ambit of debates and discussions. There has been a long-standing controversy whether a relationship between a man and a woman living together without marriage can be recognized by law. With changing social hypothesis entering the society, in most places, it is legal for unmarried people to live together. Now even in a country like India bounded by innumerable cultural ethics and rites, the law finds legally nothing wrong in live-in relationships.

This, however, cannot be construed that law promotes such relationships. Law traditionally has been biased in favour of marriage. It reserves many rights and privileges to married persons to preserve and encourage the institution of marriage. Such stands, in particular cases of live-in relationship, it appears that, by and large, is based on the assumption that they are not between equals and therefore women must be protected by the courts from the patriarchal power that defines marriage, which covers these relationships too.

Legitimacy Of The Child Born Out Of A Live-In Relationship
The Supreme Court on an earlier occasion, while deciding a case involving the legitimacy of a child born out of wedlock has ruled that if a man and a woman are involved in a live-in relationship for a long period, they will be treated as a married couple and their child would be legitimate. Also, the recent changes introduced in law through the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 gives protection to women involved in such relationships for a ‘reasonable long period’ and promises them the status of wives. A Supreme Court Bench headed by Justice Arijit Pasayat declared that children born out of such a relationship will no more be called illegitimate. “Law inclines in the interest of legitimacy and thumbs down ‘whoreson’ or ‘fruit of adultery’.”

Inheritance Rights
The Supreme Court held that a child born out of a live-in relationship is not entitled to claim inheritance in Hindu ancestral coparcenary property (in the case of an undivided joint Hindu family) and can only claim a share in the parents’ self-acquired property. The Bench set aside a Madras High Court judgment, which held that children born out of live-in relationships were entitled to a share in ancestral property as there was a presumption of marriage in view of the long relationship.

Reiterating an earlier ruling, a Vacation Bench of Justices B.S. Chauhan and Swatanter Kumar said, “In view of the legal fiction contained in Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (legitimacy of children of void and voidable marriages), the illegitimate children, for all practical purposes, including succession to the properties of their parents, have to be treated as legitimate. They cannot, however, succeed to the properties of any other relation on the basis of this rule, which in its operation, is limited to the properties of the parents.”

A child can only make a claim on the person’s self acquired property, in case the child is illegitimate. It can also be interpreted in a way in which a child could lay a claim on the share of a parents’ ancestral property as they can ask for that parents’ share in such property, as Section 16 permits a share in the parents’ property. Hence, it could be argued that the person is not only entitled to self acquired property but also a share in the ancestral property.

The Apex Court also stated that while the marriage exists, a spouse cannot claim the live-in relationship with some other person and seek inheritance for the children from the property of that other person. The relationship with some other person, while the husband is living is not ‘live-in relationship’ but ‘adultery’.[4] It is further clarified that ‘live in relationship’ is permissible in unmarried heterosexuals (in case, one of the said persons is married, the man may be guilty of adultery and it would amount to an offence under Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code).

Conclusion And Suggestions
Live-in relationships are now very popular in India. The law does not prescribe how we should live; it is ethics and social norms which explain the essence of living in welfare model. The Court itself notices that what law sees as no crime may still be immoral. It has said in a judgement of 2006, notices by the Court now, that two consenting adults engaging in sex is not an offence in law “even though it may be perceived as immoral.”[5] Of course, such protective sanctions may potentially lead to complications that could otherwise be avoided. But simply raising the hammer may not be the best route to taming the bold and the brave. Awareness has to be created in these young minds not just from the point of the emotional and societal pressures that such a relationship may create, but also the fact that it could give rise to various legal hassles on issues like division of property, violence, cases of desertion by death of a partner and handling of custody and other issues when it comes to children resulting from such relationships.

While the Supreme Court’s opinion might not have the undesirable effect on more and more couples preferring live-in relationships rather that opting to wed, it could certainly embolden more young men and women as they would now be convinced that there is no breach of law in the live-in relationship. One can only weigh the pros and cons and take into account the impact of their decision on their family and most importantly on themselves.

Human rights violation have become very common now-a-days. The Newspapers and T.V. tell us that every day and at every moment, somewhat in the world, Human Rights are being violated. Broadly speaking “Human Right” means the right to life, liberty, equality, and the dignity of an individual irrespective of caste, creed or sex. These human rights are natural rights, required to be protected for peaceful existence of a provisions, the violation of these rights is very frequently taking place. The protection and preservation of Human Rights is a great challenge to every country in the world. Cases of violence, murder, torture, rape, child abuse, death due to starvation, death due to dowry, sexual harassment, custodial death have become rampant in the society.

