text:
Data: Number of registered Cognizable crimes increase marginally in 2019
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
October 6, 2020
The 2019 Crime in India report was recently released by the NCRB. The data from the report indicates that the total number of registered crimes in the country increased only marginally in 2019 compared to 2018. Violent Crimes accounted for 8.1% of all the crimes.
The Crime in India report of 2019 was released recently by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB). The report is important as it is the only report that comprehensively covers a wide range of crime statistics across all States/UTs in the country, representing the state of crime registration, disposal etc. Data for the report is collated by the State Crime Records Bureaux (SCRB) which in turn comes from the District Crime Records Bureaux at the end of every year based on a predefined format (template). Data is collected & reported for each calendar year unlike other reports which follow the financial year cycle.  What this means is that the 2019 report deals with the crime data from 01 January 2019 to 31 December 2019.
In 2019, a total of 51.56 lakh cognizable crimes were registered in India. When compared to 2018, the number of cognizable crimes went up by around 1.6%. In 2018, a total of 50.7 lakh cognizable crimes were registered in 2018.
16 States/UTs report more than a lakh Cognizable crimes each
Among the states, Uttar Pradesh (UP) continues to register the highest number of cognizable crimes with over 6.28 lakh cases, accounting for more than 12.2% of the national total. This is understandable as UP is the most populous state.  The number of cases registered in Uttar Pradesh is higher than that registered in Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, and Odisha put together.
After UP,  Maharashtra is next in line with over 5.09 lakh registered cases accounting for nearly 10% of the crimes in India followed by Tamil Nadu (4.55 lakh cases) and Kerala (4.53 Lakh cases) contributing to around 8.8% of the crimes each. Gujarat with over 4.31 lakh cases accounts for 8.4% of the crimes. Together, these five states alone have contributed to around 48% of the cases registered in India in 2019. Meanwhile, the smaller states of Himachal Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Goa, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Tripura, Nagaland, and Sikkim, combined have registered only 45,436 cases- one percent of all the crimes registered in India in 2019.
Crime rate increased marginally in 2019
‘Crime Rate’ is the incidence of crime per one lakh of population. Crime rate is a better & normalized marker to compare crimes in various states because of the differences in population. The NCRB report uses the population estimates for 2019 on the basis of 2011 Census for this calculation.
The Crime rate in 2019 has increased marginally to 385.5 from 383.5 in 2018. State wise crime rate reveals that Delhi was on the top with a crime rate of 1586.1 followed by Kerala with 1287.7 crimes per lakh persons. Kerala is the only state to have reported a crime rate of more than 1000. Gujarat has the second highest crime rate among states- 631.6 while Tamil Nadu has reported 600.3 crimes per lakh population. Haryana (577.4) and Madhya Pradesh (478.9) have reported the fourth and fifth highest crime rate among states.
Even though Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra have reported the highest number of crimes, the crime rates of the two states are 278.2 and 415.8 respectively. Uttar Pradesh’s crime rate is lower than the national crime rate. Bihar’s crime rate is 224 while Jharkhand has reported a crime rate of 165.5 per lakh population.
Higher Crime Rate may not mean ineffectiveness of the Police
The NCRB report adds a word of caution with respect to understanding crime rates. The report says, ‘as crime increases with population, Crime per lakh population (Crime Rate) may be a better indicator to assess increase or decrease in crime. However, a word of caution here! The primary presumption that the upward swing in police data indicates an increase in crime and thus a reflection of the ineffectiveness of the police is fallacious. ‘Rise in crime’ and ‘increase in registration of crime by police’ are clearly two different things, a fact which is often confused. Thus an oft-repeated expectation from certain quarters that an effective police administration will be able to keep the crime figures low is misplaced. Increase in crime numbers in a State police data may in fact be on account of certain citizen centric police initiatives, like launching of e-FIR facility or women Helpdesks, etc. The increase or decrease in crime numbers, however, does call for a professional investigation of underlying factors jointly with local communities to suitably address the issues involved’.
What this means is that a lower crime rate may not mean a better working police system and a higher crime rate the opposite. For instance, Kerala’s overall higher crime rate and UP’s lower crime rate may not be a useful marker to conclude about the law & order situation in these states.
Nearly 2/3rds of the crimes registered in India are under IPC
Crimes are classified into two broad categories, cognizable and non-cognizable crimes, according to the Code of Criminal Procedure. Cognizable crimes are those under which an officer in-charge of a police station may investigate upon receiving the complaint or information, without the order of a magistrate and effect arrest without warrant. Non cognizable crimes are those which cannot be investigated by police without the order of a competent magistrate.
Cognizable crimes can be registered under sections of the Indian Penal Code(IPC) like Crime against body, crime against property, sexual offences, crimes against state, etc. or under provisions of various Special and Local Laws (SLL) like Arms Act -1959,  SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act-1989, Prohibition of Child Marriage Act 2006, Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986, etc.
In 2019, 32.25 lakh crimes (62.6%) were registered under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) while 19.3 lakh (37.4%) under the Special & Local Laws (SLL). Compared to 2018, the share of IPC crimes has increased by 3.0% whereas SLL crimes have reduced by 0.6%.
Uttar Pradesh accounts for the highest number of cases booked under IPC
Uttar Pradesh reported the highest number of cases under IPC in 2019. Around 56% of the cases in UP, i.e. 3.53 lakh cases were registered under IPC.  In Maharashtra, two-thirds of the cases registered are under IPC (3.41 lakh cases), closely followed by Delhi with over 3.41 lakh cases under IPC. In Delhi, 95% of the cases registered are under IPC. Meanwhile, in Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and Gujarat, the percentage of IPC cases is only 39%, 37% and 32% respectively. The same states have recorded the largest number of SLL cases as well. Gujarat has registered 2.91 lakh cases, followed by Tamil Nadu with 2.87 Lakh cases, Kerala with 2.77 lakh cases and Uttar Pradesh with 2.75 Lakh cases under SLL.
Around 8% of the cases registered in India are violent crimes
Violent crimes are an important category of crimes as categorized by the NCRB due to their grave nature. NCRB classifies crimes like Murder, Culpable Homicide not amounting to murder, Dowry Deaths, Attempt to Commit Murder, Grievous Hurt, Rape, Rioting etc. as violent crimes.
Of all crimes registered in the country, 8.1% are violent crimes. Around 13.3% of the violent crimes in India have been reported from Uttar Pradesh. About 55,519 such violent crimes were registered there, accounting for 8.8% of all the crimes in Uttar Pradesh. Bihar accounts for 10.8% of the violent crimes in India with more than 45,000 cases. Maharashtra and West Bengal each contribute around 10.6% of the violent crimes in India. More than 45% of the violent crimes registered in India are from these four states.
The number of crimes or violent crimes do not reveal anything when looked at in isolation. In the following stories, we would look at the numbers to understand if the incidence of violent crimes in a state matches with the overall crime incidence and if there are any outliers.
Featured Image: Cognizable crimes

