Current Affairs 05 September 2025

Content

1. Auto, Pharma Sectors Cheer GST Slabs; Airlines Say Wings Clipped
2. Should Commercial Speech on Digital Platforms Be Regulated?
3. India–China: The Making of a Border
4. India’s Birth Rate Down: First Dip in TFR in 2 Years
5. How the Antibiotic Culture in India Imperils Mental Health
6. Logs in Himachal Floodwaters: Supreme Court Response
7. New Foreigners Act, 2025
8. PVTGs and Enumeration Issues

Auto, pharma sectors cheer GST slabs; airlines say wings clipped

Basics

• GST (Goods and Services Tax): Indirect tax introduced in 2017, subsuming multiple central & state taxes.
• GST Council: Apex decision-making body under Article 279A, chaired by Union Finance Minister.
• Inverted Duty Structure: Situation where tax on inputs > tax on final product, discouraging domestic value addition.
• Recent Decision (Sept 2025): GST Council revised rates across multiple sectors → auto, insurance, appliances, pharma, renewable energy, but also imposed higher rates in textiles, airlines, and services.

Relevance: GS III (Economy – Taxation, GST reforms, federal fiscal relations, sectoral impacts on industry and labour).

Key Changes

• Positive for Industry:
  • Auto sector: Rate rationalisation + removal of GST Compensation Cess on certain vehicles.
  • Pharma & Fertilisers: Corrected inverted duty structure → reduces input cost burden.
  • Renewable energy: Adjustments encouraging investment in green projects.
  • Consumer appliances: Lower duties on select items → boost demand.
• Negative for Some Sectors:
  • Textiles & Garments: GST on labour charges raised 12% → 18% → affects small units, handlooms, embroidery, wedding wear.
  • Cloth Manufacturers Association of India: Warned higher costs will hurt migrant workers and common consumers (woollens, handlooms, traditional clothing).
  • Airlines: Criticised higher GST on non-economy class tickets.
  • Service providers/SMEs: Fear higher compliance costs.
• Stock Market Reaction: Initial optimism but ended flat, Sensex barely up → reflects mixed industry sentiment.

Implications

• Economic Impact
  • Rationalisation reduces litigation & compliance disputes.
  • Correction of inverted duty structure supports Make in India and boosts domestic value chains.
  • But labour-intensive textile sector hit → job losses possible for migrant/daily-wage workers.
• Social Impact
  • Higher tax on garments affects low-income consumers → affordability issue.
  • Migrant workers in textile hubs (Surat, Tiruppur, Panipat) likely to face wage squeeze.
• Political Angle
  • Rate hikes on essential clothing → politically sensitive before elections, esp. in states with large textile workforce.
  • Industries lobbying for rollback may pressure govt.
• Governance Angle
  • Shows federal cooperation in GST Council but also trade-offs → boosting revenue vs protecting vulnerable industries.
  • Addresses long-pending duty inversion, improving tax efficiency.
• Sectoral Winners & Losers
  • Winners: Auto, pharma, renewable energy, fertilizers.
  • Losers: Textiles, airlines, MSME service providers.

Should commercial speech on digital platforms be regulated?

Basics

• Commercial Speech: Expression with an economic motive (advertisements, influencer content, monetized performances). Recognised under Article 19(1)(a) (Tata Press Ltd. v. MTNL, 1995).
• Regulatory Context:
  • IT Act, 2000 & BNS, 2023 provide mechanisms for prosecution and content removal.
  • SC’s 25 Aug 2024 Order: Urged govt. to draft guidelines for social media content, triggered by derogatory remarks by comedians against persons with disabilities.
• Constitutional Framework:
  • Free speech subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) (security, public order, decency, morality, etc.).
  • Individual dignity is not an explicit ground under Art. 19(2), but SC upheld criminal defamation (2016) recognising dignity as linked to reputation.

Relevance: GS II (Polity – Fundamental Rights: Free Speech & Reasonable Restrictions; IT laws; Judiciary–Executive balance).

