Journal Title : National Journal for Legal Research and Innovative Ideas
ISSN(O):2582-8665
Frequency : Quarterly
Volume : 6
Issue : 1
Period : Oct- Dec 2025
1. WHY WE CLICK “I AGREE”: THE ILLUSION OF ONLINE CONSENT
By - Sakshi Kothari, Research Scholar, Amity University, Gwalior Madhya Pradesh, India & Assistant Professor at ICFAI University, Dehradun Uttarakhand, India
•Abstract
We have done all done it like being on a spree of achieving fastest-fingers-fast, scrolling past pages of “terms and conditions” as soon as we can, clicking “I agree” to get immediate access of service. Presumed rational human beings tend to click “I agree” on most digital platform’s “privacy-policy” or “permission”. In today’s digital world, this has become our daily routine and it’s like using websites, downloading “promising” apps as being advertised, shopping online and in all clicking “I agree” or “allow location while visiting this site” or “accept cookies”. But here comes real question: “when we give our consent repeatedly and so quick, is it really informed?” Or “we are simply ticking a box that law requires without truly understanding what we are agreeing to!”. While legal protocols are designed to ensure transparency and autonomy but behavioural economics has revealed worrisome crack. There’s a vast difference between set ideal “informed consent” and how online users actually behave to such protocols. This paper looks into that very dilemma, “illusion of online consent. This interdisciplinary research including behavioural economics, law, and psychology will help find out why is there a huge gap between protecting user’s data and autonomy to digital-platforms design their own policy for analysing “site-usage” of users. Behavioural economics helps explain this pattern of human decision, shaped by cognitive shortcuts, default settings, and designs. These nudge users towards passively consenting to terms.
To have the access to full paper - CLICK HERE
2. A Comparative Analysis of International Tax Agreements' Impact on Developed and Developing Countries' Tax Policies
By- NISHKA KASHI GOWDA, UG Law Student, Christ (Deemed to be University) Bangalore
•Abstract
This paper presents a comparative analysis of the international tax regime, arguing that its century-long evolution has been defined by a structural ‘sovereignty gap’. This gap systematically advantages developed, capital-exporting nations by constraining the fiscal policy autonomy and revenue-raising capacity of developing, capital-importing countries. The analysis traces the origins of this imbalance from the foundational principles established during the League of Nations era, which privileged residence-based taxation, through their codification in a global network of bilateral treaties dominated by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Model. It critically examines the OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) project, contending that its limited reforms addressed symptoms of tax avoidance without rectifying the underlying inequitable allocation of taxing rights. The paper further dissects the paradoxical outcomes of the subsequent Two-Pillar Solution, which offers marginal revenue gains to developing nations at the cost of significant fiscal sovereignty and unprecedented administrative complexity. Finally, the analysis evaluates the emerging potential of a United Nations-led framework on international tax cooperation as a historic opportunity to challenge the institutional status quo and address these deep-seated structural imbalances.
To have the access to full paper - CLICK HERE
3.PUNISHMENT THEORIES, THEIR VALID JUSTIFICATION, AND CRITICISM
By- MOHD SHAGIL ANSARI & MOHD SHAHRAN, LLM Students, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh
•Abstract
Punishment forms the backbone of the criminal justice system, serving as a means to uphold social order and respond to violations of law. This paper examines the major theories of punishment- deterrent, retributive, preventive, reformative, and contributive- by analysing their underlying justifications and the criticisms they attract. Tracing the evolution of punishment from ancient, harsh practices to modern, humane approaches, the study highlights how each theory reflects a distinct philosophy of justice. While deterrence and retribution emphasize societal protection and moral accountability, preventive and reformative theories focus on incapacitation and rehabilitation of offenders. The contributive theory further shifts attention towards victim compensation and restorative justice. Through critical evaluation, the paper argues that no single theory can adequately serve the ends of justice in isolation. An effective sentencing policy requires a balanced application of these theories, guided by the nature of the offence, the circumstances of the offender, and the broader interests of society. Ultimately, punishment must aim not only to penalize wrongdoing but also to prevent crime, reform offenders, and promote justice in its true sense.
To have the access to full paper - CLICK HERE
4. Artificial Intelligence and Criminal Liability: Legal Challenges
By - Astha Mishra, BALLB, LLM
•Abstract
The rapid evolution of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has significantly reshaped diverse sectors, including healthcare, transportation, finance, and law enforcement. Although AI technologies enhance efficiency and support advanced decision-making, they simultaneously give rise to intricate legal and ethical concerns, particularly within the domain of criminal law. Established doctrines of criminal liability—such as actus reus, mens rea, causation, and accountability—are fundamentally designed around human conduct and therefore face limitations when applied to harm caused by autonomous or semi-autonomous AI systems. This research paper critically examines the inadequacy of the existing Indian criminal law framework in addressing AI-related offences. It analyses potential models for attributing criminal responsibility to developers, users, and corporate entities involved in the design and deployment of AI systems, while also addressing the procedural and evidentiary difficulties encountered in prosecuting such offences. Further, the study undertakes a comparative analysis of international approaches, including the European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act, the United Kingdom’s hybrid liability framework, and ethical guidelines developed by the OECD, with the objective of identifying relevant lessons for India. The paper concludes by advocating the adoption of a risk-based and ethically grounded legal framework that ensures accountability, safeguards fundamental rights, and maintains an appropriate balance between technological innovation and public safety.
To have the access to full paper - CLICK HERE
5. A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF RERA AND CONSUMER COURTS IN RESOLVING REAL ESTATE DISPUTES IN INDIA
By-Vikas Verma, Advocate-on-Record, Supreme Court of India (Ex – AAG, Government of Haryana)
•Abstract
The real estate sector in India, pivotal to economic growth, infrastructure development, and urbanisation, has historically been characterised by asymmetries of information, regulatory gaps, and exploitative practices by promoters, leading to widespread disputes involving project delays, substandard construction, non-delivery of promised amenities, and unfair contractual terms. These issues have not only caused financial losses to homebuyers but have also undermined public confidence in the sector. In response, the Indian Parliament enacted the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016 (RERA), a landmark legislation designed to foster transparency, accountability, and timely project completion through mandatory registration, escrow mechanisms, and specialised adjudication. Complementing this, the Consumer Protection Act 2019 (CPA), which replaced the 1986 Act, offers a comprehensive consumer redressal system, categorising real estate transactions as 'services' susceptible to claims of deficiency or unfair trade practices.
To have the access to full paper -CLICK HERE
.jpeg)