created: October 6, 2020


text:
Data: Number of Suicides in India increased by over 26% between 2017 & 2021
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
September 8, 2022
Suicides data from the NCRB’s ‘Accidental Deaths and Suicides in India’ report indicates that the number of suicides in India has been increasing since 2017 after a decline. Between 2017 & 2021, the number of suicides increased by over 26% with few states & cities contributing disproportionately to this number.
Suicide is a highly sensitive and complex phenomenon. Understanding its roots has always been inconsistent throughout the history. Conventional beliefs characterize suicide as a choice of free-willed individuals acting in personal despair. However, social scientists argue that a large systemic forces stronger than the individuals exist behind the suicides. It is also believed that suicides tend to produce chain-reaction effect, i.e., a greater number of individuals at a given time and in a given geography committing suicides could produce more suicides.
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), more than seven lakh people die from suicide every year globally. It is one of the leading causes of death among teenagers, and three-fourths of the suicides globally occur in middle- and low-income nations. Every one in hundred deaths is by suicide across the world. For every individual committing suicide, almost 10-20 times more people attempt suicide. These statistics point out the glaring invisibility of the suicide, which is often perceived as a private concern.
Having a thorough and reliable database of suicides is highly essential, as it enables us to understand the underlying causes that push people towards suicide & its spread.  In India, the “Accidental Deaths and Suicides in India”, hereafter referred to as ‘ADSI’ is such a comprehensive data source published as an annual report by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB). In today’s story, we look at some of the key statistics relating to suicides and its trends in India.
The increasing trend in Suicides from 2017
Data indicates that the number of suicides in India has declined from 2011 to 2016. It was 1.36 Lakh in 2011, which fell to 1.31 Lakh in 2016. The rate of suicides, defined as the number of suicides per lakh population, had also come down from 11.2 in 2011 to 9.9 in 2017. However, since 2017, both the number of suicides and the rate of suicides have been increasing. Incidentally, it is the same year when ‘The Mental Healthcare Act, 2017’ was adopted. This increase is higher in the years 2020 and 2021, giving an impression of COVID-19 induced suicides. The rate of suicides increased from 10.4 in 2019 to 11.3 in 2020, which further increased to 12 in 2021. Further, if we look at the decadal growth, there is an approximate increase of 21% in the incidence of suicides, while the rate of suicides grew by 7%.
Five states account for half of the suicides in India
As stated earlier, many systemic factors also play a role in the incidences of suicides. The role of geographical location, the legislations, and the governance process, become crucial in terms of access to better mental health care, restricting access to lethal means of death, and understanding the interpersonal relationships and sense of community building.
Suicides in India are not uniform across these factors. Five states account for approximately half of the total suicides in India. These five states have consistently been contributing significantly to the suicide burden in India. Even among these five states, Maharashtra, and Tamil Nadu account for half of the share of five states. Other states like Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal, and Karnataka together account for another 25% of the suicides in India.
Among the metropolitan cities, Delhi, and Chennai account for one-fifth of the total suicides occurring in Indian cities. They are followed by Bengaluru, Mumbai, and Surat, which together add up to another one-fifth of the suicides in Indian cities.
Non-uniformity of Suicide trend across states
As observed earlier, there is no uniformity in suicide incidences across the states. To understand the trend further, we look at the change in the number of suicides over the years. For simplification, this change is considered in percentages. Accordingly, nine states are mapped with their corresponding percentage change over previous years (from 2017 to 2021). Upon mapping, it is found that, for states like Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Telangana, and West Bengal, there has been a positive change in the majority of the years, essentially pointing out that these states have constantly seen an increasing number of suicides over these years, irrespective of the value of such an increase. For states like Tamil Nadu, and Karnataka, in the initial years, the suicide incidence decreased, while in recent years, these states have also recorded positive change.
Suicide incidences in males are greater than in females
Gender and suicide are intrinsically related. It is well documented by researchers across the world that men are more likely to commit suicide than women. Some of the common reasons attributed to such a strange phenomenon are the lack of willingness of males to seek help for mental health, usage of addictive substances as a form of ‘self-medication’, economic reasons, and similar others.
India is no different in terms of the gendered nature of suicide incidences. Both genders registered a steady increase in the number of suicides from 2016 to 2021. However, this increase is not the same across these genders. Suicides in males increased from 88,997 in 2016 to 1,18,979 in 2021, marking an increase of nearly 33%. Similarly, suicides in females rose from 41,997 in 2016 to 45,026 in 2021, registering an increase of approximately 7%. Transgender suicides also rose from 14 in 2016 to 28 in 2022. Such an uneven increase in the incidences of suicides across genders calls for targeted interventions.
Few professions see increase in share in total suicides
Economic reasons are one of the most important causes of suicidal tendencies. The type of employment, the social status attached to it, the demands of working places, and other similar factors contribute to the incidence of suicides. Accordingly, not all professions are equally vulnerable to suicide. Some categories such as daily-wage earners, students, and unemployed persons are more vulnerable to committing suicide.
The data from 2016 to 2021 point to a declining share in total suicides committed by housewives, and the persons engaged in the farming sector – both cultivators, and agricultural labourers. However, the share of suicides by daily wage-earners, professionals/salaried persons, and unemployed persons is showing an increasing trend. In these increasing categories, one can observe a sudden spike in the years 2017, and 2020, when demonetization and COVID-19 happened.
Marital status and Suicide incidence
There exists a strong correlation between suicides and interpersonal relationships, particularly marriage. The better the interpersonal relationships, the lesser the tendency to commit any act of self-destruction. If we look at the data on suicides from 2016 to 2021 by marital status, some peculiar trends emerge. First, in the unmarried category, the share of men who commit suicide is higher than that of women. Similar is the case with the married category. However, the share of men in the married category is higher than the share of men in the unmarried category. The vice-versa is true for women.
In the widowed/widower category, both genders almost have a similar share in the total suicides under this category. Further, divorcee men are more likely to commit suicide than divorced females. Similarly, separated men commit more suicide than separated women.
Suicides due to Substance abuse and Love affairs on a rise
Suicide is a complex phenomenon whose underlying roots are difficult to comprehend. Though there might be several reasons behind the commission of such acts, one or two reasons dominate over the others. If we look at the data on the causes behind the suicides from 2016 to 2021, the share of suicides due to family problems, love affairs, and substance abuse has been rising. This points out to the diminishing interpersonal relationships, and sense of solidarity among the individuals as well as the households.
Overall, the data indicates a general increase in suicides in the last five years. The study of suicides is of utmost importance, and it is high time that it should move away from an excessive focus on individuals, and focus on structural factors like poverty, inequality, mental health issues, etc., to understand the vulnerability of the people. And strategies for suicide prevention must extend beyond the formal organizational approaches to reach the vulnerable.

source: news-factly

created: September 8, 2022

license: Creative Commons - Attribution - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

author: Sai Krishna Muthyanolla


text:
Data: Numbers of the No-Confidence & Confidence Motions
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
August 1, 2023
Data indicates that since 1952, there have been 27 No-Confidence motions and 12 Confidence motions, excluding the current one where a discussion is yet to take place. The most time spent in a No-Confidence motion was during the one against Lal Bahadur Shastri’s government.
Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla accepted the ‘No-Confidence’ motion against the government moved by the Opposition on 26 July 2023. This motion was brought to the House by Deputy leader of the Congress Party in Lok Sabha, Gaurav Gogoi amidst the opposition’s ongoing protests demanding a statement on the situation in Manipur from Prime Minister Narendra Modi.  While the motion was accepted, the speaker is yet to confirm the time and date of the debate and vote.  This would be the first no-confidence motion against the government during the current 17 Lok Sabha term.
What is a No-Confidence motion?
In a parliamentary democracy, a government can be in power only if it enjoys the majority and confidence of the directly elected house i.e., Lok Sabha in the case of India. The rules of Lok Sabha allow for a motion of no-confidence, where-in any MP can garner the support of 50 MPs and introduce a motion of no-confidence against the government. A discussion on the motion takes place, in which those supporting the motion highlight the concerns against the government, to which the treasury benches respond. This is followed by a vote. In case the motion carries, the government is required to resign.
While the current NDA government has a more than comfortable majority in the Lok Sabha, a no-confidence motion has historically been used as a strategic tool to force a discussion on a certain issue or topic.  Our detailed explainer on ‘No-Confidence motion’ can be read here.
In contrast, the Government also has the option of introducing a ‘Confidence Motion”. A Motion of confidence is a motion of support proposed by a government in a parliament or other assembly of elected representatives to give members of parliament a chance to register their confidence in a government.
In this story, we look at the data related to both these motions. The compiled dataset with details on Confidence and No-Confidence Motions discussed in the Lok Sabha is available on Dataful.
Highest number of No-confidence Motions during 3rd & 4th Lok Sabha terms
The first no-confidence motion was moved during the 3 Lok Sabha. Acharya Kripalani moved this motion after Sino-India War when Jawaharlal Nehru was the Prime Minister. The motion garnered 62 votes in favour and 347 votes against and hence, it did not go through. There were 5 other No-confidence motions during the 3rd Lok Sabha Term. Even during the next Lok Sabha term, there were 6 no-confidence motions. Overall, there have been 27 No-Confidence motions so far. The number of no-confidence motions has reduced in the more recent Lok-Sabha terms.
Apart from the no-confidence motion, there were 12 instances where-in the Government sought the confidence of the house through a confidence motion. The first confidence motion was moved by then Prime Minister Charan Singh during the 6th Lok Sabha. However, this motion was listed but not moved because Charan Singh has tendered his resignation. The next confidence motion was during the 9 Lok Sabha by V.P. Singh, which was adopted. However, V.P. Singh lost the next confidence motion moved in the next year. His successor Chandra Sekhar moved a confidence motion, which he won by securing 280 votes.
Indira Gandhi led Government faced the most No-Confidence motions
8 out of the 14 Prime Ministers of India have faced a no-confidence motion during their tenure.
More than half of the total no-confidence motions were moved against Indira Gandhi’s government who faced 15 of the 27 no-confidence motions. However, none of these 15 motions were successful, with all of them being defeated. Only in case of the Morarji Desai, did the no-confidence motion led to his resignation. In fact, he won a no-confidence motion earlier. After Indira Gandhi, the next highest number of no-confidence motions were against Lal Bahadur Shastri and P.V. Narasimha Rao with 3 each.
Out of the 12 Confidence motions moved by the Prime Ministers, the highest was Atal Bihar Vajpayee with 3.  The first of these motions was not put to vote as he resigned after being unable to gather the required support to form a government. His second motion in his next tenure was successful but in the third confidence motion, he lost by just one vote. V.P. Singh was the first PM to lose a confidence vote. The only other PM apart from these two who lost a confidence vote was H.D. Deve Gowda.
Highest time spent in discussion was during the first no-confidence motion against Lal Bahadur Shastri
Debate is an important part of any confidence or no-confidence motions raised in the Lok Sabha. As indicated above, one of the main reasons why the opposition moves a no-confidence motion is to get a response from the government on any particular issue. Many a time, this is done despite fact that the opposition does not have a majority in the house and that the motion would be defeated.
As per the data available, a total of 351 hours were spent in discussions as part of the non-confidence motion.  A total of 1293 minutes across 4 days was spent in discussion in the first no-confidence motion moved in 1963.
The next no-confidence motion was faced by Lal-Bahadur Shastri. The discussion happened over a period of 6 days and 1474 minutes. The next two-faced by Lal Bahadur Shastri saw fewer minutes in discussion with 650 and 948 minutes.
Two of three no-confidence motions faced by P.V. Narasimha Rao went over thousand minutes of discussion. In the second no-confidence motion against him, the discussion spread over three days and lasted 1304 minutes, while the third one was for 1100 minutes over 3 days.  In the No-Confidence motion moved by Sonia Gandhi in the 13 Lok Sabha against the government headed by Atal Bihari Vajpayee, the discussion was for 1267 minutes over two days.
Among the confidence motions, the highest time spent in the discussion was for the confidence moved by Atal Bihari Vajpayee in the Twelfth Lok Sabha. His government lost the historic confidence motion by a single vote, but only after 1498 minutes spent in discussions over three days.
Highest Margin for No-Confidence motions vote was the first motion
Voting after the discussion determines whether the motion is successful or not.  In case of a no-confidence motion, majority votes in favour of the motion mean that the government has lost the confidence of the house and must resign.
However, this has never happened in the history of the Lok Sabha. All the no-confidence motions which went to vote were lost. In one instance, Morarji Desai resigned after an inconclusive discussion and the motion did not go to vote.
Among the no-confidence motions that went to vote, the highest margin was the first no-confidence motion. This motion against Jawaharlal Nehru’s government was able to find support of only 62 votes while 347 voted against the motion and in favour of the government.
In the case of Confidence motions moved by the respective PM in power, 8 went for voting.  The biggest margin of loss was in the case of VP Singh whose confidence motion secured only 152 votes while 356 MPs voted against it. H.D Deva Gowda of the first United Front government also lost the vote by securing only 190 in favour, and 338 against. As already highlighted above, the closest loss was by 1 vote in the case of Atal Bihari Vajpayee.

