Category: Defence and Security

Context:

• Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) and Safran Electronics and Defence (SED) signed an agreement for the production of HAMMER weapon system in India.

About HAMMER Weapon System:

• Nomenclature: HAMMER stands for Highly Agile and Manoeuvrable Munition Extended Range. It is also known as a glide bomb.
• Nature: It is an air-to-ground precision-guided weapon system and can be fitted to standard bombs of 250kg, 500kg, and 1,000kg weights.
• Development: Originally developed by Safran Electronics and Defence (SED), France, it is now set for joint manufacturing with Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) in India.
• Range: HAMMER precision-guided munitions have a range of up to 70 km. It 
• Difficult to intercept: It is resistant to jamming, and capable of being launched from low altitudes over rough terrain. It is difficult to intercept and can penetrate fortified structures.
• Manoeuvrability: It is optimised for mountain warfare (e.g., Ladakh), allowing precision strikes even in complex topography and high-altitude environments.
• Uniqueness: It is a precision-guided weapon system known for its high accuracy and modular design, making it adaptable for multiple platforms, including the Rafale and Light Combat Aircraft Tejas.
• Significance of agreement: The development is crucial because India previously ordered this weapon system, along with other armaments, from France to equip its Rafale fighter jets in 2020 during standoff with China in eastern Ladakh.

Source:

• • • The Indian Express

Category: International Institutions

Context:

• Recently, the 10th Session of the Asian and Pacific Centre for Development of Disaster Information Management (APDIM) took place at Vigyan Bhawan in New Delhi.

About APDIM:

• Nomenclature: APDIM stands for Asian and Pacific Centre for Development of Disaster Information Management.
• Nature: It is a regional institution of the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP). 
• Vision: Its vision is to ensure effective disaster risk information is produced and used for sustainable development in Asia and the Pacific. 
• Mandate: It aims to reduce human and material losses due to natural hazards and contribute to the effective design, investment and implementation of disaster risk reduction and resilience policies.
• Administration: It is governed by a Governing Council consisting of eight ESCAP member countries elected for a period of three years (India is one of the members for a period from 2022 to 2025).
• Headquarter: Its headquarters is located in Tehran, Iran.
• Functions: It functions as a regional facility to strengthen the science-policy interface. It also promotes effective regional cooperation, facilitates dialogue.
• Facilitates disaster management between countries: It facilitates the exchange of expertise, experiences, and knowledge in disaster information management between and within the countries of the region.
• Acts as a knowledge hub: It acts as a regional knowledge hub, consolidating and sharing disaster-related data, strengthening information systems, and supporting cooperation on transboundary hazards.

Source:

• • PIB

Category: Geography

Context:

• The Hayli Gubbi volcano, located in Ethiopia’s Afar region for several hours after 12,000-year dormancy.

About Hayli Gubbi Volcano:

• Location: Hayli Gubbi volcano is located in Afar, northeastern Ethiopia, within the Danakil Depression – one of the hottest and lowest places on Earth.
• Hotspot for seismic activity: The Afar Triple Junction, where the Red Sea Rift, Gulf of Aden Rift, and East African Rift meet, makes this region a hotspot for volcanic and seismic activity.
• Uniqueness: The current eruption is unique because the volcano is believed to have erupted after nearly 12,000 years, based on geological evidence from the Afar Rift.
• Composition of volcanic plume: The ash cloud contained a mix of volcanic ash, sulphur dioxide, glass shards, and rock fragments, transported at high altitudes between 15,000-45,000 ft. These aerosols can persist in the atmosphere for days to weeks depending on wind patterns and atmospheric stability.
• Significance: The Hayli Gubbi eruption highlights the geological volatility of the East African Rift System (EARS) where active volcanism, fissure eruptions, and spreading ridges are common.
• At the junction of diverging plates: It is one of the world’s most tectonically active rift systems where the Arabian, Nubian, and Somali plates are diverging.
• Characterised by basaltic lava: The region is characterised by basaltic lava, fissure systems, and frequent seismic activity linked to the continental rifting process.

Source:

• • The Hindu

Category: Polity and Governance

Context:

• The Jammu & Kashmir HC has observed that dismissal of a Special Leave Petition (SLP), does not lead to merger of the impugned order with the Supreme Court’s order.