Arguments Against New Regulation

• Existing Laws Already Cover It: FIRs filed under BNS & IT Act show enforceability. Section 69A already provides takedown powers.
• Risk of Overreach: Using “dignity” as an independent ground risks expansive censorship.
• Chilling Effect: Comedians, satirists, journalists may self-censor, harming democratic debate.
• Judicial Precedent: SC has protected unpalatable speech (e.g., quashing FIR against Imran Pratapgadhi’s poem, 2024).
• Commercial Nature ≠ Justification for Regulation: Profit-driven speech still falls under free expression (Sakal Papers v. Union, 1962).

Arguments for Some Regulation

• Protection of Vulnerable Groups: Content mocking disabilities or minorities affects dignity and participation in public life.
• Social Responsibility: Commercialisation of free speech (influencer marketing, stand-up comedy, monetised social media) increases its reach and impact.
• Judicial Role of “Complete Justice”: SC has inherent jurisdiction to balance free expression with social harm.
• Safeguards Against Hate Speech: Commercial platforms amplify hate speech faster; some oversight is needed to prevent real harm.

Key Constitutional & Legal Precedents

• Sakal Papers v. Union (1962): Struck down govt. attempt to regulate newspaper page limit; reinforced commercial speech as part of free expression.
• Tata Press Ltd. v. MTNL (1995): Affirmed advertisements as part of free speech under Art. 19(1)(a).
• Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India (2016): Upheld criminal defamation, linking dignity with reputation.
• Recent SC orders:
  • Protected “disturbing or offensive” speech (2024).
  • Questioned excessive executive censorship via IT Act Sec. 69A.

Risks of Over-Regulation

• Censorship Creep: Govts may regulate under “social value” standards, suppressing dissent.
• Opaque Mechanisms: Existing takedown regime already lacks transparency and notice to content creators.
• Institutional Overreach: SC asking executive to draft regulations may reinforce state censorship with judicial backing.

Way Forward – Safeguards Needed

• Strong Review Mechanisms: Independent tribunals or oversight bodies for content removal.
• Clear Definitions: Avoid vague terms like “dignity” or “offensive content”.
• Stakeholder Consultation: Must include creators, civil society, and vulnerable groups—not just state or industry bodies.
• Transparency: Public disclosure of takedown/blocking orders; notice to affected parties.
• Balance Approach: Protect vulnerable groups from targeted ridicule while preserving space for satire, dissent, and artistic freedom.

India-China: the making of a border

Basics of the Border Issue

• Colonial Legacy: Border derived from British (India) and Manchu (China) empires, drawn imprecisely in Himalayan, uninhabited terrain.
• Post-Independence Indian Position: India assumed British-era maps were final; avoided negotiations. China viewed border as undefined.
• Key Disputed Areas:
  • Western Sector: Aksai Chin (strategically important for China’s Xinjiang–Tibet highway).
  • Eastern Sector: Arunachal Pradesh (esp. Tawang), based on McMahon Line (1914 Simla Agreement with Tibet).

Relevance: GS I (History – Colonial Legacies) + GS II (IR – India-China Relations, Border Disputes) + GS III (Security – Border Management).

Beginning of Conflict

• China built Aksai Chin highway (1950s) → India discovered only later.
• 1959 Proposal: China suggested Line of Actual Control (LAC) + mutual pullback (20 km).
• 1960 Zhou Enlai Proposal: Swap deal (Aksai Chin to China, Arunachal to India). India rejected.
• 1962 War: Triggered by Indian forward moves in Aksai Chin; China retained Aksai Chin but withdrew in east north of McMahon Line.

Post-War Developments (1962–1979)

• 1967: Nathu La & Cho La clashes in Sikkim → Indian Army showed stronger resolve.
• 1975: Sikkim merged with India → Chinese protests.
• 1975: Formation of China Study Group (CSG) → institutionalized patrolling, mapping with satellite imagery.
• 1979: FM Vajpayee visited Beijing → first high-level political contact post-war; partial normalisation attempt.