created: August 1, 2023


text:
Occupancy ratio in Indian Prisons was at a 10-year high by the end of 2019
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
September 5, 2020
World over, prisons have turned out to be hotspots of COVID infection & spread because of overcrowding & high occupancy ratio. India is no exception to this trend. The latest PSI report of the NCRB indicates that the prison occupancy ratio in India was at a 10-year high by the end of 2019.
Prison overcrowding is a common problem that many countries across the globe, including the developed ones like the US and European countries. There are many causes behind the overcrowding such as overreliance on imprisonment as a means of punishment, imprisonment of offenders who cannot pay their fines, recidivism, long duration of the trials and inadequate prison facilities. The increasing size of prison population places an enormous financial burden on governments. Besides, overcrowding challenges the ability of prison administration to provide the basic human needs like food, accommodation, and healthcare. The effectiveness of rehabilitation programs, educational programs, and vocational trainings will also be challenged. Overcrowding can also have repercussions on the mental and physical health of prisoners and the support staff manning these prisons.
Amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, the issue of prison overcrowding was under limelight as prisons emerged as hotspots of the pandemic. The risk of infection of the coronavirus is high in overcrowded prisons, and hence governments even resorted to releasing prison inmates based on certain criteria. Indian prisons are no exception. Indian prisons also continue to be overcrowded.
Indian prisons continue to be overcrowded
Recently, the National Crime Records Bureau released the 25 edition of the annual Prisons Statistics India (PSI) for 2019 which provides comprehensive statistical information on various aspects of prison administration in India. As per this report, as on 31 December 2019, 4.78 Lakh inmates were lodged in prisons across the country while the actual capacity of the prisons was only 4.03 Lakh persons. The occupancy rate of prisons in India is calculated as the percentage of the ratio of inmate population to total capacity in prisons. An occupancy ratio of more than 100% implies that the prisons are overcrowded and if it is below 100%, it means that the prisons are not yet filled to their capacity. The occupancy ratio of prisons in India was 118.5% in the end of 2019. In simpler terms, what it means is, in a space where 100 persons could be accommodated, close to 119 persons were accommodated on average. The occupancy ratio of males in prisons was 122% while that of women was only 71.9%, clearly indicating that overcrowding is an acute problem for male prisoners.
2019 recorded the highest occupancy ratio in the last 10 years
Prisons in India have been overcrowded for many years now. In the last 10 years between 2010 and 2019, the occupancy ratio has been above 110% consistently. Since 2016, the occupancy ratio has been on the rise albeit at a slow place- from 113.7% in 2016 to 115.1% in 2017 to 117.6% in 2018, and to 118.5% in 2019. In the last 10 years, the highest overall occupancy ratio in Indian prisons was reported in 2019.
The increase in inmates and prison space are not proportional
Data indicates that the accommodation capacity of Indian prisons has increased from over 3.2 Lakh persons in 2010 to around 4.04 Lakh persons in 2019. Nonetheless, the population of inmates in the prisons across India has increased from over 3.69 Lakh persons to 4.79 Lakh persons during the same period. The total capacity of prisons crossed 4 lakh persons only in 2019 while the number of inmates has been more than 4 Lakhs since 2013. While the capacity has increased to accommodate another 83,289 persons, the number of inmates has grown by 1.09 lakh persons during the same period, thus increasing the occupancy ratio further. In the 10-year period from 2010 to 2019, the capacity of prisons in the country has increased by 26% while the occupancy has increased by 30%.
Prisons in 19 states were overcrowded
There is wide variation in prison occupancy ratio across different states. The prisons in 19 States were overcrowded by the end of 2019 and in seven of these, the occupancy ratio was above 150%. Two union territories- Delhi and Daman& Diu also reported overcrowding in 2019. Delhi had reported the highest occupancy ratio in 2019 with close to 175% followed by Uttar Pradesh with 168% and Uttarakhand with 159%. Meghalaya, Madhya Pradesh, Sikkim, Maharashtra, and Chhattisgarh were the other states with over 150% occupancy ratio. The occupancy ratio is high in Sikkim and Meghalaya, also because of the low prison capacity. In these two states, the capacity was 260 and 650 while the occupancy was 400 and 1023 respectively. In Uttar Pradesh however, the capacity was over 60,000 while the occupancy was over 1 lakh.
Number of inmates within the capacity in only 10 states
In the state of Bihar, the occupancy ratio was only 94.3%. There were close to 39,000 inmates in the state which had a total capacity of 42,222. The occupancy ratio was less than 100% in only 10 states. Among the states, Nagaland had the least occupancy ratio of 30.8%. Tripura had only half of its prisons filled. Tamil Nadu reported almost 63% occupancy and Manipur recorded close to 69%. Rajasthan (94.1), Odisha (91), Telangana (86.3), Andhra Pradesh (86.2%), and Goa (83%) also reported an occupancy ratio of less than 100.
Prisons in Tamil Nadu are filled only to 2/3rd of their capacity
Between 2010 & 2019, the occupancy rate in prisons of Bihar has always been below 100% except in 2017.  Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Nagaland, Tripura, Tamil Nadu, Chandigarh, and Puducherry are the only places where the occupancy ratio in prisons has consistently remained below 100%. In Tamil Nadu, the occupancy has always remained between 60 to 67% except in 2014 when it was 71.5%.
The trends within states shows that the occupancy ratio has increased in the states of Jammu & Kashmir, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, and Odisha. Though the occupancy ratio has increased in Odisha, it continues to remain below 100%. In Jammu and Kashmir, the prisons were occupied below capacity up to 2017. In 2018 and 2019 however, the prisons here were overcrowded. In Madhya Pradesh, the occupancy has gradually increased from 122.5% in 2010 to 155.3% in 2019. In Maharashtra, the rise has been steeper- from 100.5% in 2010 to 152.7% in 2019.
Chhattisgarh had prison occupancy of more than 230% between 2010 and 2015
There has been a continuous decrease in the occupancy ratio of prisons in Jharkhand & Punjab.  In Jharkhand which the prisons continue to remain overcrowded, the occupancy ratio has fallen from 140% in 2010 to 111% in 2019. Punjab has reported a decline in occupancy from 149% in 2011 to less than 96% in 2018. In 2019, the occupancy has slightly increased to102.9%. Chhattisgarh, which had an occupancy ratio of more than 230% between 2010 and 2015, has seen its prisons de-congesting in the last few years. Since 2016, the percentage occupancy has declined from 190% to 150%, even though it continues to remain overcrowded and is in the top-10 states in terms of occupancy ratio.
Almost 70% of the inmates in Indian prisons are under trials
What is alarming is that majority of the prison inmates in India are undertrials. As on 31 December 2019, over 3.27 lakh persons out of the 4.78 lakh persons lodged in prisons in India, accounting for 69.2% of the inmates, were undertrials. Only 30% of the inmates were convicts and 0.67% were detenues. Undertrials are those who are being held in custody while the trial for the crime is pending. In the last decade, there has been a marginal increase in the percentage of undertrials being held in prisons, from 65% in 2010 to 69% in 2019.
In Delhi, which recorded the largest occupancy ratio, over 82% of the inmates were undertrials. More than 80% of the inmates Delhi, Odisha, and Jammu & Kashmir were undertrials.
About 79% of the prison inmates were undertrials in the states of Bihar, Maharashtra & Uttar Pradesh though they have varying occupancy ratio. In Bihar, the occupancy ratio was less than 100%, while it was more than 150% in Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh. In contrast, states like Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh, which had a high occupancy ratio had only 54% undertrials confined in prisons.
Prisons are not only overcrowded but understaffed
Concomitantly, it is observed that the prisons in India are understaffed with only a strength of 60,787 as against the sanctioned strength of 87,599 (only 69.4% of vacancies filled)- adding to the difficulties in managing overcrowded prisons.
Measures to fast-track trials have not helped de-congest prisons
According to the latest response in the Lok Sabha in July 2019 regarding the overcrowding of prisons, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) stated that administration and management of prisons falls under the purview of the States. Further, MHA stated that it has issued advisories to the States and UTs for taking steps to provide free legal aid to undertrials and setting up Lok Adalats/Special courts in prisons for reviewing their cases. Additionally, the Model Prison Manual 2016 has been shared with states that has details about the facilities that may be provided to undertrials such as legal defence, interviews with lawyers, etc. National Legal Services Authority also provides free legal services to undertrial prisoners through legal service clinics which are running in jails in India. However, these measures have clearly not helped to de-congest prisons in the country.
Multiple studies and even the United Nations has devised strategies for reducing overcrowding in prisons, as this is a global issue and not limited to India. These measures include looking for non-custodial alternatives to detention before trial takes place and even after sentencing. Faster disposal of cases involving undertrials, rehabilitation program for those involved in minor crimes, adopting long term measures to reduce recidivism, are some of the strategies suggested by the UN. However, many of these measures will require changes to existing law.
Featured Image: Occupancy ratio in Indian Prisons