About Special Leave Petition (SLP):

• Definition: A SLP is a request made to the Supreme Court seeking special permission to appeal against any judgment, order, or decree from any court or tribunal (except military tribunals), even when the law does not provide a statutory right of appeal.
• Not a right: Special Leave Petition (SLP) is not a right—it’s a privilege granted by the Supreme Court at its discretion. It is a discretionary/optional power of the SC, and the court can refuse to grant the appeal at its discretion.
• Constitutional provision: Article 136 states that the Supreme Court may, in its discretion, grant special leave to appeal from any judgment, decree, determination, or order from any court or tribunal in India.
• Conditions for using SLP: It can only be exercised when a substantial question of law or gross injustice has been committed. A judgement, decree, or order need not be final for an SLP. An interim or interlocutory order or decree can also be challenged.
• Filed by: SLP can be filed by any aggrieved party (individual or business). government bodies, public sector undertakings or NGOs or associations (in relevant cases).
• Filed against: SLP can be filed against judgments from High Courts, Tribunals (except those under armed forces) or Quasi-judicial bodies.
• Time limit to file SLP: It can be filed against any judgment of the High Court within 90 days from the date of judgment or it can be filed within 60 days against the order of the High Court refusing to grant the certificate of fitness for appeal to SC.
• Procedure for a SLP: A SLP must contain all the facts upon which the SC is to decide, which revolve around the grounds on which an SLP can be filed. The said petition needs to be duly signed by an Advocate-on-Record. The petitioner must include a statement within the SLP stating that no other petition has been filed in a High Court.
• Acceptance or rejection by SC: Once the petition is filed, the SC will hear the aggrieved party and depending upon the merits of the case, will allow the opposite party to state their part in a counter affidavit. After the hearing, if the court deems the case fit for further hearing, it will allow the same; otherwise, it will reject the appeal.

Source:

• • Live Law

Category: Government Schemes

Context:

• India’s vehicle safety roadmap is set for a major upgrade as the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH) has released a draft for Bharat NCAP 2.0.

About Bharat NCAP:

• Nature: The Bharat New Car Assessment Programme (Bharat NCAP) is an indigenous star-rating system for crash testing cars, under which vehicles will be assigned between one to five stars, indicating their safety in a collision. 
• Partnership: It is an ambitious joint project between the Government of India (GoI) and Global NCAP, the regulatory body behind the safety crash test ratings.
• Launch: It was launched on 22 August 2023 and commenced on 1 October 2023.
• Objective: It aims to help consumers make an informed decision before purchasing a car, thereby spurring demand for safer cars.
• Nodal ministry: Bharat NCAP is overseen by the Ministry of Road Transport, but is an independent body.
• Testing protocol: Under the Bharat NCAP, cars voluntarily nominated by automobile manufacturers will be crash tested as per protocols laid down in the Automotive Industry Standard (AIS) 197.
• 3 safety domains: Vehicles tested under the Bharat NCAP are evaluated across three critical safety domains- adult occupant protection, child occupant protection, and safety assist technologies.
• Applicability: Only right-hand drive passenger vehicles on sale in India and weighing less than 3,500 kg are eligible for consideration. Base variants of cars are to be tested, and ratings will be applicable for four years.
• Eligible vehicles: Besides internal combustion engine (ICE) models, CNG cars as well as battery-powered electric vehicles are eligible to undergo the safety test.
• Voluntary in nature: It is a voluntary programme under which the cost of the car for assessment for star rating and the cost of such assessment are borne by the respective vehicle manufacturer or importer.
• Validity: The current Bharat NCAP regulations remain valid until September 30, 2027, after which Bharat NCAP 2.0 is expected to be implemented by October 2027.

About Bharat NCAP 2.0 Draft Guidelines:

• Based on 5 pillars: The Bharat NCAP 2.0 proposal introduces a 100-point rating system across five pillars- Crash Protection, Vulnerable Road-User Protection, Safe Driving, Accident Avoidance, and Post-Crash Safety.
• Use of minimum score in a rating system: From 2027-29, a 5-star rating will require 70 points, and this would rise to 80 points from 2029-31. Minimum scores will also apply across each pillar.
• Updated norms: It brings in fresh mandatory tests, revised scoring methods, and updated safety verticals.
• Uniqueness: Notably, for the first time, vehicles will be assessed on vulnerable road user protection.
• Expansion of crash test: The crash test will be expanded from two to five and will now have Male, female, and child dummies for testing. The cars will go through offset frontal impact, full-width frontal impact, side impact, and rear impact.
• Curtain airbags compulsory: Electronic stability control (ESC) and curtain airbags will be compulsory for any model seeking a star rating. Autonomous emergency braking (AEB) remains optional.

Source:

• • India Today

(UPSC GS Paper II – “Mechanisms, Laws, Institutions for Vulnerable Sections; Issues Relating to Women”)

Context (Introduction)

A recent Chandigarh case where a college professor was dismissed following an ICC probe under the POSH Act has revived debate on low conviction rates, procedural gaps, digital-era challenges, and the Act’s inability to address informed consent and power asymmetry in academic institutions.

