In the Indian Constitution, writs are formal written orders issued by courts, primarily the Supreme Court (under Article 32) and High Courts (under Article 226), to enforce fundamental rights and ensure governmental accountability. They act as a remedy against the violation of fundamental rights and can also be used to correct legal wrongs. There are five main types of writs: Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Certiorari, Prohibition, and Quo-Warranto, each serving a distinct purpose.
Types of Writs:
Habeas Corpus:
This writ means "you have the body" and is issued to release a person who is believed to be unlawfully detained. It ensures personal liberty by requiring the person in custody to be brought before the court to justify the detention.
Mandamus:
Literally "we command," this writ is issued to compel a public authority or government official to perform a specific duty or action when they have failed to do so. It is a directive order ensuring the government acts in accordance with its obligations.
Certiorari:
Meaning "to be certified," this writ is issued to quash or set aside the order of a lower court or tribunal when the court's decision is deemed illegal or beyond its jurisdiction. It acts as a check on the powers of subordinate courts.
Prohibition:
This writ prevents a lower court or tribunal from exceeding its jurisdiction by issuing an order or taking action that is beyond its powers. It ensures that courts stay within their defined legal boundaries.
Quo Warranto:
Meaning "by what authority," this writ is used to question the legality of a person's claim to a public office or position. It ensures that public offices are held by individuals with legitimate authority.

Caveat emptor is a Latin phrase that is translated as “let the buyer beware.” The phrase describes the concept in contract law that places the burden of due diligence on the buyer of a good or service. Caveat emptor is a fundamental principle in commerce and contractual relationships between a buyer and a seller.
According to the caveat emptor principle, a buyer is responsible for performing the necessary due diligence before the purchase to ensure that a good is not defective and that it suits his/her needs. If the buyer fails to perform the necessary actions, he or she will not be entitled to any remedies for damages in case the purchased product shows significant defects.

The main motive behind the Consumer Protection Act, first enacted in 1986 and later updated in 2019, was to protect consumers from unfair trade practices, fraud, and exploitation by businesses. It aims to empower consumers by providing them with legal backing to seek redressal and compensation for unfair practices. The Act also seeks to promote consumer education and awareness to ensure they are informed about their rights and responsibilities.

The doctrine of severability, also known as the separability doctrine, is a legal principle that allows a contract or law to remain enforceable even if some parts are found to be invalid or unconstitutional. If a provision is deemed invalid, it can be "severed" or removed, leaving the remaining valid portions in effect. This principle helps to preserve the original intent of the parties or lawmakers while avoiding the invalidation of the entire contract or law.

The concept of separation of powers in the Indian Constitution refers to the division of government responsibilities among three distinct branches: the Legislature (which makes laws), the Executive (which implements laws), and the Judiciary (which interprets laws). This doctrine aims to prevent the concentration of power in any one organ, thereby promoting a system of checks and balances essential for a democratic setup. While the Indian Constitution does not explicitly mention the separation of powers, it implies this principle through various provisions, such as Article 50 (separation of judiciary from executive), Articles 53 and 154 (vesting executive power in the President and Governors), and Articles 121 and 211 (restricting legislative discussion of judicial conduct). The Supreme Court has recognized separation of powers as part of the basic structure of the Constitution, meaning it cannot be abrogated even by constitutional amendment. However, the Indian model does not follow a rigid separation; instead, it allows for some functional overlap to ensure effective checks and balances, with each organ exercising certain controls over the others to prevent abuse of power and safeguard constitutional democracy.

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, contains a total of 358 sections organized into 20 chapters.

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, while intended as a progressive overhaul of India’s criminal law, does not achieve comprehensive gender neutrality, particularly in the context of sexual offences. Although the BNS introduces gender-neutral language in some provisions—such as replacing "minor girl" with "child" to cover both boys and girls for certain offences of procurement and trafficking—the core provisions related to rape and sexual assault remain gender-specific, recognizing only women as victims and men as perpetrators. This approach fails to protect men and transgender persons from sexual offences, perpetuating a gender-biased legal framework and overlooking the realities faced by male and non-binary survivors. Legal scholars and commentators have criticized the BNS for missing the opportunity to create truly inclusive, gender-neutral laws that would ensure justice and support for all individuals, regardless of gender identity.

