“The Supreme Court has banned mining in the Aravalli Hills to stop degradation the forest cover and to maintain ecological balance. However, the stone mining to still prevalent in the border district of the affected State with connivance of certain corrupt forest officials and politicians. Young and dynamic SP who was recently posted in the affected district promised to himself to stop this menace. In one of his surprise checks with his team, he found loaded truck with stone trying to escape the mining area. He tried to stop the truck but the truck driver overrun the police officer, killing him on the spot and thereafter managed to flee. Police filed FIR but no breakthrough was achieved in the case for almost three months. Ashok who was the Investigative Journalist working with leading TV channel, suo moto started investigating the case. Within one month, Ashok got breakthrough by interacting with local people, stone mining masia and government officials. He prepared his investigative story and presented to the CMD of the TV channel. He exposed in his investigative report the complete nexus of stone mafia working with blessing of corrupt police and civil officials and politicians. The politician who was involved in the mafia was no one else but local MLA who was considered to be very close to the Chief Minister. After going through the investigative report, the CMD advised Ashok to drop the idea of making the story public through electronic media. He informed that the local MLA was not only the relative of the owner of the TV channel but also had unofficially 20 percent share in the channel. The CMD further informed Ashok that his further promotion and hike in pay will be taken care of in addition the soft loan of 10 lakhs which he has taken from the TV channel for his son’s chronic disease will be suitably adjusted if he hands over the investigative report to him. (a) What are the options available with Ashok to cope up with the situation? (b) Critically evaluate/examine each of the options identified by Ashok. (c) What are the ethical dilemmas being faced by Ashok? (d) Which of the options, do you think, would be the most appropriate for Ashok to adopt and why? (e)In the above scenario, what type of training would you suggest for police officers posted to such districts where stone mining illegal activities are rampant?”
This question is available to read here. The practice button generates a fresh question from the same paper. Here, practise an answer plan in keywords. Choose your timer on the next screen. Feedback uses our common 15-point practice rubric, rather than the paper’s original mark allocation.
The Supreme Court has launched a rigorous inquiry into the Andhra Pradesh police regarding the failure to produce Sai Krishna before a magistrate, questioning unexplained delays in filing the First Information Report and the inexplicable disappearance of closed-circuit television footage from the Krishnalanka police station in Vijayawada. A three-judge Bench highlighted profound systemic concerns over custodial non-compliance, police accountability, and the safeguarding of personal liberty under Article 21, demanding comprehensive records in a sealed cover while monitoring ongoing proceedings before the High Court.
The Supreme Court of India has issued a stay on an Allahabad High Court order that directed the personal recovery of ₹5 lakh from the Noida District Magistrate (DM) in relation to a detention case under the National Security Act (NSA). The High Court had imposed the penalty as compensation for the wrongful detention of an individual, citing procedural lapses. In the Supreme Court, senior counsel argued that the decision-making process for such detentions involves a multi-tiered administrative review, involving various officials and legal vetting, which makes it legally contentious to single out a specific civil servant for personal financial liability for an official act. This case brings into focus the delicate balance between judicial oversight of administrative actions and the protection of civil servants acting in the course of their official duties.
The Kerala High Court recently intervened to protect a CPI(M) member from coercive legal action by state authorities following a social media post that compared media coverage of political leaders foreign trips across different tenures. The petitioner argued that the post constituted a legitimate political observation rather than defamation against the Home Minister. This judicial intervention highlights ongoing tensions surrounding the threshold for criminal defamation, police overreach, and the protection of dissenting or comparative political discourse in democratic spaces.