Main Arguments

• Conceptual Clarity: The Act’s focus on consent without recognising informed consent overlooks manipulation, emotional coercion, and power asymmetry in workplaces and universities.
• Emotional Exploitation: Emotional or psychological harassment arising from deceitful relationships remains outside the Act’s scope despite being a prominent form of abuse in hierarchical settings.
• Time-Barred Justice: The three-month limitation period discourages survivors who often need longer to recognise manipulation, gather evidence, and overcome fear of institutional backlash.
• Diluted Terminology: Referring to the accused as a “respondent” rather than “accused” symbolically downplays the gravity of sexual harassment compared to similar acts outside workplaces.
• Behavioural Evidence: Ambiguous definitions make ICCs rely heavily on direct evidence, ignoring circumstantial indicators or behavioural patterns that commonly characterise harassment cases.

Challenges / Criticisms 

• Inter-Institutional Blind Spot: The Act lacks mechanisms to address misconduct spanning multiple campuses despite frequent cross-institutional interactions in academia.
• Procedural Trauma: Complainants often face delays, institutional hesitation, emotional fatigue, and fear of counter-action under the “malicious complaint” clause.
• Digital Evidence Gaps: ICCs struggle to interpret modern digital evidence—disappearing messages, encrypted chats, single-view photos—due to lack of legal and technical training.
• Institutional Under preparedness: ICCs remain unevenly trained and often risk-averse, unintentionally reinforcing protection for powerful perpetrators over vulnerable complainants.
• Silent Serial Offenders: Absence of information-sharing or cross-institution coordination enables repeat offenders to continue exploiting multiple academic environments.

Way Forward

• Expand Definitions: Incorporate informed consent, emotional coercion, and digital harassment into statutory definitions to reflect contemporary realities.
• Extend Timelines: Increase or remove the three-month limitation period to ensure survivors are not denied justice due to delayed recognition or fear.
• Improve Evidence Protocols: Develop clear guidelines for handling digital evidence and expand the use of corroborative or behavioural indicators in ICC assessments.
• Build ICC Capacity: Mandate periodic legal, psychological, and technological training for ICC members to improve sensitivity and evidence evaluation.
• Inter-Institutional Mechanisms: Create a confidential national or sectoral registry enabling institutions to share information on proven offenders to prevent serial misconduct.

Conclusion

The POSH Act was transformative in 2013, but evolving power structures, digital interactions, and emotional manipulation demand a stronger, clearer, survivor-centric law in 2025. Justice must be embedded in the system, not dependent on a victim’s endurance or institutional goodwill.

Mains Question 

1. Despite being a landmark legislation, the POSH Act, 2013 faces gaps that dilute its effectiveness. Critically evaluate these challenges and suggest reforms to strengthen workplace justice for women.(250 words, 15 marks)

Source: The Hindu

(UPSC GS Paper II – “Structure, Organization and Functioning of the Executive and the Judiciary; Issues and Challenges Pertaining to Federal Structure; Role of UPSC”)

Context (Introduction)

Tamil Nadu’s inability to appoint a regular Director-General of Police before the incumbent’s retirement, rejection of the UPSC panel, and allegations of contempt of Supreme Court guidelines have reignited debates on State autonomy, police reforms, and Centre–State coordination.

Main Arguments: Why the Issue Matters

• Prakash Singh Mandate: The 2006 judgment mandates that States select the DGP only from a UPSC-approved panel of the three seniormost eligible IPS officers based on service length, record, and experience.
• Tenure Protection: The Court’s requirement of a minimum two-year fixed tenure for DGPs seeks to depoliticise police leadership and promote administrative continuity.
• Procedural Timeline: States must send proposals to the UPSC three months before the anticipated vacancy, a rule Tamil Nadu violated by submitting its list only a day before retirement.
• Autonomy vs Oversight: The State’s rejection of the UPSC panel as “unacceptable” highlights ongoing tensions between State preference and UPSC-mandated merit-based selection.
• Judicial Intervention: The Supreme Court’s request for immediate appointment after UPSC recommendations underscores the judiciary’s role in enforcing police reform compliance.