1980s Escalation & Diplomacy

• 1980 Deng Proposal: China willing to accept McMahon Line if India recognised Aksai Chin status quo. India refused.
• 1981–85 Talks: Resumed but deadlocked; India wanted sector-by-sector talks, China insisted on package deal.
• 1983–86 Crisis:
  • China demanded Tawang, shifting stance (linked to Tibet policy).
  • 1986: Wangdung standoff → India launched Operation Falcon, strong forward deployment. Showed India’s improved military preparedness.
• 1988 Rajiv Gandhi Visit: Turning point in ties. Both sides agreed on “mutual understanding & mutual accommodation” (MUMA). Normalisation of ties + creation of Joint Working Group (JWG) on border issue.

Implications

• Strategic Factors:
  • China needed Aksai Chin for Tibet–Xinjiang connectivity.
  • India viewed Arunachal (esp. Tawang) as non-negotiable due to cultural, historical, and security reasons.
• Diplomatic Approaches:
  • China repeatedly offered “package deals”; India preferred incremental, sectoral talks.
  • India’s stance shaped by 1962 trauma → reluctance to accept territorial concessions.
• Military Evolution:
  • 1962: Indian Army unprepared → humiliation.
  • Post-1967 & 1986: India demonstrated stronger capability & resolve.
• Geopolitical Context:
  • 1960s–70s: China wary of Soviet Union, sought neutralising India.
  • 1980s: China recalibrated post-Afghanistan war, wary of Indo-US proximity, opened to India.
• Outcome by late 1980s:
  • Border dispute unresolved.
  • Shift from confrontation to “peaceful coexistence + negotiation”.
  • Framework for future CBMs (Confidence Building Measures) laid.

‘India’s birth rate down, first dip in TFR in 2 years’

Basics

• Crude Birth Rate (CBR): No. of live births per 1,000 population/year.
  • Declined from 19.1 (2022) → 18.4 (2023).
• Total Fertility Rate (TFR): Avg. no. of children a woman is expected to bear during her reproductive span.
  • Declined from 2.0 (2021 & 2022) → 1.9 (2023).
  • First dip in 2 years.
• Replacement-level fertility: 2.1 (needed for population stabilization).
• Highest CBR (2023): Bihar (25.8).
• Lowest CBR (2023): Tamil Nadu (12).
• Highest TFR: Bihar (2.8).
• Lowest TFR: Delhi (1.2).
• States with TFR above replacement level: Northern India – Bihar (2.8), UP (2.6), MP (2.4), Rajasthan (2.3), Chhattisgarh (2.2).
• States/UTs with lowest TFRs: Delhi (1.2), West Bengal (1.3), Tamil Nadu (1.3), Maharashtra (1.4).
• Elderly proportion (2023): 9.7% of population (↑ 0.7% in one year).
  • Highest elderly share: Kerala (15%).
  • Lowest: Assam, Jharkhand (7.6%), Delhi (7.7%).

Relevance: GS I (Society – Demographic Trends, Population Issues) + GS II (Governance – Health, Education, Social Policy).

Demographic Trends

• India’s fertility is steadily declining → convergence towards below-replacement fertility in majority of states (18 States/UTs).
• North-South divide:
  • North/Central India still above replacement (Bihar, UP, MP, Rajasthan).
  • South & urbanised states far below replacement (TN, WB, Delhi, Maharashtra).
• Indicates demographic heterogeneity – “two Indias” in population dynamics.

Implications of Falling TFR

• Population Stabilisation: India nearing replacement level fertility; long-term population expected to peak around mid-2060s.
• Ageing Society: Elderly share rising (9.7% in 2023; Kerala already at 15%).
• Labour Force Impact: Declining fertility may affect working-age population growth after 2040, impacting economic growth potential.
• Gender Dimension: Falling fertility often linked with female education, urbanisation, workforce participation, and healthcare access.