The Human Rights of the people have been protected by “The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993”. It has been amended by Protection of Human Rights (Amendment Act, 2006. The Act is passed for the constitution of a National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), State Human Rights Commission in States and Human Rights Courts for the better protection of human rights and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has been able to touch the tip of iceberg of the problem of Human Rights violation. But NHRC can’t be blamed, when the entire society is culpable in respect of Human Rights violations in one way when the entire society is culpable in respect of Human Rights violations in one way or the other. It is not possible NHRC to keep vigil on every human being in the country.

The Former Chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission, Dr. Justice A.S. Anand has emphasized that it is the obligation of the State to ensure everyone the right to adequate food, education and enjoyment of highest attainable standards of physical and mental health. These rights have to be respected and made available to the citizens by the State, said Justice Anand while inaugurating the two-day Capacity Building Workshop on “Economic, Social and Cultural Rights” jointly organized by the National Human Rights Commission and the Indian Institute of Public Administration.

“India being a signatory to Universal Declaration of Human Rights, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and other international instruments, is legally as well as morally committed to ensure basic human rights to all its citizens and enact laws accordingly”.
With every passing year, conviction has grown in the Commission that for right to live with human dignity, it is essential to focus in equal measures on economic, social and cultural rights and civil and political rights. The indivisibility and interrelated nature of these rights is a reality and there is a symbiosis between them. Those in the field must, therefore, ensure that the concern and anxiety, which they show for political and social rights, are also manifested in economic, social and cultural rights as we he said.

The abject poverty prevailed in the country, denies basic Human Rights to millions of poor in our country. Poverty is the major cause of various Human Rights violation. Child labor, Bonded labor and Illiteracy are various vulnerable points of Human Rights violation. The Human Rights of women are violated from birth to death. Even the female’s right to born is taken away by Sex determination tests, with termination of female fetus. Female infanticide is common in many parts of the country even as on date. Sexual abuse of female children, dowry deaths, flourishing flesh trade, rape case, pitiable conditions of windows living in Vrindawan and Varanasi are some flagrant examples of violations of the fair sex. Ours is male dominated society, where women are being treated as their subordinates. Most of the women in real terms, do not enjoy any rights at all, they are just living first as per wish of their parents and after marriage as per whims of their husband and in the old age, as per convenience of their sons and daughters in-law.

The NHRC has tried to check the human rights violations in wide range of spheres. The Commission has asked the States and Union Territories in April 2000, to compulsorily video film the post-mortem examination in all cases of custodial deaths. The Commission has asked the State governments to sensitize the police and jail officials. The NHRC also taken up the cases of victimized women in all perspective. It has also recommended that the maintenance allowance for divorced women be increased from Rs. 500 to Rs. 5000 per month. Cases of violation of children’s right, like trafficking in children, imprisonment of juveniles, child marriage, have also taken up by the NHRC. NHRC also taken up cases of rape, death and detention without trials, vehemently.

The Founding Fathers of the Indian Constitution had a vision of the Indian society, which they wanted to realize through the Constitution. That vision was primarily reflected in the Preamble, the chapters on Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy is the product of human rights movement in the country. It is the duty of the State to guarantee what is said in the Constitution. But the shocking evidence that the State is itself the culprit, according to Mr. J.S. Verma, the former chairman of the NHRC. According to a statement made by him on Jan. 15, 2003, just a few days before his dim the office: “It is often the State which is violator of Human Rights in maximum cases in the country. But the maximum responsibility to protect and safeguard the rights of its citizens also lies with the State”.

The former Chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission, Dr. Justice A.S. Anand stressed the need for making human rights the focal point of good governance. He called for greater role for National Human Rights Commission in the work of United Nations, its treaty bodies and specialized agencies, stressing the need to further develop cooperation between them. He made these observations while delivering a Statement to the 60th Session of the Commission on Human Rights at Geneva on 14th April 2004.

He emphasized the protection of human rights not only requires vigilance by various agencies but sustained cooperation at regional and international levels.
No commission or no Police station can police every nook and corner of the country. No NGO, no any other agency can be present everywhere to protect the Human Rights. It is the we people; it is the duty of every civilized person to rise to the occasion. This can be brought about only through general awakening which make everyone understand the eternal values of life and dignity of an individual irrespective of caste, creed or sex. In the words of Swami Vivekananda that the “Self in you is the Self everywhere.”

