International law generally prohibits pre-emptive strikes under the **UN Charter**, which allows the use of force only in cases of **self-defense against an armed attack** (Article 51) or with **UN Security Council authorization**. A pre-emptive strike—using force before an actual attack occurs—is controversial because it challenges the principle of state sovereignty and the prohibition on the use of force (Article 2(4)). While some argue that pre-emptive self-defense may be justified if an attack is **imminent, overwhelming, and leaves no choice**, this remains a debated and largely unsettled issue in international law, with most scholars and states considering it illegal unless under extreme necessity.

The legal implications of recognizing or not recognizing a state under international law are significant, impacting a state's ability to engage in international relations, access resources, and maintain its sovereignty. Recognition, particularly de jure recognition, grants a state the capacity to enter into treaties, establish diplomatic relations, and enjoy sovereign immunity in the courts of the recognizing state. Conversely, non-recognition can hinder a state's ability to function on the international stage, limiting its access to legal recourse, diplomatic channels, and international cooperation

Yes, marital rape should be criminalized in India as it violates a woman's fundamental rights under the Constitution, including **Article 14 (equality before law)**, **Article 19 (freedom of expression and dignity)**, and **Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty)**. The current exception under **Section 375 of the IPC**, which exempts husbands from rape charges, is inconsistent with the principles of bodily autonomy and consent. Supreme Court judgments have increasingly recognized a woman’s right to dignity and sexual autonomy within marriage. Criminalizing marital rape would align Indian law with global human rights standards and fulfill constitutional guarantees of gender equality and protection against violence.

Balancing data protection and innovation in AI-based platforms is challenging because AI systems rely heavily on large datasets to improve performance, often conflicting with data protection principles like minimization and consent. Ensuring user privacy while enabling data-driven innovation requires navigating complex regulations, such as GDPR or India’s DPDP Act. Challenges include obtaining meaningful consent, preventing data misuse, ensuring transparency in automated decisions, and avoiding algorithmic bias. Additionally, enforcing the right to erasure or data portability in AI models is technically difficult, often limiting compliance and slowing innovation.

The judgment mentioned that a competent court can use its discretion to impose “any condition" for granting of bail under Sections 437 (3) and 439 (1) (a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which inevitably includes imposing certain travelling restrictions as well

Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 grants significant discretionary powers to the High Court and the Court of Session to grant or deny bail in certain circumstances and also allows them to modify or set aside bail conditions imposed by a Magistrate

In Indian law, bail is the temporary release of a person accused of a crime from legal custody, subject to certain conditions imposed by a court or officer. The primary purpose of bail is to ensure the accused's appearance in court for trial while avoiding unnecessary detention.

Anticipatory bail is a pre-arrest protection under Indian law, allowing someone to seek bail before they are arrested for a non-bailable offense. It's essentially a court order granting bail in anticipation of arrest. This helps individuals avoid immediate custody and allows them to cooperate with the investigation

Interim bail is a temporary bail granted to an accused person before a final decision is made on their regular or anticipatory bail application. It's a short-term relief to prevent unnecessary incarceration while the court considers the main bail application

If someone is arrested despite having anticipatory bail granted, the arrest is considered illegal, and they can seek immediate relief from the court that issued the bail order. The accused should inform the court of the illegal arrest and request their release under the anticipatory bail order.