Challenges / Criticisms 

• Delayed Compliance: Tamil Nadu’s failure to meet the three-month proposal deadline disrupted the selection process and invited judicial scrutiny.
• CAT Proceedings: Pending litigation before the Central Administrative Tribunal delayed the State’s actions, yet the Court held that this cannot justify procedural non-compliance.
• Withheld Integrity Certificate: The State withdrew integrity clearance for one officer and expressed reluctance to consider three others without transparent explanations.
• Panel Rejection: Tamil Nadu’s objection to the UPSC panel and request for another meeting contradicted the structured process laid down in Prakash Singh.
• Contempt Allegations: Appointment of an “in-charge” DGP instead of a regular one has triggered contempt petitions alleging wilful violation of Supreme Court guidelines.

Way Forward

• Strict Adherence: States must comply with the Prakash Singh framework to ensure transparency, stability, and depoliticisation of police leadership.
• Timeline Discipline: Institutionalising internal reminders and administrative protocols can prevent last-minute submissions that derail the selection process.
• Integrity Transparency: Clear, recorded reasons for withholding integrity certificates must be shared with the UPSC to prevent arbitrariness.
• Cooperative Federalism: Structured consultation between State governments and the UPSC can reduce conflict while respecting the merit-based selection process.
• Monitoring Mechanism: A periodic compliance audit by the Supreme Court or an independent oversight body could strengthen police reform implementation nationwide.

Conclusion

The DGP appointment controversy in Tamil Nadu highlights the unresolved tension between political discretion and judicially mandated police reforms. Ensuring merit-based selection, transparent procedures, and timely coordination is essential to build a professional, independent police leadership.

Mains Question 

1. The Prakash Singh reforms sought to depoliticise police leadership through transparent and merit-based appointments. Discuss (250 words, 15 marks)

Source: The Hindu

(UPSC GS Paper II – “Indian Constitution—Features, Amendments, Significant Provisions; Comparison with Other Constitutions”)

Context (Introduction)

As India marks 76 years of the Constitution’s adoption, renewed analysis highlights how its framers deliberately moved beyond Western constitutional models, designing a transformative charter that addressed social hierarchies, group rights, and structural inequalities embedded in India’s social fabric.

Why India’s Constitutional Vision Was Ahead of Its Time

• Transformative Equality: The Constitution expanded equality beyond Western notions by recognising caste-driven discrimination from both the state and private actors through Articles 14, 15(2), 17, and 23.
• Social Power Recognition: By acknowledging that power in India is wielded not only by the state but also by entrenched social groups, the Constitution mandated state action to dismantle societal hierarchies.
• Affirmative Action Leadership: India introduced constitutionally sanctioned reservations in 1950, a decade before U.S. civil rights reforms, making it a global pioneer in group-differentiated rights.
• Secular Pluralism: The Constitution adopted a nuanced secular framework—eschewing state religion, prohibiting compulsory religious taxes (Art. 27), and safeguarding individual (Art. 25) and group religious freedoms (Art. 26).
• Minority Cultural Rights: Through Articles 29 and 30, the Constitution empowered linguistic and religious minorities to preserve their culture and manage educational institutions, ensuring pluralist nation-building.

Challenges / Criticisms 

• Partial Rights Protection: Certain freedoms remained circumscribed due to colonial-era emergency provisions, allowing governments to suspend rights in broad circumstances.
• Executive Dominance: The Constitution created a powerful executive with sweeping discretionary powers, raising concerns about civil liberty safeguards.
• Uneven Pluralism: While minority and cultural protections exist, their scope has sometimes been reduced or inconsistently implemented.
• Debates on Group Rights: Intense Constituent Assembly debates reflected tensions between equality and differentiated protections, leaving some ambiguities unresolved.
• Limitations of Remedies: Judicial review exists, but access to remedies can be limited when rights are suspended under exceptional circumstances.

Deepening the Constitution’s Transformative Promise

• Strengthen Social Equality: Reinforce constitutional mandates against societal discrimination through stronger implementation of Articles 15(2) and 17.
• Balance Executive Power: Revisit emergency provisions and enhance institutional checks to prevent misuse of executive authority.
• Promote Pluralist Governance: Uphold minority cultural and educational rights consistently to preserve India’s pluralism in practice.
• Expand Rights Awareness: Enhance civic education and public literacy on constitutional rights to democratise access to justice.
• Safeguard Transformative Vision: Protect affirmative action and group-differentiated rights as foundational tools against structural inequality.

Conclusion

India’s Constitution is not merely a legal document but a transformative project that acknowledges deep social inequalities and plural identities. Its endurance reflects a commitment to equality that respects diversity, showing that national unity and constitutional longevity emerge not from uniformity, but from inclusive recognition of difference.

Mains Question

1. The Indian Constitution deliberately moved beyond Western liberal constitutionalism. Critically examine how this transformative vision has shaped India’s constitutional experience. (250 words, 15 marks)

Source: Indian Express