About the Event
Justice Spectrum was a one-day outreach event that the Legal Aid Centre, LAC, of the University School of Law and Legal Studies, USLLS, GGSIPU Delhi, hosted on 4th November 2025. The event was themed “Rethinking Free Legal Aid in India” with the purpose of highlighting challenges before the Indian legal aid system, while engaging students of law with practical advocacy exercises. Organized under the guidance of Prof. (Dr.) Lisa P. Lukose, Director, LAC, USLLS, with SCC Online as media partner, the spectrum featured a panel discussion by distinguished jurists, a live quiz, and competitive rounds in PIL drafting and extempore speaking. The LAC, acclaimed for its bridge between legal education and community service and a recipient of national awards for excellence, hosted the sessions in the Moot Court Hall (C-413) and adjacent classrooms.
Event Schedule — 4th November 2025
9:00 AM & 10:00 AM— Registration & Inaugural Ceremony(4th Floor, C-Block, USLLS):
The Legal Aid Centre, USLLS, GGSIPU inaugurated Justice Spectrum 2025 with the registration of over a hundred students, faculty, and guests at the Moot Court Hall (C-413). In the inaugural address, Dean Prof. Queeny Pradhan welcomed the gathering. and LAC Director Prof. (Dr.) Lisa P. Lukose, reaffirmed GGSIPU’s commitment to legal empowerment. Guest of Honour Sh. Shubham Devadiya (Secretary, South West Delhi LSA) underlined the goal of the day: “Rethinking Free Legal Aid in India” by addressing systemic gaps and empowering future lawyers.
The first session was a formal inaugural one that outlined the theme of the conference: democratizing access to justice in India.
10:15 AM — Panel Discussion: “Rethinking Free Legal Aid in India” (C-413, Moot Court Hall, USLLS):
Democratizing India’s Legal Aid Ecosystem: The main session started with a scholar moderated panel discussion on “Democratizing Justice”. District & Additional Sessions Judge Preeti Agarwala (Keynote Speaker) led a distinguished panel that included Prof. Ritu Gupta (Law Professor, SAU), Advocate/Researcher Aparimata Pratap, and Govt.-empaneled Advocate Sakshi Bhayana. Moderator Sonal Mehta, research scholar at USLLS, guided the dialogue to dissect the “multifaceted challenges plaguing India’s legal aid ecosystem”.
These include procedural delays and fragmented coordination among Legal Services Authorities, leading often to delayed justice and misallocation of resources.
They explained that gaps in outreach leave vulnerable communities unaware of entitled legal aid because of geographical, digital, and bureaucratic barriers.
Other discussions involved quality concerns, such as increasing training, compensation, and accountability for panel lawyers so that free legal aid indeed secures fair representation.
It was a session that truly intertwined academic study with real-life impact: judges and lawyers cited case examples, like legal aid for women and workers, and urged students to look at PILs and outreach clinics as methods of systemic reform.
A spirited student Q&A followed, in which attendees questioned how legal literacy programs would be enforced and technology’s role in expanding aid.
11:15 AM — Online Quiz Competition: “Legal Aid Knowledge Challenge” (C-413, Moot Court Hall, USLLS):
“Legal Aid Knowledge Challenge”: Immediately following the panel, participants took part in a live quiz based on today’s theme. Organized on Google Forms, this “Legal Aid Knowledge Challenge” turned passive learning into active engagement. Students used smartphones/laptops to answer multiple-choice and short-answer questions under time pressure. The quiz was intentionally wide-ranging. As designed, questions spanned constitutional provisions, statutory frameworks, landmark judgments, and contemporary challenges in legal aid delivery.
For example, one question asked “Which part of the Indian Constitution explicitly mentions ‘free legal aid’?” (answer: the Directive Principles — Article 39A), testing awareness of basic legal provisions. Another asked which categories- acid attack victims, women, children, and industrial workers-receive free legal aid in Delhi, reflecting practical knowledge of local LSA rules. More challenging items linked law to society: e.g., identifying M.H. Hoskot v. Maharashtra (1978) as the SC judgment recognizing a prisoner’s right to legal aid. Yet other questions highlighted social reality-one asked why free legal aid schemes may fail, with the answer being “low legal literacy and awareness among the poor”. As participants raced the clock, the format reinforced lessons from the panel while revealing real-world awareness gaps: many struggled with helpline numbers or procedural details, underscoring the need for outreach campaigns. In all, the quiz was a “dynamic learning experience” that both challenged students about their knowledge and “cultivated a broader awareness of social justice issues.”
Sample Quiz Questions: To illustrate the range,
“A daily wage worker is accused of theft but can’t afford an attorney. The court appoints free counsel. What purpose is being served?” (Answer: justice is not denied because of inability to pay.
“Which authority provides free legal aid in Delhi?” (Answer: the Delhi State Legal Services Authority.)
A factory pollutes the land of a farmer. Which of the following should ensure that he gets free legal aid? (Answer: the State Legal Services Authority.)
Which international instrument explicitly enunces the right to free legal assistance in criminal proceedings? Precisely, ICCPR, 1966.
