Taxes are the major source of revenue for a country to run its administration while upholding its sovereignty. In India, revenue is collected through direct and indirect taxes with due adherence to the laws. With a revolution in the sphere of indirect taxation in India in 2016, there came the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act of 2017. It subsumed all the existing indirect taxes under one single umbrella, i.e., GST, with the motto of establishing a 'One Nation, One Tax policy. The basic intention behind such reform was to make the tax burden lighter on the taxpayer by removing the cascading effect and introducing a better and easy compliance mechanism that ultimately focused on enhancing the tax base for the government. Alongside, it also incorporated provisions relating to search, seizure, arrest, and bail with regard to indirect tax evasion in the country. This paper is an analytical study of the provisions pertaining to arrest and bail with conditions precedent as specified under the GST Act and the corresponding impact so far as the implementation of the Act is concerned. The paper also draws inferences from the judicial pronouncements in this regard.

IVF and Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) have offered millions of infertile couples a ray of hope. ART has revolutionized the lives of countless hopeful couples by fulfilling their dream of having children. Advanced research practices have been made possible by ART. The technology also challenges societys views on human life, justice, equal rights, and entitlement to biological offspring. The paper discusses the legal importance of ART, role of ART clinics, the criteria for determining whether a couple deserves to use ART measures, etc. It also examines the legal issues involved in the reproductive rights of women. It is felt that more laws are needed to address the problems brought out by ART.

The purpose of the criminal justice system is prevention of crime, maintenance of law and order to preserve public peace, as well as protection of rights of the important stakeholders, i.e., the accused and crime victim. In India, the criminal justice system is accused-oriented. The Constitution of India guarantees certain rights to the accused under articles 20, 21, and 22. Conversely, victims of a crime are forgotten. They are considered mere witnesses in the trial. In the last few decades, many countries in the world have recognized the need to protect the rights of the crime victims. But unfortunately in India, there is no substantial improvement in the condition of victims. In 2003, Justice Malimath Committee made several recommendations concerning victims of crime. Amendments have been made to the Criminal Procedure Code in 2008 and Section 2(wa) has been inserted in the code which provides an elaborate definition of a victim. Few other sections also have been inserted by Criminal Law Amendment Acts which contain provisions relating to the victim. Nonetheless, the needs of the victims are not properly addressed and their role in the criminal justice system is nominal. This paper examines the role of crime victims in the criminal justice system and suggests measures to enhance their position.

hildren under the age of 18 who are in dispute with the law and have been arrested on criminal charges or are involved in criminal conduct are referred to as juvenile delinquents. A police officer cannot legally arrest a minor; they must instead be captured. Teenagers between the ages of 16 and 18 who commit very terrible crimes are the only ones who may be prosecuted and sentenced as adults. After a psychological assessment of a juvenile offenders criminal behavior, the next step in rehabilitation is to engage him or her in meditative practices like yoga and meditation. The Juvenile Justice Act of 2015 specifies in Section 15 that the Juvenile Justice Board may carry out a preliminary assessment to determine whether or not a child between the ages of 16 and 18 has the maturity, mental capacity, and physical ability to commit a heinous offense. To help them decide whether or not to try a kid as an adult, the board will consult with licensed psychologists and psychosocial specialists who have extensive expertise working with problematic youth. Experts have pointed out that children under the age of 18 are to be treated equally, as stated in the Juvenile Justice Act of 1995 and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child 2015. This is not in keeping with Article 14s guarantee of equality.