UG-CLAT LEGAL REASONING QUIZ 4

National Legal Services Authority vs. Union of India is a landmark case which dealt with the grievances of the members of the Transgender Community in India. The National Legal Services Authority came forward to advocate their cause by filing Writ Petition in 2012. The Transgender Communities sought a legal declaration of their gender identity than the one assigned to them, male or female, at the time of birth. The Supreme Court observed that the recognition of ‘sex identity gender’ of persons and ‘guarantee to equality and non-discrimination’ on the ground of gender identity or expression is increasingly gaining acceptance in international law and therefore be applied in India as well. In Kesavannanda Bharti vs State of Kerala (1973), it was stated that in view of Article 51 of the Constitution, the Court must interpret the language of the Constitution in the light of the UN Charter and the solemn declaration subscribed to it by India. 

Article 14 of the Constitution states that ‘the State shall not deny any person equality before the law and equal protection of the law’. Article 14 does not restrict the word ‘person’ and its application only to male or female. Therefore the Apex Court held that ‘transgender persons who are neither male/female fall within the expression ‘person’ and hence, entitled to legal protection of laws in all spheres of State activity, including employment, healthcare, education as well as equal civil and citizenship rights, as enjoyed by any other citizen of this country’. The Court held that ‘discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation or gender identity impairs equality before the law and equal protection of the law and violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Article 15 and 16 prohibit discrimination against any citizen on certain enumerated grounds, including the ground of ‘sex’. Both Articles prohibit all forms of gender bias and gender-based discrimination. So, the Supreme Court held that ‘the discrimination on the ground ‘sex’ under Article 15 and 16 includes discrimination on the of gender identity. The expression ‘sex’ used in Article 15 and 16 in not just limited to the biological sex of male or female, but intended to include people who consider themselves to be neither male or female. Apex court held that ‘the Transgender communities are legally entitled and eligible to get the benefits of SEBC (Socially and Educationally Backward Classes). The state is bound to take some affirmative action for their advancement so that the injustice done to them for centuries could be remedied’.

It also held that ‘values of privacy, self-identity, autonomy and personal integrity are fundamental rights guaranteed to member of the transgender community under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India and the State is bound to protect and recognize those rights’. Self-determination of gender is an integral part of personal autonomy under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Hijras/Eunuchs, therefore, have to be considered as the Third Gender over and above binary genders for the purpose of safeguarding their rights under Part III of our Constitution and the laws made by the Parliament and the State Legislature. The country's first university for transgender community will be opened in Uttar Pradesh's Kushinagar district to facilitate its members to study right from class one to PG and even do research and get PhD degree. The university, which will come up in Fazilnagar block of Kushinagar district, is being built by the Akhil Bhartiya Kinnar Siksha Seva Trust (All-India transgender education service trust).

National Legal Services Authority vs. Union of India is a landmark case which dealt with the grievances of the members of the Transgender Community in India. The National Legal Services Authority came forward to advocate their cause by filing Writ Petition in 2012. The Transgender Communities sought a legal declaration of their gender identity than the one assigned to them, male or female, at the time of birth. The Supreme Court observed that the recognition of ‘sex identity gender’ of persons and ‘guarantee to equality and non-discrimination’ on the ground of gender identity or expression is increasingly gaining acceptance in international law and therefore be applied in India as well. In Kesavannanda Bharti vs State of Kerala (1973), it was stated that in view of Article 51 of the Constitution, the Court must interpret the language of the Constitution in the light of the UN Charter and the solemn declaration subscribed to it by India. 

Article 14 of the Constitution states that ‘the State shall not deny any person equality before the law and equal protection of the law’. Article 14 does not restrict the word ‘person’ and its application only to male or female. Therefore the Apex Court held that ‘transgender persons who are neither male/female fall within the expression ‘person’ and hence, entitled to legal protection of laws in all spheres of State activity, including employment, healthcare, education as well as equal civil and citizenship rights, as enjoyed by any other citizen of this country’. The Court held that ‘discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation or gender identity impairs equality before the law and equal protection of the law and violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Article 15 and 16 prohibit discrimination against any citizen on certain enumerated grounds, including the ground of ‘sex’. Both Articles prohibit all forms of gender bias and gender-based discrimination. So, the Supreme Court held that ‘the discrimination on the ground ‘sex’ under Article 15 and 16 includes discrimination on the of gender identity. The expression ‘sex’ used in Article 15 and 16 in not just limited to the biological sex of male or female, but intended to include people who consider themselves to be neither male or female. Apex court held that ‘the Transgender communities are legally entitled and eligible to get the benefits of SEBC (Socially and Educationally Backward Classes). The state is bound to take some affirmative action for their advancement so that the injustice done to them for centuries could be remedied’.

It also held that ‘values of privacy, self-identity, autonomy and personal integrity are fundamental rights guaranteed to member of the transgender community under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India and the State is bound to protect and recognize those rights’. Self-determination of gender is an integral part of personal autonomy under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Hijras/Eunuchs, therefore, have to be considered as the Third Gender over and above binary genders for the purpose of safeguarding their rights under Part III of our Constitution and the laws made by the Parliament and the State Legislature. The country's first university for transgender community will be opened in Uttar Pradesh's Kushinagar district to facilitate its members to study right from class one to PG and even do research and get PhD degree. The university, which will come up in Fazilnagar block of Kushinagar district, is being built by the Akhil Bhartiya Kinnar Siksha Seva Trust (All-India transgender education service trust).

National Legal Services Authority vs. Union of India is a landmark case which dealt with the grievances of the members of the Transgender Community in India. The National Legal Services Authority came forward to advocate their cause by filing Writ Petition in 2012. The Transgender Communities sought a legal declaration of their gender identity than the one assigned to them, male or female, at the time of birth. The Supreme Court observed that the recognition of ‘sex identity gender’ of persons and ‘guarantee to equality and non-discrimination’ on the ground of gender identity or expression is increasingly gaining acceptance in international law and therefore be applied in India as well. In Kesavannanda Bharti vs State of Kerala (1973), it was stated that in view of Article 51 of the Constitution, the Court must interpret the language of the Constitution in the light of the UN Charter and the solemn declaration subscribed to it by India. 

Article 14 of the Constitution states that ‘the State shall not deny any person equality before the law and equal protection of the law’. Article 14 does not restrict the word ‘person’ and its application only to male or female. Therefore the Apex Court held that ‘transgender persons who are neither male/female fall within the expression ‘person’ and hence, entitled to legal protection of laws in all spheres of State activity, including employment, healthcare, education as well as equal civil and citizenship rights, as enjoyed by any other citizen of this country’. The Court held that ‘discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation or gender identity impairs equality before the law and equal protection of the law and violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Article 15 and 16 prohibit discrimination against any citizen on certain enumerated grounds, including the ground of ‘sex’. Both Articles prohibit all forms of gender bias and gender-based discrimination. So, the Supreme Court held that ‘the discrimination on the ground ‘sex’ under Article 15 and 16 includes discrimination on the of gender identity. The expression ‘sex’ used in Article 15 and 16 in not just limited to the biological sex of male or female, but intended to include people who consider themselves to be neither male or female. Apex court held that ‘the Transgender communities are legally entitled and eligible to get the benefits of SEBC (Socially and Educationally Backward Classes). The state is bound to take some affirmative action for their advancement so that the injustice done to them for centuries could be remedied’.

It also held that ‘values of privacy, self-identity, autonomy and personal integrity are fundamental rights guaranteed to member of the transgender community under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India and the State is bound to protect and recognize those rights’. Self-determination of gender is an integral part of personal autonomy under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Hijras/Eunuchs, therefore, have to be considered as the Third Gender over and above binary genders for the purpose of safeguarding their rights under Part III of our Constitution and the laws made by the Parliament and the State Legislature. The country's first university for transgender community will be opened in Uttar Pradesh's Kushinagar district to facilitate its members to study right from class one to PG and even do research and get PhD degree. The university, which will come up in Fazilnagar block of Kushinagar district, is being built by the Akhil Bhartiya Kinnar Siksha Seva Trust (All-India transgender education service trust).

National Legal Services Authority vs. Union of India is a landmark case which dealt with the grievances of the members of the Transgender Community in India. The National Legal Services Authority came forward to advocate their cause by filing Writ Petition in 2012. The Transgender Communities sought a legal declaration of their gender identity than the one assigned to them, male or female, at the time of birth. The Supreme Court observed that the recognition of ‘sex identity gender’ of persons and ‘guarantee to equality and non-discrimination’ on the ground of gender identity or expression is increasingly gaining acceptance in international law and therefore be applied in India as well. In Kesavannanda Bharti vs State of Kerala (1973), it was stated that in view of Article 51 of the Constitution, the Court must interpret the language of the Constitution in the light of the UN Charter and the solemn declaration subscribed to it by India. 

Article 14 of the Constitution states that ‘the State shall not deny any person equality before the law and equal protection of the law’. Article 14 does not restrict the word ‘person’ and its application only to male or female. Therefore the Apex Court held that ‘transgender persons who are neither male/female fall within the expression ‘person’ and hence, entitled to legal protection of laws in all spheres of State activity, including employment, healthcare, education as well as equal civil and citizenship rights, as enjoyed by any other citizen of this country’. The Court held that ‘discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation or gender identity impairs equality before the law and equal protection of the law and violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Article 15 and 16 prohibit discrimination against any citizen on certain enumerated grounds, including the ground of ‘sex’. Both Articles prohibit all forms of gender bias and gender-based discrimination. So, the Supreme Court held that ‘the discrimination on the ground ‘sex’ under Article 15 and 16 includes discrimination on the of gender identity. The expression ‘sex’ used in Article 15 and 16 in not just limited to the biological sex of male or female, but intended to include people who consider themselves to be neither male or female. Apex court held that ‘the Transgender communities are legally entitled and eligible to get the benefits of SEBC (Socially and Educationally Backward Classes). The state is bound to take some affirmative action for their advancement so that the injustice done to them for centuries could be remedied’.

It also held that ‘values of privacy, self-identity, autonomy and personal integrity are fundamental rights guaranteed to member of the transgender community under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India and the State is bound to protect and recognize those rights’. Self-determination of gender is an integral part of personal autonomy under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Hijras/Eunuchs, therefore, have to be considered as the Third Gender over and above binary genders for the purpose of safeguarding their rights under Part III of our Constitution and the laws made by the Parliament and the State Legislature. The country's first university for transgender community will be opened in Uttar Pradesh's Kushinagar district to facilitate its members to study right from class one to PG and even do research and get PhD degree. The university, which will come up in Fazilnagar block of Kushinagar district, is being built by the Akhil Bhartiya Kinnar Siksha Seva Trust (All-India transgender education service trust).

National Legal Services Authority vs. Union of India is a landmark case which dealt with the grievances of the members of the Transgender Community in India. The National Legal Services Authority came forward to advocate their cause by filing Writ Petition in 2012. The Transgender Communities sought a legal declaration of their gender identity than the one assigned to them, male or female, at the time of birth. The Supreme Court observed that the recognition of ‘sex identity gender’ of persons and ‘guarantee to equality and non-discrimination’ on the ground of gender identity or expression is increasingly gaining acceptance in international law and therefore be applied in India as well. In Kesavannanda Bharti vs State of Kerala (1973), it was stated that in view of Article 51 of the Constitution, the Court must interpret the language of the Constitution in the light of the UN Charter and the solemn declaration subscribed to it by India. 

Article 14 of the Constitution states that ‘the State shall not deny any person equality before the law and equal protection of the law’. Article 14 does not restrict the word ‘person’ and its application only to male or female. Therefore the Apex Court held that ‘transgender persons who are neither male/female fall within the expression ‘person’ and hence, entitled to legal protection of laws in all spheres of State activity, including employment, healthcare, education as well as equal civil and citizenship rights, as enjoyed by any other citizen of this country’. The Court held that ‘discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation or gender identity impairs equality before the law and equal protection of the law and violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Article 15 and 16 prohibit discrimination against any citizen on certain enumerated grounds, including the ground of ‘sex’. Both Articles prohibit all forms of gender bias and gender-based discrimination. So, the Supreme Court held that ‘the discrimination on the ground ‘sex’ under Article 15 and 16 includes discrimination on the of gender identity. The expression ‘sex’ used in Article 15 and 16 in not just limited to the biological sex of male or female, but intended to include people who consider themselves to be neither male or female. Apex court held that ‘the Transgender communities are legally entitled and eligible to get the benefits of SEBC (Socially and Educationally Backward Classes). The state is bound to take some affirmative action for their advancement so that the injustice done to them for centuries could be remedied’.

It also held that ‘values of privacy, self-identity, autonomy and personal integrity are fundamental rights guaranteed to member of the transgender community under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India and the State is bound to protect and recognize those rights’. Self-determination of gender is an integral part of personal autonomy under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Hijras/Eunuchs, therefore, have to be considered as the Third Gender over and above binary genders for the purpose of safeguarding their rights under Part III of our Constitution and the laws made by the Parliament and the State Legislature. The country's first university for transgender community will be opened in Uttar Pradesh's Kushinagar district to facilitate its members to study right from class one to PG and even do research and get PhD degree. The university, which will come up in Fazilnagar block of Kushinagar district, is being built by the Akhil Bhartiya Kinnar Siksha Seva Trust (All-India transgender education service trust).

The Supreme Court on 21 February, issued notices to the Centre and states in a writ petition seeking the enforcement of the fundamental duties of citizens as enshrined in the Constitution of India. The petition, filed by advocate Durga Dutt, argues that citizens have a duty to uphold the ideals of the country and to contribute to its growth and betterment, and that not carrying out the fundamental duties of the citizen has a direct bearing on the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. “The Fundamental Duties are intended to serve as a constant reminder to every citizen that while the Constitution conferred on them certain Fundamental Rights specifically, it also requires citizens to observe certain basic norms of democratic conduct and democratic behaviour because rights and duties are correlative… There have been cases where Fundamental Duties have been brazenly flouted by the people including the officers of the law and which in turn resulted in violation of Fundamental rights of other citizens,” the petition argued.

The issue of fundamental duties crops up periodically in public discourse. In his Constitution Day address to a Joint Session of Parliament in 2019, Prime Minister Narendra Modi stressed the importance of constitutional duties, while President Ram Nath stressed the difference between rights and duties, and Vice President M Venkaiah Naidu called for fundamental duties to be included in the school curriculum and for a list of the duties to be displayed at educational institutions and other public places. Then Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad, wrote in The Indian Express, calling for citizens to remember their fundamental duties just as they remembered their fundamental rights.

The fundamental duties were incorporated in Part IV-A of the Constitution by The Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976, during Indira Gandhi’s Emergency. Article 51(A) describes 11 fundamental duties — 10 came with the 42nd Amendment; the 11th was added by the 86th Amendment in 2002, when Atal Bihari Vajpayee was Prime Minister.

These duties are not enforceable by law. However, a court may take them into account while adjudicating on a matter. They were made a part of the Constitution to emphasise the obligation of the citizen in return for the fundamental rights that he or she enjoys. The Russian Constitution has the concept of fundamental duties. The last subsection, (k), on the education of children, was added in 2002 by The Constitution (86th Amendment) Act. The same amendment also introduced Article 21A in the Constitution: “The State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years in such manner as the State may, by law, determine.” ……….(Taken from indianexpress.com)

The Supreme Court on 21 February, issued notices to the Centre and states in a writ petition seeking the enforcement of the fundamental duties of citizens as enshrined in the Constitution of India. The petition, filed by advocate Durga Dutt, argues that citizens have a duty to uphold the ideals of the country and to contribute to its growth and betterment, and that not carrying out the fundamental duties of the citizen has a direct bearing on the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. “The Fundamental Duties are intended to serve as a constant reminder to every citizen that while the Constitution conferred on them certain Fundamental Rights specifically, it also requires citizens to observe certain basic norms of democratic conduct and democratic behaviour because rights and duties are correlative… There have been cases where Fundamental Duties have been brazenly flouted by the people including the officers of the law and which in turn resulted in violation of Fundamental rights of other citizens,” the petition argued.

The issue of fundamental duties crops up periodically in public discourse. In his Constitution Day address to a Joint Session of Parliament in 2019, Prime Minister Narendra Modi stressed the importance of constitutional duties, while President Ram Nath stressed the difference between rights and duties, and Vice President M Venkaiah Naidu called for fundamental duties to be included in the school curriculum and for a list of the duties to be displayed at educational institutions and other public places. Then Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad, wrote in The Indian Express, calling for citizens to remember their fundamental duties just as they remembered their fundamental rights.

The fundamental duties were incorporated in Part IV-A of the Constitution by The Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976, during Indira Gandhi’s Emergency. Article 51(A) describes 11 fundamental duties — 10 came with the 42nd Amendment; the 11th was added by the 86th Amendment in 2002, when Atal Bihari Vajpayee was Prime Minister.

These duties are not enforceable by law. However, a court may take them into account while adjudicating on a matter. They were made a part of the Constitution to emphasise the obligation of the citizen in return for the fundamental rights that he or she enjoys. The Russian Constitution has the concept of fundamental duties. The last subsection, (k), on the education of children, was added in 2002 by The Constitution (86th Amendment) Act. The same amendment also introduced Article 21A in the Constitution: “The State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years in such manner as the State may, by law, determine.” ……….(Taken from indianexpress.com)

The Supreme Court on 21 February, issued notices to the Centre and states in a writ petition seeking the enforcement of the fundamental duties of citizens as enshrined in the Constitution of India. The petition, filed by advocate Durga Dutt, argues that citizens have a duty to uphold the ideals of the country and to contribute to its growth and betterment, and that not carrying out the fundamental duties of the citizen has a direct bearing on the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. “The Fundamental Duties are intended to serve as a constant reminder to every citizen that while the Constitution conferred on them certain Fundamental Rights specifically, it also requires citizens to observe certain basic norms of democratic conduct and democratic behaviour because rights and duties are correlative… There have been cases where Fundamental Duties have been brazenly flouted by the people including the officers of the law and which in turn resulted in violation of Fundamental rights of other citizens,” the petition argued.

The issue of fundamental duties crops up periodically in public discourse. In his Constitution Day address to a Joint Session of Parliament in 2019, Prime Minister Narendra Modi stressed the importance of constitutional duties, while President Ram Nath stressed the difference between rights and duties, and Vice President M Venkaiah Naidu called for fundamental duties to be included in the school curriculum and for a list of the duties to be displayed at educational institutions and other public places. Then Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad, wrote in The Indian Express, calling for citizens to remember their fundamental duties just as they remembered their fundamental rights.

The fundamental duties were incorporated in Part IV-A of the Constitution by The Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976, during Indira Gandhi’s Emergency. Article 51(A) describes 11 fundamental duties — 10 came with the 42nd Amendment; the 11th was added by the 86th Amendment in 2002, when Atal Bihari Vajpayee was Prime Minister.

These duties are not enforceable by law. However, a court may take them into account while adjudicating on a matter. They were made a part of the Constitution to emphasise the obligation of the citizen in return for the fundamental rights that he or she enjoys. The Russian Constitution has the concept of fundamental duties. The last subsection, (k), on the education of children, was added in 2002 by The Constitution (86th Amendment) Act. The same amendment also introduced Article 21A in the Constitution: “The State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years in such manner as the State may, by law, determine.” ……….(Taken from indianexpress.com)

The Supreme Court on 21 February, issued notices to the Centre and states in a writ petition seeking the enforcement of the fundamental duties of citizens as enshrined in the Constitution of India. The petition, filed by advocate Durga Dutt, argues that citizens have a duty to uphold the ideals of the country and to contribute to its growth and betterment, and that not carrying out the fundamental duties of the citizen has a direct bearing on the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. “The Fundamental Duties are intended to serve as a constant reminder to every citizen that while the Constitution conferred on them certain Fundamental Rights specifically, it also requires citizens to observe certain basic norms of democratic conduct and democratic behaviour because rights and duties are correlative… There have been cases where Fundamental Duties have been brazenly flouted by the people including the officers of the law and which in turn resulted in violation of Fundamental rights of other citizens,” the petition argued.

The issue of fundamental duties crops up periodically in public discourse. In his Constitution Day address to a Joint Session of Parliament in 2019, Prime Minister Narendra Modi stressed the importance of constitutional duties, while President Ram Nath stressed the difference between rights and duties, and Vice President M Venkaiah Naidu called for fundamental duties to be included in the school curriculum and for a list of the duties to be displayed at educational institutions and other public places. Then Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad, wrote in The Indian Express, calling for citizens to remember their fundamental duties just as they remembered their fundamental rights.

The fundamental duties were incorporated in Part IV-A of the Constitution by The Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976, during Indira Gandhi’s Emergency. Article 51(A) describes 11 fundamental duties — 10 came with the 42nd Amendment; the 11th was added by the 86th Amendment in 2002, when Atal Bihari Vajpayee was Prime Minister.

These duties are not enforceable by law. However, a court may take them into account while adjudicating on a matter. They were made a part of the Constitution to emphasise the obligation of the citizen in return for the fundamental rights that he or she enjoys. The Russian Constitution has the concept of fundamental duties. The last subsection, (k), on the education of children, was added in 2002 by The Constitution (86th Amendment) Act. The same amendment also introduced Article 21A in the Constitution: “The State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years in such manner as the State may, by law, determine.” ……….(Taken from indianexpress.com)

The Supreme Court on 21 February, issued notices to the Centre and states in a writ petition seeking the enforcement of the fundamental duties of citizens as enshrined in the Constitution of India. The petition, filed by advocate Durga Dutt, argues that citizens have a duty to uphold the ideals of the country and to contribute to its growth and betterment, and that not carrying out the fundamental duties of the citizen has a direct bearing on the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. “The Fundamental Duties are intended to serve as a constant reminder to every citizen that while the Constitution conferred on them certain Fundamental Rights specifically, it also requires citizens to observe certain basic norms of democratic conduct and democratic behaviour because rights and duties are correlative… There have been cases where Fundamental Duties have been brazenly flouted by the people including the officers of the law and which in turn resulted in violation of Fundamental rights of other citizens,” the petition argued.

The issue of fundamental duties crops up periodically in public discourse. In his Constitution Day address to a Joint Session of Parliament in 2019, Prime Minister Narendra Modi stressed the importance of constitutional duties, while President Ram Nath stressed the difference between rights and duties, and Vice President M Venkaiah Naidu called for fundamental duties to be included in the school curriculum and for a list of the duties to be displayed at educational institutions and other public places. Then Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad, wrote in The Indian Express, calling for citizens to remember their fundamental duties just as they remembered their fundamental rights.

The fundamental duties were incorporated in Part IV-A of the Constitution by The Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976, during Indira Gandhi’s Emergency. Article 51(A) describes 11 fundamental duties — 10 came with the 42nd Amendment; the 11th was added by the 86th Amendment in 2002, when Atal Bihari Vajpayee was Prime Minister.

These duties are not enforceable by law. However, a court may take them into account while adjudicating on a matter. They were made a part of the Constitution to emphasise the obligation of the citizen in return for the fundamental rights that he or she enjoys. The Russian Constitution has the concept of fundamental duties. The last subsection, (k), on the education of children, was added in 2002 by The Constitution (86th Amendment) Act. The same amendment also introduced Article 21A in the Constitution: “The State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years in such manner as the State may, by law, determine.” ……….(Taken from indianexpress.com)