Constitutional Validity of Controversial Provisions under the BNS
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, which replaced the Indian Penal Code, has introduced, modified, or omitted several provisions that have sparked constitutional debate. Below is a discussion of the constitutional validity of some of its most controversial provisions, referencing recent legal and academic analysis.

1. Replacement of Sedition with "Acts Endangering Sovereignty, Unity and Integrity"
Background: The BNS has removed the explicit offence of sedition (Section 124A, IPC) and replaced it with a new offence targeting acts endangering the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India.

Constitutional Issues: The sedition law’s constitutional validity was challenged on the grounds of violating Articles 14 (equality), 19(1)(a) (freedom of speech), and 21 (right to life and personal liberty). The Supreme Court had previously upheld sedition’s validity only under Article 19(1)(a), but evolving jurisprudence has called for a broader reassessment.

Current Concerns: The new BNS provision, while omitting the term "sedition," is similarly broad and may be vulnerable to constitutional challenge for vagueness and potential misuse against free speech. The Supreme Court has already indicated the need for careful scrutiny of such provisions to ensure they do not infringe on fundamental rights.

2. Section 69: Sexual Intercourse by Employing Deceitful Means
Background: Section 69 of the BNS criminalizes sexual intercourse obtained through deceitful means, such as false promises of marriage.

Constitutional Issues: Critics argue that the provision is prone to misuse, perpetuates outdated notions about female agency, and may infringe upon personal liberty and privacy (protected under Article 21). There are concerns that the section could criminalize consensual relationships based on subjective interpretations of "deceit," raising questions about the principle of legality and the right to a fair trial.

Potential for Challenge: The overbreadth and ambiguity of the provision could invite constitutional challenges for violating Articles 14 and 21, particularly if it leads to arbitrary or discriminatory enforcement.

3. Definition of Mental Illness and Exclusion of Mental Retardation
Background: The BNS changes the defence of unsound mind to "mental illness," which excludes mental retardation but includes substance abuse. This means individuals with mental retardation may be prosecuted, while those voluntarily intoxicated could be exonerated.

Constitutional Issues: This redefinition raises equality concerns under Article 14, as it may result in unequal treatment of similarly situated individuals. The exclusion of mental retardation from the defence could be challenged as arbitrary and inconsistent with the principle of equal protection.

4. New Offences and Enhanced Punishments
Background: The BNS introduces new offences (such as terrorism and organized crime) and increases punishments for certain acts (e.g., hit-and-run cases).

Constitutional Issues: While the legislature has the power to define offences and prescribe punishments, such provisions must satisfy the test of reasonableness under Articles 14 and 21. Any disproportionate or arbitrary punishment could be challenged as violating the right to life and personal liberty.

Charge Sheet under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023
(For Rape, Kidnapping, and Criminal Intimidation – Hypothetical Case Occurred in Delhi)

Police Station: Connaught Place Police Station, New Delhi
District: New Delhi
Year: 2025
FIR No.: 112/2025
Date: 15.05.2025
Charge Sheet No.: 36/2025
Date of Charge Sheet: 02.06.2025

I. Details of the Accused
Name: Rajesh Kumar

Father’s Name: Suresh Kumar

Address: 45, Karol Bagh, New Delhi – 110005

Age/Sex: 28/Male

Occupation: Private Job

II. Details of the Complainant/Victim
Name: Priya Sharma

Father’s Name: Mahesh Sharma

Address: 22, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi – 110024

Age/Sex: 22/Female

III. Acts and Sections Invoked (BNS, 2023)
Section 63, BNS – Rape

Section 97, BNS – Kidnapping

Section 351, BNS – Criminal Intimidation

IV. Brief Statement of Facts
On 12.05.2025, at about 19:30 hours, the accused Rajesh Kumar, resident of Karol Bagh, New Delhi, kidnapped Priya Sharma, resident of Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi, from near Central Park, Connaught Place, without her consent and against her will. The accused took the victim to a rented flat at Patel Nagar, New Delhi, and committed rape upon her. During the commission of these acts, the accused also threatened the victim with dire consequences, including threats to her life and reputation, to instill fear and prevent her from reporting the crime.