created: September 5, 2020


text:
Data of over 7 lakh geo-tagged facilities released under PMGSY
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
December 5, 2020
Under the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY), data of over 7 lakh geo-tagged facilities at the habitation level were recently released by the government. Three major facilities namely Market facilities, Educational facilities & Medical facilities were mapped under this exercise.
The Pradan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY) was launched in December 2000 as a one-time special intervention to provide rural connectivity by constructing all-weather roads to unconnected habitations with the prescribed population. Road connectivity is a pivotal facilitator of growth and enables the achievement of many developmental goals. The first and second phase of the government’s flagship rural road development scheme focused on construction and upgradation of rural roads respectively. In 2019, the Central government approved the implementation of Phase III of the programme under which it aims to consolidate 1.25 Lakh kilometres of existing Rural Road Network and the upgradation ‘through routes’ and ‘major rural links’ that connect habitations to
The government has identified the three mentioned critical facilities as pivotal. Priority will be given to identifying and upgrading routes and links to connect the agriculture warehouses, government hospitals, and educational institutions. This would enable easy and faster movement to and from food processing centers, provide affordable and easy access to schools and medical facilities, which are necessary for the socio-economic development of a region.
GIS mapping of critical facilities has been conducted for identification of routes under PMGSY
In order to select candidate routes and identifying Major Rural Links/Through Routes, routes connecting each habitation in a Block to the nearest mandi/school/health facility would be traced and those which are common to many habitations will be identified by the States as candidate roads. As per the guidelines, this exercise is to be carried out preferably through GIS or manually. The exercise is useful for planning relevant investments.
Data of over 7 lakh geo-tagged facilities was opened by government recently
Recently, the data of about 7 lakh geo-tagged rural facilities across India under PMGSY was opened for public use. In other words, PMGSY released the data for anyone to freely use, re-use, or share the data provided it is attributed to the provider, and license as per Government of India’s Open Data License. The release of such a large GIS dataset is an important step forward as it helps in enhancing transparency. Such data is also important in planning and encourages public participation. Such data can be combined with other existing data for further research.
The data is available up to the habitation level in each state (data for some states is not completely available) and includes names of the facility, habitation name, address, category (such as transport or education), sub-category (such as Bank or High School), and its geographic coordinates (latitude and longitude).
The list of facilities covered under the survey is given in the table below.
OMMAS software is being used for monitoring the implementation of PMGSY
OMMAS or the Online Management Monitoring and Accounting System is the web-based software being used for the implementation of PMGSY. The website provides the details of fund releases, fund utilization, the status of work progress, etc. and is available in the public domain. The geo-spatial data of facilities opened recently can be readily downloaded for each state from OMMAS. Of the data of over 7.71 lakh facilities, 1.53 lakh are Agro facilities, 1.7 lakh are educational institutions, over 88,500 are medical facilities. More than 3.58 lakh facilities are transport/admin related facilities.
Definition of facilities is not standardized
The data collection began in 2019 and is still in progress in some states like Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Nagaland, and certain other north eastern states. Meanwhile, data for Goa and most union territories is unavailable since they are yet to be integrated into the scheme. The data was collected by government rural engineers at the block level using a common android application. However, no prior centralized training or SOP was issued as a result of which there can be variations in collected data since the interpretation of the term facilities under each category is left to the persons collecting the data.
For instance, some states may have included private facilities on the list. The case may be that some states may not have considered weekly markets while collating the data on agro facilities, which is also critical in rural areas. But the facilities under education such as High Schools, recorded across the country need not be highly variant. Only what the surveyor deems fit to be considered in the collation, will be included. Some surveyors may have even used the definitions given in the census. States do not have records of what has been considered while collecting the data. This may act as a hindrance in the analysis and comparison of the data across states.
No standard device used for recording GPS
Another potential issue could be the inconsistency arising out of the use of different devices for capturing GPS coordinates. Use of different models of devices and varying accuracy can affect the longitude and latitudes recorded for this purpose since devices should be calibrated from time to time for recording accurate GPS coordinates. Mistakes while labelling sub-categories is another issue observed in the data. An example could be High Schools have been labelled as sub-categories under agro related facilities in Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, and Kolhapur, Maharashtra.
Geo-spatial data for different types of facilities is already available for some states
Geo-spatial data is already available in the public domain for some states & facilities. Telangana’s and Maharashtra’s GIS data on warehouses are different in the form of availability. While Telangana’s data is available in a tabular format, Maharashtra’s data has been mapped using different legends for different sub-categories of warehouses and agro related facilities. Similarly, Andhra Pradesh has geo-spatial data mapped for different health facilities in the state. Punjab has a single GIS dashboard where the user can choose to look for what they require from many options like irrigation, tourism, wetland, sewa kendras, and more, in addition to the three focused in PMGSY. The central government also maintains a GIS portal for schools which helps one in locating schools by category, facilities etc.
Improving quality of this data should be the next step
From the perspective of the PMGSY scheme, the data collated by the government is of grave importance. Opening of this data is also an important step forward considering the lack of such granular data in the public domain. In terms of planning, the variation in the availability of facilities across states can be taken into consideration. However, for such datasets to become really useful, many gaps need to be filled including improving the quality of the data. The process of nation-wide data collation is a cumbersome, time- consuming and an expensive exercise. Considering the huge investment and efforts required to generate such large datasets, steps should be taken for standardization of devices and definitions, better coverage, and increased accuracy.
Featured Image: PMGSY

created: December 5, 2020


text:
Data: Of the Certificates issued by the Plant Authority, 54% were issued to Farmers & 25% to Private organizations
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
February 2, 2024
The issue of certification of new & extant plant varieties is in the limelight thanks to the PepsiCo issue. The latest data indicates that of the 6400 odd certificates issued so far, 54% were issued to farmers, 25% to private organizations, 21% to public bodies like ICAR and state agricultural universities.
PepsiCo India Holdings Ltd.’s potato variety, FL-2027, used for manufacturing Lays potato chips had garnered attention when the Company sued a few farmers in Gujarat for allegedly infringing its patent rights by illegally growing, producing, and selling the variety without the company’s permission, back in 2019. Later, the company withdrew the lawsuits to settle the issue amicably.
Subsequently, in December 2021, the registration of FL-2027 potato variety was revoked by the ‘Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers Rights Authority’ (The Authority) upon finding that the certificate of registration was earlier granted on the basis of incorrect information furnished by the Company. The revocation order was issued upon the filing of revocation application in June 2019, about 30 months before the order.
However, the recent verdicts of the Delhi High Court about registration and renewal of the same variety of Potato has been garnering attention yet again. The Company had challenged the revocation order of Authority in the Delhi High Court. In its verdict on 5 July 2023, the single judge bench upheld the revocation order of the Authority. However, in its recent judgment on 9 January 2024, the Division Bench of Delhi High Court had set aside both the single bench judge verdict and also the revocation order and had directed the Authority to process the renewal application of the Company in accordance with Law and in light of the findings recorded in the judgement. While it remains to be seen what further administrative and legal developments are going to take place, the issue has been receiving attention yet again.
Against this backdrop, we look at the significance of the patenting of plant varieties and the process in India, the legislation that governs it, and numbers pertaining to the certified varieties in the country.
IPR Protection for improved seed varieties
Usually, improved varieties of seeds are used for an increase in yield alongside the use of other agricultural inputs such as fertilizers, and insecticides. To achieve better yields, improved seed varieties that can withstand environmental shocks and diseases are often used. These could help in multiple ways such as ensuring food security, and supporting farmers to adapt to climate change among other things.  However, it takes a very long time, sometimes 15 years or more to develop a new variety with improved features, and an additional number of years to introduce the same into the market and for farmers to adopt it. In addition to the time required for developing these varieties, human and financial resources are also required, which calls for a legal system of plant variety protection.
UPOV convention in 1961 encouraging countries to introduce a plant variety protection system
Globally, the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) was established in 1961 ‘to provide and promote an effective system of plant variety protection, with the aim of encouraging the development of new varieties of plants, for the benefit of society.’ Following the UPOV Convention, many countries introduced a plant variety protection (PVP) system. UPOV had 78 members as of 03 November 2021, while India has initiated the procedure for acceding to the UPOV Convention.
Protection of Plant Variety and Farmers Right Act was enacted in India in 2001
In India, the Protection of Plant Variety and Farmers Right Act, 2001 (PPVFR Act) was enacted ‘to provide for the establishment of an effective system for the protection of plant varieties, the rights of farmers and plant breeders and to encourage the development of new varieties of plants’ and for giving effect to the TRIPS Agreement. In simpler terms, the legislation grants intellectual property rights to breeders, farmers, and researchers who develop a new plant variety or develop the existing ones.
The Act defines the rights of breeders, farmers, and researchers
The rights of breeders, farmers, and researchers have been clearly defined under the Act:
Breeders’ Rights – The breeder or their successor, agent, or licensee, has exclusive rights to produce, sell, market, distribute, import, or export the protected variety under Section 28 of the Act.
Researchers’ Rights – The researchers are permitted to use any of the registered varieties under the Act for conducting experiments or research. They can also use a registered variety as an initial source for the purpose of developing another variety. However, repeated use needs the prior permission of the registered breeder.
Farmers’ Rights – The Act contains a separate chapter listing the rights of farmers. If a farmer has evolved or developed a new variety, then they are entitled to the registration and protection of the variety just like a breeder. Further, they are permitted to save, use, sow, re-sow, exchange, share or sell their farm produce including seeds of a variety protected under the PPVFR Act, 2001. However, they are not permitted to sell ‘branded seed’ or those seeds that are of a variety protected under the Act. Furthermore, the Act also provides for compensation to the farmers for non-performance of variety.
Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Authority has been established by the Act
The Act established the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Authority, also referred to as Plant Authority, under the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare. The functions of the Authority include the following:
The Chairperson of the Authority is appointed by the Union Government. The remaining 15 members of the Authority include 8 ex-officio members from various ministries, three members from state governments, and one representative each for farmers, tribal organizations, seed industry, and women’s organizations associated with agricultural activities.
Any person or group can apply for the registration of Plant Variety
Any person, group, or organization that claims to be the breeder of a plant variety can apply for the registration of plant variety. The applicant must submit a fixed amount of seed sample with prescribed germination percentage, physical purity, and phytosanitary standards for the authority to conduct tests. There is a schedule for the receipt of seed samples to facilitate the Distinctness, Uniformity and Stability (DUS) testing procedures depending on the crop. For instance, for rice crops, the seeds should be submitted between December and 15 April.
For any variety which is already in the market, but for not more than a year, an application can be made for registration as a new variety. Other older varieties can be registered as Extant Variety. The fee varies depending on factors like if the variety is new, fee for DUS test, annual fee, registration fee, etc. The duration of registration is 18 years for trees and vines, and 15 years for other crops & extant varieties.
6,450 certificates have been issued as of 19 January 2024; 68% of these are Cereals
A total of 6,450 certificates have been issued by the Plant Authority as of 19 January 2024, as per the authority’s dashboard. This includes 4,389 varieties of cereals, which alone account for more than two-thirds (68%) of the total certificates issued. Fibre crops, Legumes, Vegetables, and Oilseed varieties of crops together account for 28% of the certificates, while other crops and plants such as Fruits, Spices, Sugar Crops, Trees and Forest Plantation Crops, Flowers and Medicinal and Aromatic Plants together account for nearly 4% of the certificates. Among these, Flower, and Medicinal and Aromatic Plants registered are only 12 and 1 varieties, respectively.
More than 50% of Certificates issued to Farmers
Based on the applicant category of certificates issued,  about 3,475 certificates have been issued to farmers which is about 54% of all the certificates issued as of 19 January 2024. About 25% or 1,609 certificates are issued to private organizations that are mostly seed companies. The remaining about 21% or 1,366 certificates have been issued to public bodies such as The Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) and Universities such as State Agricultural Universities (SAUs).
In terms of the category of variety, 3,175 certificates have been issued to farmer variety, and 993 certificates were issued for new varieties, according to the dashboard. Apart from these, 1,548 certificates were issued for extant & extant notified, and 720 for extant varieties of which there is common knowledge (Varieties of common knowledge, abbreviated as VCK). 14 certificates were issued to Essentially Derived Variety (EDV) of crops, that is, those which have been derived from the existing varieties.
Protecting the Rights of Farmers is Paramount
While the plant authority and PPV&FR Act facilitates a system for protecting plant varieties while aiding the growth of the seed industry, protecting the rights of farmers & ensuring that the law is not misused is of paramount importance. The PepsiCo issue highlights the lacunae in the entire process. While it is important to incentivize private companies and public organizations to invest in research & develop new varieties, this cannot be at the expense of infringing on farmers’ rights. This also calls for increased investment by the government so that state-owned public institutions can be at the forefront of developing new varieties
Featured Image: Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers Rights Authority

created: February 2, 2024


text:
Data of first 5 months of 2021-22 indicates that Imports from China surpass 2019-20 levels
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
October 26, 2021
The imports from China during the first half of 2020-21 fell on the back of COVID-19 restrictions. While the imports in 2020-21 recovered during the latter half, the first five months of 2021-22 present a different story. In the first five months of 2021-22, imports from China have surpassed the 2019-20 levels. Exports to China have also increased though not at the same levels.
In his recent address to the nation on 22 October 2021, Prime Minister Narendra Modi reiterated the message of the need to buy “made in India” products. In his address to the nation on achieving the milestone of 100 crore COVID-19 vaccine doses, the PM also emphasized on being vocal for local.
This message is in line with the government’s initiative announced last year, “Aatmanirbhar Bharat” or self-reliant India, the target of which is to develop local industry and become less reliant on imports. In earlier stories, we have highlighted the trends in trade with India’s major trade partners like the USA & China. The data indicates that, despite the prevailing border tensions with China and calls from a few sections within India to ban the usage of Chinese products, there has been an increase in imports from China.  In this story, we look at the trade with China during the current financial year (2021-22).
China’s share in the overall imports has increased in 2020-21
In an earlier story, we highlighted that China’s share in the overall trade during the first four months of 2020-21 increased when compared to the same period of 2019-20. As per the information available in the Department of Commerce’s Export Import data bank,  the same trend continued for the remainder of 2020-21. The share of imports from China as well as the exports have increased during 2020-21.
Raw materials and other inputs for various industries form the key part of imports from China. The lack of industrial activity due to COVID-19 pandemic-induced lockdowns could be one of the reasons for the fall in the volume of imports with China. As the value of imports from China indicates, there is a general fall in the overall trade with most of the countries during 2020-21 on account of COVID-19.
In the current financial year, the value of exports to China increased while the share dropped
As per the monthly data available in the ‘Export Import Data bank’ of the Ministry of Commerce, the total value of India’s exports in the first five months of 2021-22 (April – August) is 164 billion USD. Of this, the value of exports to China was 10.58 billion USD. This is around 6.44% of India’s overall exports. The overall value of exports to China during this period in 2021-22 is higher than during the same period in 2020-21 when was 8.9 billion USD. However, the share of exports to China was higher in 2020-21 at 9.17%. While the share of exports to China has decreased compared to the same period last year, it is still higher than in the pre-pandemic year of 2019-20.
In the current financial year, the value of imports from China increased by 58%, with a slight drop in overall share
During 2020-21, the value of imports from China was the same as in 2019-20, albeit with an increase in the share.  So far in the first five months of the current financial year i.e., from April-August’ 2021, the value of imports from China was 34.14 billion USD, higher than the imports during the same period in 2020-21 by around 58%. However, there is a fall in the overall share of imports from China to 15.67% in the first five months of 2021-22 compared to 17.78% during the same period in 2020-21. Nevertheless, the share of imports from China in the current year is higher than during the same period in 2019-20, prior to the pandemic.
It must be noted that there has been an exponential increase in the value of imports by India during April-August of 2021-22, with 217 billion USD compared to 121 billion USD during the same period in 2020-21. The value of imports is even higher compared to the pre-pandemic year of 2019-20 when it was 210 billion USD. Hence, while there is a marginal fall in China’s share out of total imports, it is mainly due to a higher increase in the overall imports.
Mineral Fuels, Cotton among the products with an increase in export volume to China
During the first five months of 2020-21, exports relating to ‘Ores, Slag & Ash’ reported the second-highest volume of exports to China with 1.72 billion USD, which increased to 1.8 billion USD during the same period in 2021-22.
On the other hand, Iron & Steel, the product with the greatest export trade volume to China during the first five months of 2020-21 with 1.86 billion USD, reported a drastic fall in exports with just 0.69 billion USD during the same period in 2021-22. In the earlier analysis, we highlighted that there was a sharp increase in exports of Iron & Steel during the April-June period of 2020-21.
The value of exports for other major products ‘Organic Chemicals’ also fell, though to a lesser extent. The fall in the exports of these products was compensated by an increase in exports of other products, contributing to the overall increase in the volume of exports during this period.
Major growth was observed in the case of Cotton, whose export volume increased from 0.27 billion USD in 2020-21 to 0.75 billion USD in the first five months of 2021-22.
Exports relating to Mineral Fuels & oils also increased from 0.38 billion USD to 0.76 billion USD.  Articles made of Aluminum; Articles made of Copper followed by Electrical machinery & parts are the other exports which witnessed an increase in export value during April-August of 2021-22 compared to the same period in 2020-21. The trends reflect an increase in export volumes across diverse products.
Imports from China increased across product types
Electric machinery & equipment (which includes all integrated circuits & raw material for electronic equipment) reported the greatest imports from China with the value increasing from 6.05 billion USD during April-August of 2020-21 to 9.81 billion USD during the same period in 2021-22.
The other major imports, Nuclear Reactors & appliances along with Organic Chemicals have also reported a significant import volume during this period.  Data does not indicate any reduction in imports of major products.
Along with the previously mentioned products with high import volumes, a substantial increase is also observed in import volumes of other products. The import volume of plastic articles increased from 0.7 billion USD to 1.7 billion USD during this period. Similarly, there is an increase in the imports of Fertilizers from 0.55 billion USD to 1.29 billion USD.
The import of products under the head of ‘Parts & accessories relating to Optical, photographic & medical instruments’ also increased substantially.
Reliance on imports from China both for raw materials & finished products continues
The increase in the exports to China and the diversity of the exports is a positive development. However, there is also a proportionate if not a greater increase in the value of imports from China. The imports during the first five months of 2021-22 have not only surpassed the value of 2020-21 (which was lower due to the pandemic) but also the value of imports in the year prior to the pandemic, 2019-20.
The opening up of the economy post the lockdown restrictions has increased the demand for various electronic and other products which in turn increased the demand for various raw materials. Since imports from China are a major source of these raw materials for multiple industries, import volumes from China increased across product categories.
China continues to enjoy the Most Favoured Nation (MFN) status, which facilities smoother trade between the countries and lower import tariffs for certain products. While this could be helpful to many industries reliant on imports from China, it would hurt the local industry in the long run. Data indicates that India has a long way to go in attaining self-reliance.

created: October 26, 2021


text:
Data: Oil Imports From Russia in The First Nine Months of 2022-23 Are More Than 9 Times The Imports in Whole Of 2021-22
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
February 17, 2023
India’s oil imports from Russia have witnessed an exponential increase in the wake of discounts offered by Russia. Data indicates that the overall imports from Russia in the first nine months of 2022-23 are already more than the thrice the value in the whole of 2021-22. In the case of petroleum products, this is more than 9 times.
In India’s 75 years as a modern independent nation, Russia (the erstwhile Soviet Union ) has consistently been its key strategic ally as well as an important partner that spreads across a wide range of sectors from food products to defence.
The developments on the international scene over the past few years have seen changes to the geopolitical and trade dynamics among countries. While the COVID-19 pandemic affected production and supply chains, with a cascading impact on trends in international trade, the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war has also upended global trade.
In this context, we look at the numbers related to the India-Russia trade and analyse any impact of the ongoing events. The data for the story is from Factly’s Dataful, which in turn is sourced from the Department of Commerce’s Export Import Databank.
Imports during first three quarters of 2022-23 already three times the imports during 2021-22
Prior to 2020-21, the trends in trade with Russia have been fluctuating. In the case of imports, an increase in the value of imports in a year was followed by a fall in the subsequent years. This inconsistent trend is also seen in the case of India’s exports to Russia. But the value of imports has always exceeded the value of exports, thereby resulting in a trade deficit. While the trend remained inconsistent, it can be said that the trade deficit has widened if we consider the period 2006-07 to 2020-21.
During 2021-22, the value of imports from Russia increased to $ 9.9 billion compared to $ 5.48 billion in 2020-21. This is the greatest value of imports if the data from 2006-07 is considered. The previous highest was in 2017-18, wherein the value of imports from Russia was $8.5 billion. The increasing trend continued into 2022-23 and there is an exponential increase in the value of imports during the year.
During the first 9 months of 2022-23 i.e. during April-December 2022, the total value of imports is $ 32.82 billion. With another quarter of the fiscal year to go, the value of imports so far is already more than three times the value of the previous year. Comparatively, the overall imports of India during the first three quarters are about 90% of the imports of the total fiscal 2021-22. To put in perspective in terms of the share of India’s overall imports, the share of imports from Russia was 1.6% of India’s total imports during 2021-22, which is at nearly 6% during the three quarters of 2022-23. On the other hand, the value of exports has largely remained unchanged. This has contributed to a gaping a trade deficit. By the end of December 2022, the trade deficit is valued at $ 30.6 billion. This is 4.5 times the deficit in 2021-22, with a quarter of a year still to go.
The increase in Imports from Russia is largely due to Petroleum Oils & Crude
Out of the total $ 32.8 billion imports from Russia during the first three quarters of 2022-23, $ 27.2 billion is under HS Code 0027 i.e. “Mineral Fuels, Mineral Oils, Bituminous substances, etc.” More specifically,  the major share under this category is the imports of “Petroleum Oils & Crude” (HSC 2709) at $ 21.79 billion.
In 2021-22, the total value of Petroleum Oils & Crude imported from Russia was $ 2.47 billion i.e. the import during April-December of 2022-23 is nearly 10 times of last year.  This category makes up nearly 2/3rds of the total imports from Russia during April-December of the current fiscal 2022-23. In 2021-22, Petroleum oils & Crude formed around 25% of the total imports from Russia. Comparatively, in 2020-21, it was around 17%. Hence, the exponential increase in the value of imports from Russia during 2022-23 so far,  can be attributed largely due to the increase in import of Petroleum Oils and Crude. This is understandable as Russia has provided discounts on its oil in the wake of sanctions from western countries.
Russia’s share in Total Crude oil Import increased by 8 times during 2022-23
While the increase in Import of Petroleum Oils & Crude from Russia has multiplied by nearly 10 times during 2022-23, the overall increase of India’s import of this product category is only about 4%. Therefore, the increase in imports from Russia was not due to an increase in overall requirements but was at the cost of other countries, due to the discounts offered by Russia.
Prior to 2021-22, Russia was not among the Top-10 countries from where India imported Crude. In 2021-22, Russia is ranked 9. So far, during the first three quarters of 2022-23, Russia is placed 3 behind Iraq & Saudi Arabia in terms of India’s crude imports.
Data indicates that imports from multiple other countries were reduced, as this reduction is compensated by imports from Russia. Russia’s share in the Petroleum Crude import increased from around 2% in 2021-22 to 17% in 2022-23 (April-December).
Among the top countries, the imports from Saudi Arabia and UAE were largely unaffected.
Iraq, the leading supplier of Petroleum Crude to India continues in its position but has seen a fall in value. However, it ought to be noted that the data for 2022-23 is for 9 months compared to the full year of 2021-22. In terms of share, Iraq’s share fell from around 25% to 21%. USA’s share fell from 9.2% to 6.5%.
Among the leading countries, the fall in share can also be observed for Nigeria, Kuwait, Oman, etc. Beyond Top-10 countries, the other countries whose share of imports for petroleum fell include Brazil, Columbia, Egypt, Gabon, etc.
Cheaper Petroleum Crude from Russia is cited as a major reason for the increase in imports. However, India does continue its heavy reliance on Middle Eastern countries like Saudi Arabia & UAE. As of now, the import from Russia seems to be at the cost of imports from most of the African and American (North & South) countries.
The Import of other products largely remain same, so also the trends in exports
In an earlier story, we analysed the trends in imports from Russia. Prior to 2022-23, the major imports from Russia included –Unworked Diamonds, Pulverised Coal, Sunflower oil, etc, among others. The trends relating to these product categories largely remain unchanged. Apart from Petroleum Crude, two other product categories that are part of HS 0027, have a substantial increase in the imports. This includes – Non-crude petroleum products and Coal Briquettes. This steep increase in imports has resulted in a widening trade deficit.

created: February 17, 2023


text:
Data on Birth Registrations in a year is not provided religion-wise - FACTLY
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
May 27, 2021
A post claiming that the Muslim fertility rate in India is extremely high compared to Hindus & other religions is being shared on social media platforms. The post states that of around 65,000 births that take place every day,  40,000 are Muslims while the rest are Hindus and other religions. Through this article, let’s fact-check the claim made in the post.
Claim: Muslim population in India is 20% and out of 65000 children born every day, 40000 are Muslims.
Fact: The Civil Registration System under the Office of Registrar General, India records the total number of birth registrations in a year. However, these reports do not provide religion-wise registration data.  Also, as per the 2011 Census, the share of Muslim population in India is 14.2%. Hence the claim made in the post is FALSE.
The government of India does not record the birth rate but records the total fertility rate (TFR), defined as the number of children born to a woman until the end of her child-bearing age. Ministry of Health & Family welfare conducts a periodic National Family Health Survey (NFHS) in which it records data related to the total fertility rate. The Census India records various compositions related to fertility.
As per the NFHS-4 data released in 2015-16, Muslims had the highest TFR of 2.62 followed by Hindus with 2.13 whereas the TFR of other major religions was less than 2.
On the other hand, registration of births is mandatory under the Civil Registration System (CRS) of India. The Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 (RBD Act) makes the registration of birth, death, and stillbirth compulsory across the country. Civil Registration System (CRS) section under the Office of Registrar General, India enumerates vital statistics related to births and deaths every year. These statistics include data related to birth registrations in a year. However, the government does not provide this data religion-wise but provides only gender-wise data. With this, we can infer that the religious breakup of the numbers related to the births mentioned in the post are most likely fictious rather than any officially recorded data.
Further, according to the CRS-2018 annual report, a total of  2,32,69,383 births were registered in the year 2018, which roughly averages to 63,758 births per day. Most probably, the data about daily births mentioned in the post might have been collected from this report.
In India, population enumeration is carried out once every ten years. The last census was carried out in the year 2011 and the next census is due this year (2021). As of now, the 2011 Census data is the only available official information as far as the population by religion is concerned. The share of the Muslim population as per 2011 Census is 14.2% which is slightly more than their share in 2001, when it was 13.4%. With this, we can conclude that the Muslim population in India is not 20% or 25% as claimed in the post as far as officially available information is concerned.
To sum it up, the religion-wise registration of births data in a year is not provided by the government.


text:
20% Conviction rate in ‘Hate Speech’ cases decided between 2016 & 2020
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
January 4, 2022
In our first story on ‘hate speech’ cases, it was observed that the number of cases booked under Sections 153A & 153AA has been increasing over the years. While the cases have increased, the disposal rates of both the police & courts have come down leading to increased pendency. Even in cases whose trial is complete between 2016 & 2020, the conviction rate was only around 20%.
In the previous story, we looked at the legal framework of ‘Hate Speech’ in India and the trends in the cases registered under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Cold (IPC). Based on the information provided in the National Crime Records Bureau’s (NCRB) Crime in India (CII) report, we analysed the cases booked under Sections 153A & 153AA i.e., under the head “Promoting enmity between groups.”
In the second part & final part of this series, we look at the disposal of these cases by the police and in the courts. This analysis is based on the data from the NCRB’s CII report.
The pendency of ‘Hate Speech’ cases with the Police increased between 2016 & 2020
In the earlier story, we have highlighted that there is a year-on-year increase in the number of cases filed under IPC 153A & 153AA, and there was a considerable increase in the number of new cases filed in 2020.
Apart from the increase in the new cases, the number of pending cases with the police has also increased continuously as the police disposal rate has not crossed 50% in any of the last five years.
At the beginning of 2020, there were 1217 cases pending with the police from the previous year. This is higher than in any of the years between 2016 & 2020. As only 1075 were disposed in 2020 and 1804 new cases were added, the pendency by the end of 2020 went up to 1944.
By the end of 2016, the pendency of these cases was nearly 57%, which improved to 51.1% by the end of 2017. However, over the three years (2018 to 2020), there is a considerable increase in pendency. It crossed 60% by the end of 2019 and was 64.2% by the end of 2020.
During the same period, the disposal rate of the police fell from 43% in 2016 to 35.5% in 2020.
During 2016-20, 59% of the Final Report filed cases were closed due to lack of Insufficient evidence
The disposal of a case by the police is either by filing the final report and closing the case (due to lack of evidence and other causes) or by filing a charge sheet in the court so that the trial can continue. Data for the last five years i.e., 2016-20 indicates that the proportion of cases in which a charge sheet is filed has increased.
Chargesheeting percentage is the number of cases charge-sheeted out of the total cases disposed by the police in a particular year. In 2016, it was 65.4% which increased to 72.4% in 2020. A considerable increase was observed in 2020. Of the 1075 cases disposed by the police in 2020, a charge sheet was filed in 778 cases. In 2019, this was 540 out of 805 disposed cases.
Police file a final report when the investigation is complete at their end and where they are unable to file a Chargesheet against the accused.  The number of such cases in 2020 was 292, more than twice of 141 in 2016. However, the proportion of the cases where a final report is filed by police (of the disposed cases) fell from 33.6% in 2016 to 27% in 2020.
During the five-year period of 2016 to 2020, a total of 1195 cases were closed by the police by filing a final report. Of these, 706 cases i.e., around 59% of the cases were closed by the police due to lack of evidence. Over the five-year period, the proportion of such cases among the final report filed cases fell slightly from 60.3% in 2016 to 58.2% in 2020. In comparison, across all IPC crimes, 68% of the final report cases are closed due to a lack of evidence in 2020. However, this percentage is skewed to a large extent due to the cases related to theft & burglary.
93% of the cases are pending trial in the courts by the end of 2020
The backlog of cases in courts relating to IPC Section 153A has been increasing year on year. By the end of 2016, a total of 903 cases were pending trial in courts. This number increased to 2132 by the end of 2019 and further increased to 2736 by the end of 2020.
The increase in the number of cases pending trial in the courts can be attributed to an extent to the increase in the number of cases in which the police filed a charge sheet and sent them to court for trial. The lower rate of disposal is another major reason for an increase in pendency. The number of cases disposed by the courts increased from 89 in 2016 to 200 in 2020, but the proportion of the cases disposed of the cases up for trial in a particular year has reduced over the years. From around 9% in 2016, the court disposal rate fell to about 6.8% in 2020.
Between 2016 & 2020, the Conviction rate is only around 20%
Of all the cases that were disposed of by the courts, the majority are those in which the trial is complete. During the period of 2016 to 2020, 50 were disposed without trial and the trials were completed in 694 cases. In all, a total of 744 cases were disposed by the courts during these five years.
In most of the cases where the trial is complete, the accused were either discharged or acquitted. Out of the 694 cases in which the trial is complete between 2016 & 2020, the accused were either discharged/acquitted in 559 cases and only 136 i.e., around 20% resulted in a conviction.
However, the yearly trend in the conviction rate is not consistent.  In 2016, only 15.3% of the cases ended up in conviction, which has increased to 26.4% in 2019. However, it again fell to 20.4% in 2020.
As per NCRB’s data, out of the 2869 cases pending under the head “Offences promoting enmity between different groups”, 2054 cases are pending trial for more than a year.
Low conviction rates are a cause for concern in cases relating to hate speech
The conviction rate of only around 20% in ‘hate speech’ cases in the year 2020 is almost 1/3 of the conviction rate of all cognizable IPC crimes. In other words, the conviction rate of ‘hate speech’ related cases is among the lowest of all IPC crimes.
The data on the disposal of cases relating to Section 153A by the police & courts highlights the following broad trends.
In a recent case relating to the Delhi Riots in 2020, the Supreme Court had to direct and give a deadline to the Delhi HC, to decide on the allegations of hate speech against a few politicians. This is an example in which the highest court of the land had to intervene to speed up the trial even to ensure that a case is filed. There could be hundreds of such instances where the police did not file a case.
In another case related to the same Delhi Riots of 2020, the Delhi high court had to reprimand the Police for not providing evidence even after one year of the arrests. In another case relating to sloganeering near Jantar Mantar, where the case was booked under Section 153A, the court rejected bail citing that there is clear evidence of speech & sloganeering against a community, but is yet to complete the trial.
In multiple other instances, courts at various levels had to pull up the police for not submitting adequate evidence or for inordinate delay.
One of the major challenges in this regard is the differentiations of Hate speech from Freedom of Speech. The Supreme Court highlights this in its judgment related to the Amish Devgan vs. Union of India  & Ors.
Data of the last five years highlights multiple challenges as far as cases related to ‘hate speech’ are considered. From collection of evidence to a proper trial, there entire process is riddled with challenges in the absence of a specific law that addresses ‘hate speech’.

created: January 4, 2022


text:
Data: Only 27% of CAMPA Funds Utilized Between 2019-20 And 2021-22
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
April 17, 2023
Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) is meant to compensate for the losses incurred in diversion of the forest land for various purposes. Data indicates that only about 27% of the dedicated CAMPA funds were utilized between 2019-20 and 2021-22.
India State of Forest Report – 2021 (IFSR 2021) reports an increase of 1.5 thousand sq. kms of Forest cover compared to the assessment in the year 2019. This is only a minute increase with the total forest Cover in the country with around 21.71% compared to 21.67% earlier.
The report states that while activities like felling of tress, natural calamities, anthropogenic pressures, and developmental activities contributed to loss in forest cover in some states, better conservation measures, afforestation activities, tree plantation drives, etc. have contributed to increase in forest cover in few other states.
Such measures of afforestation to counter the loss of forest cover due to various developmental activities is the core idea behind Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA).
Low utilization of CAMPA funds has been an issue since its inception in 2002. Compensatory Afforestation Fund Act, 2016 established a National Compensatory Afforestation Fund under the Public Account of India and State Compensatory Afforestation Fund under Public Account of each state. The Compensatory Afforestation Fund Rules were also formulated to encourage utilisation of CAMPA funds.  A detailed explainer on CAMPA funds can be read here. But what has been the trends in allocation and utilisation of the CAMPA funds in the recent years? Here is an analysis.
CAMPA funds worth 51.7 thousand crores transferred to States since 2019-20
The details of the funds released by ad hoc CAMPA until 2018-19 prior to the rules came into force can be read from here.  A recent response of the Union government in the parliament provides details of transfer of States/UTs shares of CAMPA fund to respective States & UT governments. As per the data, from 2019-20 to January 2023, a total of Rs. 51.77 thousand crores were transferred to all the states & UTs.
During 2019-20, i.e., the first full year after the new CAMPA fund rules were implemented, a total of Rs. 47.86 thousand crores were released to the States as their share. Few of the UTs which missed out in 2019-20 received the funds in 2020-21. A total of Rs. 2.8 thousand crores were released in 2021-22 for 11 States/UTs.
Among the States, Odisha has received the highest cumulative share of CAMPA funds with Rs.6.28 thousand since during this period followed by Madhya Pradesh with Rs.6.12 thousand crores. These two States along with Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand & Maharashtra account for 52% of the total funds released to all the States/UTs since 2019-20. Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Odisha & Maharashtra are among the states with the highest area under forest cover as per the latest State of Forest report – 2021.
Total Value of APOs submitted by States and approved is only about 45% of the allocation
The States and UTs that have received the funds under CAMPA are required to submit their Annual Plan of Operations (APOs) as prepared by State CAMPA. This is as pet the provisions of CAF Act, 2016 & the Rules that were framed under this Act. These APOs are required to be approved by National Authority.
In a response provided in Lok Sabha on 13 March 2023, Government of India furnished details of the value of the APOs that were approved. This is for the three complete years of 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2021-22. The total value of approved APOs is Rs. 23.22 thousand crores during these three years. This is about 45% of the total funds released to the states during this period.
There are large variances among the states in the value of the approved APOs compared to the CAMPA funds received by them.
The approved APOs for Gujarat is higher than the funds received by the state. The total value of approved APOs in the three years is Rs. 1.82 thousand crores compared to Rs. 1.48 thousand crores received by the state during this period. The APOs approved in 2019-20 was Rs.1.48 thousand crores which was same as the fund received in that year. In the ensuing two years, the state has not received any new funds but got approvals for APOs worth Rs. 169 cores each year.
The highest value of approved APOs is for Chhattisgarh. The Rs. 3.69 thousand crores approved APOs make for 61% of the fund CAMPA funds received by the state. Odisha & Madhya Pradesh, which are the among the recipients of most CAMPA funds have value approved APOs at 35.5% and 24.4% of the funds received. Barring very few states, value of approved APOs of most of the states is less than 50% of the value of CAMPA funds received.
Only 27% of CAMPA funds utilised during 2019-20 to 2021-22
In the response in Lok Sabha provided on 03 April 2023, Government of India provided details of the utilization of CAMPA funds by the respective State CAMPAs. The total amount of funds allocated to the States/UTs was Rs. 51.3 thousand crores during the three years from 2019-20 to 2021-22. On the other hand, the total amount of funds utilized as submitted by States/UTs amount to Rs. 13.69 thousand crores, or only about 27 % of the total funds received under CAMPA.
Utilisation by Odisha is the greatest with Rs. 2.07 thousand crores. However, this is only about 1/3 of the funds received by the State. Gujarat which had APOs more than the funds received, has utilised only about 31% of the funds.
Madhya Pradesh & Maharashtra the other two states which has received the most funds. But their utilisation is only 22.3% and 19.6% respectively.  Uttar Pradesh & Karnataka have a better utilisation with 44% and 42.5% respectively.  Jharkhand, another state among top-5 has utilised only 16.3% of the funds allocated to it. The details for Ladakh were not provided.
Despite new law, underutilisation of the fund persists
The CAG Report in 2013 highlighted the under cutisation of CAMPA funds. Compensatory Afforestation Fund Act, 2016 and the subsequent CAF rules & guidelines were formulated to improve upon the utilisation of the CAMPA funds.  However, the data indicates that there is a huge scope of improvement, and the problem of underutilisation persists despite a new law being in place.
The value of Approved plans itself is less than half of the funds allocated in case of most of the States/UTs. This reduces further when the actual utilisation is considered. The national average utilization is only a 1/3 of the total funds. Utilization in many states is less than the national average. Even the comparatively better performing states utilised less than half the available funds. With only a negligible increase in the forest cover and threat of deforestation across many of the States, it is imperative that the governments find better ways of proper utilisation of the available funds.