Policy & Governance Aspects

• Civil Registration System (CRS) & SRS: Key demographic data sources; delays (4-year lag in CRS, MCCD) weaken timely policymaking.
• Healthcare Planning: Rising elderly population requires stronger geriatric care, social security, and pensions.
• Regional Planning: High fertility states (Bihar, UP, MP) will continue to add to India’s population momentum → implications for resource allocation, jobs, and migration.
• Population Policies: Need state-specific approaches rather than “one-size-fits-all.”

Socio-Economic Drivers of Fertility Decline

• Education & Awareness: Female literacy rise → lower fertility.
• Urbanisation: Higher in low-TFR states (Delhi, TN, WB).
• Access to Family Planning: More widespread in southern/western states.
• Economic Aspiration: Shift from “quantity to quality” of children (health, education).
• Delayed Marriage & Fertility Choices: Seen in urban India.

Challenges & Opportunities

• Opportunities:
  • Fertility decline supports sustainable development.
  • Lower dependency ratio in short term (demographic dividend).
• Challenges:
  • Demographic imbalance between north (population boom) and south (population stagnation/decline).
  • Ageing burden → healthcare, pensions, social support.
  • Skewed sex ratio and declining fertility may exacerbate social issues.

How the antibiotic culture in India imperils mental health

Basics

• Context: Rising mental health awareness in India, but antibiotic misuse poses hidden risks via gut-brain axis disruption.
• Gut-brain axis: Bidirectional communication between gastrointestinal tract and brain, influencing mood, cognition, and stress.
• Antibiotics’ role: Overuse disturbs gut microbiota → contributes to anxiety, depression, cognitive decline.
• India’s antibiotic crisis:
  • 2,67,000 deaths due to AMR (2021); projected 1.2 million by 2030 (IHME).
  • ~50% antibiotics consumed in India are unapproved formulations (Lancet 2022).
• Institutions involved: NIMHANS, AIIMS exploring gut dysbiosis–psychiatric disorder links.

Relevance: GS II (Health – Public Health & Policy) + GS III (Science & Tech – Antibiotic Resistance, Gut-Brain Axis Research).

Health & Science Dimensions

• Gut microbiota produces serotonin, dopamine, and SCFAs (short-chain fatty acids) → regulate mood, sleep, stress.
• Antibiotic misuse → gut dysbiosis → inflammation (IL-6, TNF-α), neurochemical imbalance, cognitive decline.
• Psychobiotics (probiotics + prebiotics) emerging as adjunct therapy for depression and anxiety.
• Probiotic-rich Indian foods (curd, idli, dosa, pickles) naturally support microbial diversity.

Mental Health Impact

• Gut disruption linked to anxiety, depression, and neurodegenerative disorders.
• Dysbiosis-induced inflammation alters neurotransmitter metabolism and neuroplasticity.
• Psychiatric care must integrate gastrointestinal and nutritional assessments.

Drivers of Antibiotic Misuse in India

• Cultural: Preference for “quick fixes” over lifestyle changes.
• Systemic: Over-the-counter sales, weak enforcement of prescription laws.
• Economic: Doctors over-prescribe to satisfy patients; pharmacies act as dispensaries.
• Rural-urban gap: Easy availability in rural/semi-urban areas without medical oversight.

Governance & Policy Challenges

• Weak enforcement of CDSCO prescription rules.
• Inadequate awareness campaigns on antibiotic misuse.
• Need for stronger AMR surveillance networks (INSAR expansion with mental health metrics).
• Public health campaigns (NHM, Ayushman Bharat) yet to integrate gut-brain literacy.

Solutions & Way Forward

• Regulatory: Strict prescription-only antibiotic sales, penalties for violations.
• Public Health: Awareness drives on gut health, microbiome, and mental well-being.
• Medical Education: Antibiotic stewardship integrated into medical curriculum.
• Research & