Independence Day 2024: Celebrating Trailblazing Judgments, Legislations and Policies – Charting the path to ‘Viksit Bharat’

The Viksit Bharat Vision was introduced by the Government of India in 2023, setting a target to achieve the goal of a ‘Developed India’ by the hundredth Independence Day in 2047. 78 years into the age of an independent India, we look back on the legal developments the country has witnessed till date, by commemorating and briefly visiting the most notable judgments, legislations, and policies that were instrumental in shaping the India of today, and that still lend support in transforming this vision of Viksit Bharat into a reality.

JUDGMENTS

1. A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras, 1950 SCC 228

   The Preventive Detention Act, 1950 was held to be a valid law except Section 14 being ultra vires to Article 22(5) insofar as it prevents the grounds from being disclosed to the Court.

2. Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras, 1950 SCC 436

   The right to circulation is a part of freedom of the press. The law restricting circulation of any document or publication is violative of Article 19(1)(a) unless saved by Article 19(2).

3. Shankari Prasad Singh Deo v. Union of India, 1951 SCC 966

   The Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951 inserting Articles 31A and 31B was held to be not ultra vires.

4. Sajjan Singh v. State of Rajasthan, 1964 SCC OnLine SC 25

   The Constitutional validity of the Constitution (17th Amendment) Act, 1964, which aimed to secure the constitutional validity of several land acquisition laws inserted in the 9th Scheduled was upheld. It was held that Constitutional Amendment is not a “law” within the meaning of Article 13(2).

5. Berubari Union (I), Re, 1960 SCC OnLine SC 23

   The power to cede national territory is included in the power to amend Article 1 of the Constitution.

6. Golak Nath v. State of Punjab, 1967 SCC OnLine SC 14

   Overruling Sajjan Singh, it was held that “law” includes Constitutional Amendment.

7. Rustom Cavasjee Cooper (Banks Nationalisation) v. Union of India, (1970) 1 SCC 248

   1. Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 was within the legislative competence of the Parliament;

   2. It made hostile discrimination against the named banks in that it prohibits the named banks from carrying on banking business, whereas other Banks — Indian and Foreign — were permitted to carry on banking business, and even new Banks may be formed which may engage in banking business;

   3. It restricted the named banks from carrying on business other than banking as defined in Section 5(b) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949; and

   4. The Act violates the guarantee of compensation under Article 31(2) in that it provides for giving certain amounts determined according to principles which are not relevant in the determination of compensation of the undertaking of the named banks and by the method prescribed the amounts so declared cannot be regarded as compensation.

8. K.A. Abbas v. Union of India, (1970) 2 SCC 780

   Classification of films into two categories of ‘U’ films and ‘A’ films is a reasonable classification. It is also for this reason that motion pictures must be regarded differently from other forms of speech and expression. A person reading a book or other writing or hearing a speech or viewing a painting or sculpture is not so deeply stirred as by seeing a motion picture. Therefore, the treatment of the latter on a different footing is also a valid classification.

9. Kesavananda Bharti v. State of Kerala, (1973) 4 SCC 225

   Under Article 368 of the Constitution, the Parliament cannot alter the Basic Structure of the Constitution.

10. E.P. Royappa v. State of T.N., (1974) 4 SCC 3

    Articles 14 and 16 strike at arbitrariness in State action and ensure fairness and equality of treatment. Mala fide exercise of power and arbitrariness are different lethal radiations emanating from the same vice: in fact the latter comprehends the former. Both are inhibited by Articles 14 and 16.

11. Ahmedabad St. Xavier’s College Society v. State of Gujarat, (1974) 1 SCC 717

    The right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice has been conferred on religious and linguistic minorities. Every section of the public, the majority as well as minority has rights in respect of religion as contemplated in Articles 25 and 26 and rights in respect of language, script, culture as contemplated in Article 29. The whole object of conferring the right on minorities under Article 30 is to ensure that there will be equality between the majority and the minority. If the minorities do not have such special protection they will be denied equality.

12. ADM Jabalpur v. Shivakant Shukla, (1976) 2 SCC 521 [Habeas Corpus Case]

    In view of the Presidential Order dated 27-6-1975 under Article 359(1) of the Constitution no person has locus standi to move any writ petition under Article 226 before a High Court for habeas corpus or any other writ or order or direction to enforce any right to personal liberty of a person detained under the Act on the grounds that the order of detention or the continued detention is for any reason not under or in compliance with the Act or is illegal or mala fide.

    H.R. Khanna, J., (Dissenting): Article 21 cannot be considered to be the sole repository of the right to life and personal liberty. Even in the absence of Article 21 in the Constitution, the State has got no power to deprive a person of his life or personal liberty without the authority of law. That is the essential postulate and basic assumption of the rule of law in every civilised society.

13. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, (1978) 1 SCC 248

    “Law” in Article 21 affecting Personal Liberty, must satisfy the test of one or more of the rights under Article 19 and the test of reasonableness under Article 14. “Procedure’ under Article 21 cannot be arbitrary, unfair and unreasonable.

14. Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 684

    Death Penalty must be given only in the Rarest of the Rare cases.

15. Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India, (1980) 3 SCC 625

    Articles 368(4) and (5) as introduced by the 42nd Amendment, was declared unconstitutional for damaging the Basic Structure. Further held that, Directive Principles of State Policy cannot have primacy over Fundamental Rights.

16. Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum, (1985) 2 SCC 556

    Section 125, CrPC is secular in nature and not in conflict with any religion or personal law. There is no question of conflict vis-a-vis a Muslim husband’s obligation to provide maintenance for his divorced wife. Right of a divorced Muslim woman to claim maintenance is not affected by personal law.

17. Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corpn., (1985) 3 SCC 545

    Article 21 of the Constitution includes the Right to Livelihood.

18. Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala, (1986) 3 SCC 615

    Expulsion of the three children from the school for not singing the National Anthem, because of their conscientiously held religious faith, though they stood up respectfully when the Anthem was sung, was a violation of their fundamental right “to freedom of conscience and freely to profess, practise and propagate religion”.

19. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Shriram – Oleum Gas), (1987) 1 SCC 395

    It was held that where an enterprise is engaged in a hazardous or inherently dangerous activity and harm results to anyone on account of an accident in the operation of such hazardous or inherently dangerous activity, then such enterprise is Strictly and Absolutely liable to compensate all those who are affected by the accident and such liability is not subject to any of the exceptions which operate vis-a-vis the tortious principle of strict liability under the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher.

20. Sheela Barse v. State of Maharashtra, (1987) 4 SCC 373

    Prisoners are entitled to rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.

21. Indra Sawhney v. Union of India, 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217

    Multiple questions surrounding Caste Based Reservations were discussed and answered. The Court stated that Article 16(4) is exhaustive of the subject of reservation in favour of backward class of citizens; Neither the Constitution nor the law prescribes the procedure or method of identification of backward classes. Nor is it possible or advisable for the court to lay down any such procedure or method. It must be left to the authority appointed to identify. Furthermore, Article 16(4) does not permit provision for reservations in the matter of promotion.

22. Unni Krishnan, J.P. v. State of A.P., (1993) 1 SCC 645

    The citizens of India have a fundamental Right to Education. The said right flows from Article 21. This right is, however, not an absolute right. Its content and parameters have to be determined in the light of Articles 45 and 41. In other words every child/citizen of this country has a right to free education until he completes the age of fourteen years. Thereafter his right to education is subject to the limits of economic capacity and development of the State.

23. Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Assn. v. Union of India, (1993) 4 SCC 441

    Appointment of Judges- Initiation of the proposal for appointment in the case of the Supreme Court must be by the Chief Justice of India, and in the case of a High Court by the Chief Justice of that High Court; and for transfer of a Judge/Chief Justice of a High Court, the proposal has to be initiated by the Chief Justice of India. In the event of conflicting opinions by the constitutional functionaries, the opinion of the judiciary ‘symbolised by the view of the Chief Justice of India’, has primacy.

24. S.R. Bommai v. Union of India, (1994) 3 SCC 1:

    ‘Secularism’ is a constitutional goal and a part of Basic Structure of the Constitution.

25. Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab, (1996) 2 SCC 648:

    there is no ground to hold that Section 309 of Penal Code, 1860 is constitutionally invalid. Right to Life does not include the right to die.

26. People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. Union of India, (1997) 1 SCC 301

    Right to transmit telephone message or hold telephone conversation in privacy, forms part of Right to Privacy and is protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.

27. L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India, (1997) 3 SCC 261:

    Power of Judicial Review was held to be a Basic/Essential feature of the Constitution.

28. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, (1997) 6 SCC 241

    Women have rights to gender equality, to work with dignity and safe working environment protected from sexual harassment and abuse. Supreme Court framed Guidelines to provide for the effective enforcement of the basic human right of gender equality and guarantee against sexual harassment and abuse, more particularly against sexual harassment at workplaces, which came to be known as “Vishakha Guidelines”

29. Special Reference No. 1 of 1998, Re, (1998) 7 SCC 739

    Opinion of Chief Justice of India has primacy vis-a-vis appointment of puisne Judges of Supreme Court. Furthermore, it was held that Supreme Court Collegium should comprise of Chief Justice of India and 4 seniormost Judges of the Supreme Court.

30. Shayara Bano v. Union of India, (2017) 9 SCC 1

    By majority of 3:2, Talaq-e-Biddat popularly known as Triple Talaq was set aside.

31. National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India, (2014) 5 SCC 438

    • Gender identity did not refer to biological characteristics but rather referred to as “an innate perception of one’s gender”.

    • Upheld the right of all persons to self-identify their gender.

    • Hijras and eunuchs can legally identify as ‘third gender’.

    • No third gender persons should be subjected to any medical examination or biological test which would invade their right to privacy.

32. K.S. Puttaswamy (Privacy-9J.) v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1

    • Right to privacy is a fundamental right and an intrinsic part of Article 21 of the Constitution. It’s a natural, primordial, basic, inherent and inalienable right.

    • M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra, (1954) 1 SCC 385 and Kharak Singh v. State of U.P., 1962 SCC OnLine SC 10 partly overruled, to the extent they hold that the right to privacy is not a fundamental right.

33. I.R. Coelho v. State of T.N., (2007) 2 SCC 1

    All Constitutional Amendments made on or after 24-04-1973 (the date of pronouncement of Kesavananda Bharati (supra)), by which Schedule IX was amended shall be tested on the touchstone of Basic Structure Doctrine. Any such laws violating Part III of the Constitution shall be open to challenge.

34. People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India, (2013) 10 SCC 1

    The introduction of None of the Above (NOTA) button in the EVMs was directed to ensure that voters can exercise their right not to vote while maintaining their secrecy right.

35. Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 1

    Section 377 was read down as far as it criminalises consensual sexual acts of same- sex adults (i.e. persons above the age of 18 years who are competent to consent), for being violative of Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.

36. Vivek Narayan Sharma (Demonetisation Case-5 J.) v. Union of India, (2023) 3 SCC 1

    The demonetisation scheme in 2016 was upheld holding that it was proportionate to the Union’s stated objectives and was implemented in a reasonable manner.

37. Interplay Between Arbitration Agreements under A&C Act, 1996 & Stamp Act, 1899, In re, (2024) 6 SCC 1

    The 7 Judge bench in a unanimous judgment, held that the unstamped agreement is inadmissible under the Stamp Act, 1899 but cannot be rendered void ab initio. Thus, arbitration clauses in unstamped or inadequately stamped agreements are enforceable.

38. Cox & Kings Ltd. v. SAP India (P) Ltd., 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1634

    The companies outside of an arbitration agreement can be made parties to arbitration proceedings as per the Group of Companies doctrine, i.e., non-signatory parties can be bound to an arbitration agreement.

39. Lily Thomas v. Union of India, (2000) 6 SCC 224

    Mere conversion does not end the marital ties unless a decree for divorce on that ground is obtained from the court. Till a decree is passed, the marriage subsists. Any other marriage, during the subsistence of the first marriage would constitute an offence under Section 494 of Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 17 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the person, despite his conversion to some other religion, would be liable to be prosecuted for the offence of bigamy.

40. Kaushal Kishor v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 6

    Mere statements made by a Minister inconsistent with the rights of citizens may not constitute violation of constitutional rights and become actionable as constitutional tort. But, if as a consequence of such a statement, any act of omission or commission is done by the officers resorting in loss to a citizen then the same may be actionable as a constitutional tort.

41. Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India [Election Commission Appointments], (2023) 6 SCC 161

    The Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners shall appointed by the President on the advice of a 3-member committee consisting of, the Prime Minister of India; the leader of opposition in Lok Sabha or in case, there is no such Leader, the Leader of the largest Party in the Opposition in the Lok Sabha having the largest numerical strength; and the Chief Justice of India. The Court clarified that this norm would continue to hold good till a law is made by Parliament.

42. Article 370 of the Constitution, In re, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1647

    Union’s action abrogating Article 370 of the Constitution was upheld and the restoration of statehood in the State at the earliest was directed.

43. Githa Hariharan v. Reserve Bank of India, (1999) 2 SCC 228

    The constitutional validity of Section 6(a) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 was challenged for being violative of Article 14 and 15. The Court ruled that the mother, like the father, is the natural guardian.

44. Supriyo v. Union of India, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1348

    It was held that there was no fundamental right to marry, and the Supreme Court could not enter judicial legislation to read words into the Special Marriage Act and make it gender-neutral legislation. The Court left it to Parliament to undertake this process. There were however some disagreements on certain points where Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli and PS Narasimha, JJ. formed the majority and Dr. DY Chandrachud, CJI and SK Kaul, J. were in dissent.

45. Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 606

    There does not exist a homogeneous class of Union Territories with similar governance structures. Delhi government, and not the Union, has control over the civil servants and day-to-day administration of the NCT of Delhi.

46. Sita Soren vs. Union of India (MP/MLA immunity)

    In this case, the 5-Judge Bench 1998 verdict in P.V. Narasimha Rao v. State (CBI/SPE), (1998) 4 SCC 626, was overturned, wherein it was established that the Member of Parliaments (‘MP’) and Member of Legislative Assemblies (‘MLA’) enjoyed immunity if they cast vote in the House after taking bribe for it.

47. M. Siddiq v. Mahant Suresh Das, 2019 SCC OnLine 1440 (Ram Janmabhoomi verdict)

    Disputed land was given to Trust for construction of Ram Mandir. To balance the interest of both the parties involved, the Court directed that a suitable plot of 5 acres must be granted to Sunni Waqf Board to set up a Mosque.

48. Suchita Srivastava v. Chandigarh Admn., (2009) 9 SCC 1

    Language of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 clearly respects the personal autonomy of mentally retarded persons who are above the age of majority. Hence, consent of a mentally retarded woman is necessary, in case of termination of her pregnancy, only exception is when the woman is minor or mentally ill, and where registered medical practitioner has to form an emergency opinion to save pregnant woman’s life.

49. Arunachala Gounder v. Ponnusamy, (2022) 11 SCC 520

    Right of widow or daughter to inherit the self-acquired property or share received in partition of coparcenary/ family property of Hindu male dying intestate, is well recognised through old Hindu laws and judgments. If the property of male Hindu dying intestate is self-acquired property, or, obtained in partition of coparcenary/family property, the same would devolve by inheritance and not by survivorship, and daughter of such male Hindu would be entitled to inherit such property in preference to other collaterals.

50. Ministry of Defence v. Babita Puniya, (2020) 7 SCC 469

    Permanent Commission should be granted to all serving women officers on SSC irrespective of any of them having crossed fourteen years or, as the case may be, twenty years of service. Absolute bar on women seeking criteria or command appointments violates guarantee of equality under Article 14.

51. Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma, (2020) 9 SCC 1

    Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, as amended through Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 confer status of coparcener on the daughter born before or after the amendment in the same manner as son with same rights and liabilities.

52. Mineral Area Development Authority v. SAIL, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1796

    Royalty paid by mining operators to the Central government is not a tax and States have the power to levy cesses on mining and mineral-use activities. It was clarified that the levy of tax by the States, based on this judgment, should not operate on transactions made during the period before 01-04-2005.

53. Assn. for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India, (2024) 5 SCC 214

    Anonymous electoral bonds are violative of the right to information under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. Thus, the electoral bonds scheme has been struck down for being unconstitutional.

54. Gene Campaign v. Union of India, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1793

    Justice BV Nagarathna quashed the approval given by the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee’s and the Ministry of Environment Forests and Climate Change for environmental release of Dhara Mustard Hybrid-11 (DMH-11) mustard; Justice Sanjay Karol upheld the same. However, unanimously, the Union of India was directed to evolve a National Policy regarding GM crops in the realm of research, cultivation, trade and commerce in the country.

55. Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 544

    Supreme Court has the discretion to dissolve the marriage by passing a decree of divorce by mutual consent, without being bound by the procedural requirement to move the second motion subject to the requirements and conditions laid down under Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur, (2017) 8 SCC 746 and Amit Kumar v. Suman Beniwal, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 1270. It held that in exercise of power under Article 142(1) of the Constitution of India, the Supreme Court has the discretion to dissolve the marriage on the ground of its irretrievable breakdown.

56. X v. Health & Family Welfare Department, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 905

    The provisions of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 allowing termination of pregnancy beyond 20 weeks and upto 24 weeks extends to unmarried women. Unmarried women have right to safe abortion.

NOTABLE ACTS OF PARLIAMENT

1. Representation of People’s Act, 1951: The legislation laid down the mechanism for the conduct of elections to the Houses of Parliament and to the House(s) of Legislature of each State of India, qualifications, disqualifications for membership to the Houses, etc.

2. Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976: Often addressed as the ‘Mini Constitution’ for the monumental amendments it brought to the Constitution, such addition of Fundamental Duties, addition to Directives Principles of State Policy, and addition of “socialist” and “secular” words to the Preamble of the Constitution.

3. Constitution (Forty-fourth Amendment) Act, 1978: Right to property was abolished as a fundamental right and was made a constitutional right under Article 300-A of the Constitution. It also reformed the amendments made under the 42nd Amendment Act.

4. Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Act, 2002: It inserted Article 21-A into the Constitution by making the provision of free and compulsory education to the children of ages 6-14 years a fundamental right. The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 is a derivative of this Amendment.

5. Right to xInformation Act, 2005: Right to information was determined to be a fundamental right under Article 19 of the Constitution. The Parliament therefore enacted this legislation to empower the Indian citizens to question the Government on its policies, working, and actions etc.

6. Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971: The legislation empowered Indian women to exercise body-autonomy vis-a-vis the termination of pregnancy. The 2021 Amendment Act expanded the scope of access to safe and legal abortion on various grounds.

7. Environment (Protection) Act, 1986: This legislation is a derivative of the UN Conference on the Human Environment, and aimed to implement the decisions taken thereunder, relating to the protection and improvement of environment, and prevention of hazards to human beings, other living creatures, plants and property.

8. Constitution (Hundred and first Amendment) Act, 2016: It introduced the Goods and Services Tax (“GST”) in the Indian taxation regime. Various duties, taxes, etc., were brought within the mandate of GST, making the tax rates on most goods and services uniform across the nation.

9. Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019: Post the abrogation of Article 370 through a Presidential Order, this legislation was enacted, that reorganised the erstwhile State of Jammu & Kashmir of India as two Union Territories (“UT”), namely- the UT of Jammu & Kashmir and the UT of Ladakh. This further strengthened the sovereignty and integrity of India.

10. Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023: This legislation is aimed at lawful processing of the digital personal data, for lawful purposes, while also safeguarding the right of individuals to protect their personal data.

11. Mental Health Act, 2017: The legislation was derived from the UN Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities, wherein mental healthcare and services for persons with mental illnesses and to protect, promote and fulfil the rights of such persons during delivery of mental healthcare and services, has been provided. It is instrumental in curbing the stigma attached to mental health in the country.

12. Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019: In the backdrop of holding triple talaq announced to Muslim women as illegal and void by the Supreme Court, this legislation was enacted to protect Muslim women against such divorce, and to provide them with matrimonial, personal security and dignity.

13. Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013: This Amendment was brought in the backdrop of the deeply concerning Nirbhaya incident. The Amendment proved revolutionary in changing the erstwhile Criminal Laws- Penal Code, 1860, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and Evidence Act, 1872; and spearheading the legal protection of women against sexual offences, acid attacks, and others.

14. Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2018: The Amendment imposed stringent punishment on offenders convicted of rape of minors and made procedural amendments to the criminal trial for the offence of rape. This was a momentous amendment that safeguarded minor girls and young women against offences of rape.

NOTABLE POLICIES OF THE GOVERNMENT

The following policies of the Government of India have laid the foundation to the goal of Viksit Bharat:

1. Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 (“MNREGA”): The MNREGA Scheme was implemented through this legislation, wherein, people in the rural areas willing to undertake unskilled manual labour are guaranteed employment of at least 100 days in a financial year, to contribute towards development of amenities, such as roads, buildings etc.

2. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan: This Movement was launched to promote education for all and was implemented almost parallelly to the timeline when right to education became a fundamental right. The major emphasis is on the universalisation of elementary education and guarantee free education to children until the age of 14 years.

3. Ayushman Bharat Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana: It is a group of healthcare schemes, dedicated to providing affordable and quality healthcare to the masses. Not only does it provide insurance coverage for primary healthcare, but also for serious illnesses and prolonged treatments, that otherwise pushed a lot of people in debt.

4. Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana: The Scheme is dedicated to safeguard the farmers of India against the humongous losses that they bear in incidents of crop-failure. The Scheme’s coverage is not limited to crops damaged due to natural occurrences or disasters, but also against destruction by war, riots, enmity, animals (domestic and wild), and any malicious damage caused.

5. Swachh Bharat Abhiyan: This Movement, dedicated to clean India has been monumental in raising awareness and cleanliness levels across various Indian cities. It has aided in containing open defecation, building household and public toilets, managing effective collection and disposal of garbage, and promoting behaviour change interventions.

6. Pradhan Mantri MUDRA Yojana: This is a refinancing scheme, dedicated to creating an inclusive and sustainable entrepreneurial culture, to support economic success and financial security of micro enterprises. Institutions such as commercial banks, small finance banks, non-banking financial corporations are associated with the MUDRA institution, that lend to micro enterprises or entrepreneurs, ranging from Rs. 50,000, to up until 10 Lakhs, as per their growth requirement.

7. Startup India Initiative: The Initiative aims to create a robust startup ecosystem in the country, and provides a platform for startups, incubators and investors to share and boost the startup culture in India. Startups are also provided taxation and compliance relaxations, funding and financing opportunities, and ease of doing business.

8. Make in India Initiative: The Initiative strives to make India a global destination of designing, innovating, and manufacturing, and to take India to the epicentre of the global supply chain.

This Article was curated by: Ms. Sucheta Sarkar, Ms. Apoorva Goel, Ms. Deeksha Dabas and Mr. Tanmay Dhiman