text:
Only 4 of the 149 days of the 17th Lok Sabha saw more than 90% Attendance
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
January 13, 2022
During the recent winter session of parliament, it was reported that the PM urged his party MPs to be regular to the parliament. Data from the 17th Lok Sabha indicates that the average attendance was not more than 80% in any of the sessions. Only 6 MPs have 100% attendance. Of the 149 sittings of the 17th Lok Sabha, only four days had more than 90% attendance.
With the recent conclusion of the winter session of the Parliament, the 17 Lok Sabha has almost completed half of its five-year term. The 17 Lok Sabha met for a total of 149 days since its inception in 2019. Reportedly, Prime Minister Narendra Modi recently urged Members of Parliament (MPs) of the BJP to be regular to the Parliament. It is in this context we look at the attendance of the members of the 17 Lok Sabha in terms of sessions & the parties they represent.
Methodology: Since the 17 Lok Sabha saw the death and resignation of 11 members and Lok Sabha does not consider attendance of Speaker, Deputy Speaker, Prime Minister and Ministers, the analysis is made considering the attendance of only those members who signed either through the Register or Mobile attendance application or both.
As per the rules of the Lok Sabha, a member is considered present if he signs the attendance register. If a member was present on a particular day but did not sign the attendance register, he is considered absent. In our analysis, we consider all those who did not sign the register as absent. It is also possible that some parties may have boycotted certain days or an entire session for various reasons & issues. Since such MPs do not sign the register, they are treated as absent. For instance, MPs of the TRS boycotted a major portion of the winter session on the issue of paddy procurement.
Only 148 MPs have more than 90% attendance
The 17 Lok Sabha since its inception in 2019 sat for 149 days over seven (7) sessions. Of the 542 members, at least 59 members held ministerial portfolios during any session which means 481 members were required to sign the register to get their attendance recorded in Lok Sabha. However, only 148 members have more than 90% attendance. 93 members have less than 50%. Six MPs have attended all the 149 days over the seven sessions and recorded 100% attendance.
Three parties have more than 50% of their members with more than 90% attendance
Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) with 3 MPs, Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) with 10 MPs and Janata Dal (United) with 16 MPs are the only parties with more than 50% of its members attending more than 90% of the sittings of the 17 Lok Sabha so far. BSP is the only national party with more than 50% of its members attending 90% or more of the total sittings. Among the other national parties, less than 50% of its members had more than 90% attendance; BJP (44%), CPI(M) (33%), NCP and INC with 20% and 19% respectively.
No Session saw more than 80% average attendance
A session is defined as the period between the meeting of a Parliament and its prorogation. Normally, three Sessions of the Lok Sabha are held in a year namely,  the Budget Session, which is usually the longest  (February – May), Autumn or Monsoon Session (July – August) and Winter Session (November – December). In the 17 Lok Sabha, the Lok Sabha met for a total of seven sessions till date.
Of the seven sessions, the first session saw an average attendance of 76% while the fourth and fifth sessions which were conducted between first and second lockdown due to COVID-19 pandemic saw 64% and 60% attendance respectively. The fourth & fifth sessions lasted for 10 and 25 days respectively.
The 4th session saw the highest number of parties (6) with 100% attendance.
The lone MPs of All Jharkhand Students Union (AJSU), Naga People’s Front (NPF) and Sikkim Krantikari Morcha (SKM) attended all the sittings of the first session of the 17 Lok Sabha which was held between 17 June 2019 to 06 August 2019. They recorded 100% attendance.
No party has recorded 100% attendance in the second session. In the third session, the lone MP of the Revolutionary Socialist Party (RSP) recorded 100% attendance while in the fifth session, the lone MP of the National People’s Party (NPP) recorded 100% attendance.
It is in the fourth session that the greatest number of parties (6) recorded 100% attendance of all their MPs. This was the session held during the COVID-19 lockdown. In the Sixth and seventh sessions, there were three parties each with 100% attendance of their respective MPs.
Only four days witnessed more than 90% of attendance
Of the 149 days that the Lok Sabha sat during the 17 Lok Sabha, only four days had an attendance of 90% or more MPs. The following are the dates.
On 18 June 2019, the house saw the oath or affirmation of members who had not taken it already.
26 June 2019, with an attendance of 91.47% saw the passage of important bills like The Special Economic Zones (Amendment) Bill, 2019, The Aadhaar and Other Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2019.
On 18 July 2019, the Minister of External Affairs S. Jaishankar made statements regarding the developments that have taken place pertaining to Kulbhushan Jadhav, an Indian citizen in the illegal custody of Pakistan.
24 July 2019 saw a discussion on several important bills like the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Bill, 2019 and The Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Bill, 2019 which was introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of Finance, Ms. Nirmala Sitharaman, on 19 July 2019.
MPs can apply for Leave
Article 101(4) in The Constitution of India talks about disqualification of a Member of Parliament (MP) if he/she is absent continuously for 60 days from the Lok Sabha or the Rajya Sabha without permission. Hence, MPs usually submit leave applications when they are absent from the house for a longer period.
Since the beginning of the 17th Lok Sabha, a total of 39 leave applications were received from 26 MPs. These 39 applications together sought leave of more than 1296 days. An MP is supposed to submit his leave application to the Speaker of the house citing the reasons for absence, and one single leave application cannot exceed 60 days. All such leave applications thus received are referred to the ‘Committee on Absence of Members from the Sittings of the House’, a standing committee in the Lok Sabha that meets and decides on each such leave application.
The Committee on Absence of Members from the sitting of the House has recently released its 6th report containing details of the MP’s leave duration and reasons for which they are availing the leave. Ravneet Singh of INC, an MP from Punjab is its current Chairperson.
Of the 39 leave applications submitted by MPs belonging to ten different political parties, BJP MPs submitted 16 applications followed by 7 of the Trinamool Congress, 5 of the BSP. MPs from the INC, SP, YSRCP and Jammu & Kashmir National Conference submitted 2 applications each. MPs from the BJD, CPI and Sikkim Krantikari Morcha (SKM) parties submitted 1 application each.
Illness is the most cited reason
24 of the 39 leave applications mentioned illness as the reason for leave, of which one MP from BJP Chandra Sekhar Sahu, mentioned illness in the family and JKNC MP Farooq Abdulla cited illness and detention as the reason for leave application. Altogether, MPs sought leave for 804 days citing illness as the reason, but the committee recommended only 775 days leave because three MPs together sought 29 more leaves than the prescribed limit of fewer than 60 days each. Five MPs (4 from BJP and one from INC) cited “Election” in the state or constituency as a reason and together took 121 days to leave.
Three MPs, Atul Kumar Singh alias Atul Rai of BSP (277 days), Mohammed Azam Khan of Samajwadi Party (91 days) and Farooq Abdullah of Jammu & Kashmir National Conference (59 days) sought leave citing “detention in jail” as the reason.
The committee recommended all the leave applications received from MPs. In only six cases, it did not recommend the total number of days as applied by the MP. In the case of BSP MP Atul Kumar Singh alias Atul Rai, Choudhry Mohan Jatua of AITC, Farooq Abdullah of JKNC, Kirron Kher of BJP and Mohammed Azam Khan of SP, the committee recommended leave for 59 days and asked them to apply afresh for the remaining days since it cannot recommend a leave of absence for more than 59 days at one go. In all the other cases, the committee recommended the same number of days as applied by the MP.
Featured Image: 17th Lok Sabha

created: January 13, 2022