During investigation:

The victim’s statement was recorded under Section 183 BNSS.

Medical examination reports from RML Hospital corroborate the allegations.

Site inspection, seizure of relevant evidence, and collection of CCTV footage from Connaught Place and Patel Nagar were conducted as per Delhi Police protocols.

The accused was identified by the victim and independent witness, Sunita Devi, caretaker of the Patel Nagar flat.

The accused’s location at the time of the offence was established through CDR analysis of his mobile number 9876543210.

V. Charges Framed
That you, Rajesh Kumar, on 12.05.2025, at Central Park, Connaught Place, and Patel Nagar, New Delhi:

Kidnapped Priya Sharma (Section 97, BNS).

Committed rape upon Priya Sharma (Section 63, BNS).

Criminally intimidated Priya Sharma by threatening her with injury to her person and reputation (Section 351, BNS).

You are, therefore, charged with the offences punishable under the above-mentioned sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

VI. List of Witnesses
Priya Sharma, 22, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi – Victim

Sunita Devi, 50, Patel Nagar, New Delhi – Witness/Caretaker

Dr. Anjali Verma, RML Hospital, New Delhi – Medical Officer

Inspector Arvind Singh, Connaught Place Police Station – Investigating Officer

Ramesh Gupta, 30, Connaught Place, New Delhi – Eye Witness

VII. List of Documents/Evidence
FIR Copy (No. 112/2025)

Medical Examination Report of Victim and Accused (RML Hospital)

Statements under Section 183 BNSS (Victim, Witnesses)

Seizure Memos (Clothes, Forensic Evidence)

Site Plan (Connaught Place, Patel Nagar)

CCTV Footage (Connaught Place, Patel Nagar)

CDR/IPDR Analysis of Accused’s Mobile Number

Photographs from Scene of Crime

VIII. Compliance and Additional Notes
The charge sheet is being submitted within the prescribed time limit as per Section 193 of BNSS.

A copy of the charge sheet is being provided to the victim as per Section 193, BNSS.

Witness protection measures have been considered as per Delhi Police protocols.

If any supplementary charge sheet is required, it will be filed with the court’s permission and within the stipulated time.

Investigating Officer:
Inspector Arvind Singh
Connaught Place Police Station, New Delhi
Signature:
Date: 02.06.2025

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, aims to modernize India's criminal law by addressing issues like mob lynching and terrorism, while also focusing on victim protection and faster trials. However, there are concerns about its effectiveness and whether it adequately upholds principles of criminal jurisprudence and natural justice, particularly in its provisions on mob lynching and terrorism-related offences.
Mob Lynching:
Enhanced Punishment:
The BNS introduces severe penalties for mob lynching, including life imprisonment or even the death penalty.
Specific Provisions:
The BNS provides for specific punishments when a mob lynching involves five or more individuals and is based on identity markers like caste or religious belief.
Potential Concerns:
Some argue that the definition of "mob lynching" is broad and could lead to overreach or misapplication of the law.
Need for Clarity:
There's a need for clear definitions and guidelines to ensure that the provisions are applied fairly and prevent potential misuse, according to Drishti Judiciary.
Terrorism-related Offences:
New Provisions:
The BNS introduces new offenses related to terrorism, aiming to address modern challenges like cybercrime and national security.
Broad Definitions:
Some argue that the definitions of "terrorism" and related terms are overly broad and vague, potentially leading to abuse and overreach.
Parallel Laws:
The existence of both BNS provisions and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) for terrorism-related offenses can lead to confusion and inconsistent application.
Need for Clarity:
Clear definitions and guidelines are crucial to prevent potential misuse of the provisions and ensure that they are applied fairly and in accordance with the principles of natural justice.
Overall Assessment:
The BNS aims to address contemporary challenges in criminal justice, but concerns remain about its effectiveness and potential for misuse. It's crucial that the law is implemented with careful consideration of the principles of criminal jurisprudence and natural justice, according to Juris Centre. This includes providing clear definitions, ensuring proper training for law enforcement, and maintaining judicial oversight to prevent potential abuses.