Adultery is defined as a voluntary sexual intercourse by a married person with a partner other than his/her spouse. The legal definition of adultery varies in different jurisdictions and statutes. Adultery in India is a criminal offence and hence there are provisions related to adultery Indian Penal Code, 1860. Section 497 defines adultery as:

“Whoever has sexual intercourse with a person who is and whom he knows, or has reason to believe to be the wife of another man, without the consent or connivance of that man, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, is guilty of the offence of adultery, and shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both. In such case the wife shall not be punishable as an abettor.”

For instance, if Naina is married to Samar, and Naina has an affair with Kuljeet, then Samar can bring charges against Kuljeet, but Naina will not be charged under this offence.

It is important to lay down an establishment, that from the very onset, this law does not seek to preserve the sanctity of marriage- but it pursue to secure the structure of the institution. In case of V. Revathi v. Union of India, it was held that the man was seducer, not woman. Basically it was said that, Section 497 does not provide any right to the wife to prosecute the husband who has committed adultery with another woman. the above mentioned law is striking in its pursuit to incarcerate only the ‘outsiders’ in the marriage and the community also believes to punish the outsider who breaks into a matrimonial home and violates the sacredness of marriage.
In India, Section 497 of IPC a history of 150-year colonial period and, since from its commencement, it has been spinning into debatable and questionable controversies on several accounts, such as its gender bias approach, questioning equality clause, reflecting cultural conflicts, and strong arguments were raised either for its retention, alteration, or complete modification and deletion from penal statutes.
The object, philosophy and justification of legal regulation of the adulterous behavior of a person in society has been examined appropriately on time scale so as to estimate whether its modification, retention, or deletion is imperative in the contemporary context or otherwise.

History
Incidents related to husbands having illicit affairs with other women and wives cheating behind their husband were not unknown in ancient India. Hinduism never favored Adultery, it was established as a mortal sin. According to Hindus, marriage is a pious and sacred relationship and the sanctity of marriage should be upheld all the times. Infringing the sacred commitment of marriage would lead to ruthless sin and a bad karma.

Hindu law are very strict against adultery, for both moral and social reasons. The ancient Hindu law also categorized the relationships which involved married women from those who are unmarried and the former attracted harsher punishment. There were also different acts for treating adultery, involving different caste of women. Ancient Hindu Society was not free from the obstacle of Adultery. Hindu Mythology illustrated many stories in which god themselves were indulge in adulterous thoughts and action. For instance how Lord Rama banished his wife into forest due to mere allegation of adultery. Manuscript has laid down chapters on the act of adultery. The book explains why adultery occurs, how to secure it and the ruthless punishment for the ones who are caught in such relationships. Centuries ago, this sin was punishable by death, either by public stoning, hanging, or even worse.

When the Indian Penal Code, was drafted Lord Macaulay didn’t approve adultery/ infidelity as a provision in IPC, but in the second report the presidents disfavored Macaulian’s perceptions about adultery and imposed heavy reliance upon his marks and concluded that committing adultery was a heinous crime and the offender will be liable for punishment. Hence, section 497 was instituted in Indian Penal Code.

Immediately after the institution in the Constitution of India, Section 497 Indian Penal Code was impugned on the ground that it usually goes against the spirit of equality inculcated in the Constitution. One of the most controversial cases was in 1951, when Mr Yusuf AbdulAziz, who was charged for adultery, grappled before the Bombay High Court that Section 497 of IPC is unconstitutional as it, in infringement of Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution, as it operates unequally between a man and a woman by making the former only responsible for adultery. Therefore, he argued, its discrimination in favor of women and against men exclusively on the ground of sex.

In most of the foreign jurisdictions, adultery, exclusively from being a ground for divorce, it has been realize as a criminal wrong against marriage. Coincidentally, in these jurisdictions, both spouses are generally adhered criminally responsible for their extramarital sexual intimacy.

However, the law of adultery in India is commenced on the one and a half century ancient caste- based “social norms” in the reference of the traditional conservative property-oriented familial ideology. It is also pre conceived on a few obsolete and moot assumptions of sexuality, sexual agency and unequal marital rights.