Indian Journal for Research in Law and Management
Advancing Law and Management
ISSN No. : 2583-9896
ISSN No. : 2583-9896
Master Archive
Explore our comprehensive collection of research articles
Abstract
When a crime occurs, precious time is often wasted in territorial disputes between police stations. The Zero FIR mechanism solves this delay by allowing a victim to register an FIR at any police station, regardless of where the incident happened. Now explicitly codified under Section 173 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), it […]
Abstract
The rapid entry of AI into daily operations from automated surveillance logs and predictive software to synthetic media and deepfakes is forcing Indian courts to rethink how truth is proven in a courtroom. While digital records are generally admitted under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, through procedural certification, AI outputs present a […]
Abstract
In May 2026, the Supreme Court of India transformed road safety jurisprudence in SaveLife Foundation v. Union of India, ruling that the Right to Emergency Trauma Care is a non-negotiable fundamental right under Article 21 (Right to Life). Moving beyond early protections for Good Samaritans, the Bench elevated post-crash response into a constitutional obligation of […]
Abstract
India does not have any law to pay the victims who have suffered wrongful accusation, arrest or imprisonment. Due to this absence of law, Supreme Court had been creating its own jurisprudence to provide compensatory relief since the “Rudul Sah v. State of Bihar (1983)” case by viewing compensation as a public law relief. However, […]
Abstract
N/A
Abstract
N/A
Abstract
N/A
Abstract
N/A
Abstract
With the Supreme Court concluding the final hearings in May 2026, as the country awaits the final judgement in one of the most contested legal disputes in contemporary history, it makes this the right moment to revisit an overlooked procedural episode from this case’s history. The Indian Union Muslim League v. Union of India started […]
Abstract
This paper asks whether Article 36 of Additional Protocol I functions as a genuine accountability safeguard for weapons review, or merely produces its appearance. Using doctrinal reconstruction of Article 36’s architecture (via the ICRC’s Guide and Commentary) combined with an interdisciplinary framework borrowed from Dan Davies’ concept of the “accountability sink,” the paper maps three […]