These sample questions, both easy and difficult, highlighted both expected knowledge and subtle gaps in student awareness.
12:15 PM — Lunch Break:
After lunch, participants reconvened to continue with advocacy events. The break allowed for some informal networking: students discussed quiz questions and compared their ideas on legal aid clinics and community outreach.
1:00 PM — PIL Drafting Competition (Presentation Round) (C-412, Moot Court Room):
The afternoon session consisted of a practical PIL drafting competition. Each team was previously provided with a problem statement that was released on 24 Oct, dealing with a current socio-legal issue. The brochure published at the end proposes environmental damage as a sample topic.) Participants acted as public-spirited lawyers and were required to frame a PIL petition that the courts could entertain. This entailed specifying a clear cause of action, for instance, pollution violating residents’ right to life; establishing locus standi under liberal PIL norms; and invoking constitutional and statutory provisions, such as Articles 21 and 48A and Water/Environment Acts.
They had to support facts with evidence and precedents-for instance, citing MC Mehta v. Union of India on environmental rights-and propose practical relief, such as cleanup orders, compensation, monitoring agencies, etc.
The competition had two parts. Prior to the event, teams submitted written PIL drafts online; a faculty panel reviewed them and selected the top ten. Starting at 1:00 PM, those finalists presented their petitions in moot-court fashion before senior judges and practitioners. Each team summarized their petition and answered judges’ questions on legal standing, remedy, and broader impact. Throughout, faculty and guest judges tested how well students could turn theory into advocacy. The exercise brought to light many skills beyond technical drafting: judges praised teams that could connect systemic social realities with the legal arguments and think of the litigation as “a tool for systemic reform rather than individual gain.”
Although results are pending (the trophies are announced at the valedictory), it was clear that the participants gained confidence in constitutional reasoning and strategic thinking.
1:00 PM — Extempore Competition (English/Hindi) (C-412, USLLS):
Running simultaneously from 1:00—4:00 PM, a bilingual extempore test was held to tap students’ impromptu oratory. Each speaker picked up “a legal or social topic on the spot” and prepared for 2 minutes, followed by speaking for 2 minutes in either English or Hindi.
The titles, which were provided by the organizers of LAC, represented the advocacy themes of this event. During the English session, it included topics such as “Access to Justice Begins with Awareness” and “Technology and Legal Aid: Revolutionizing Justice Delivery”, focusing on social equity and innovation. Other topics, such as “Legal Aid and Prison Reforms: Restoring Dignity Behind Bars” or “From Silence to Strength: Every Citizen a Voice for Justice”, challenged speakers to connect legal principles with lived experiences of marginalized groups. Hindi topics, picked separately, carried similar weight-for example, they likely invoked concepts of justice and equality rooted in India’s democratic values.
There was penetrating thinking and mastery over legal discourse from the students. Successful speakers wove constitutional ideals, such as Article 14 equality, into rousing narratives, while others grounded arguments with social statistics or anecdotes. The bilingual format respected India’s linguistic diversity and underscored the imperative that legal advocacy must transcend language barriers.
Judges commended participants who explained complex issues-so far as legal literacy or the rights of the underprivileged concern-in a lucid and persuasive manner. Overall, the extempore round “reinforced the event’s core mission: nurturing a generation of legally astute, socially conscious, and communication-savvy professionals”
4:00 PM — Valedictory Session and Prize Distribution ( Moot Court Hall, USLLS):
The day concluded with a closing ceremony in the Moot court Hall of USLLS. Organizers delivered brief summaries of each competition’s outcomes and acknowledged volunteer support. Certificates and trophies (first, second and third prizes for quiz, PIL, extempore) were presented. In remarks, the competition panelists encouraged students to carry forward the conversations sparked at Justice Spectrum. They cited the vision that participants should “view litigation as a tool for systemic reform” and emphasized the larger aim of translating legal principles into actual practice. Justice Spectrum was acclaimed as a pathbreaking, student-led effort that wove together legal pedagogy and public advocacy.
WINNERS:
Online Quiz Competition
First Place: Vaishnavi Chauhan
Second Place: Vaishnava Shrivastava
Third Place: Soumya Raj
PIL Drafting Competition
First Place: Vedansh Goyal, NMIMS (Team Code 43)
Second Place: Harshit Arora, USLLS, GGSIPU (Team Code 17)
Third Place: Disha Thakur and Dhruv Sharma (Best Speaker), MAIMS (Team Code 50)
Special Mention: Mukti Sharma and Khushi Solanki, USLLS, GGSIPU (Team Code 03)
Extempore Competition
First Place: Aanvi Kapoor
Second Place: Zeeshan Parvez
Third Place: Harsh Kumar
Special Mention: Piyush Goyal
Coordinators
Deeksha Saini & Mahak
Organising Team
Mokshi Lohchab, Alisha Khan, Harshita, Vanshika Agarwal, Shuhool Fotedar, Akshar Gupta, Soumya, Vrinda Tanwar, Vaishnavi Jagdeo, Sara Sharma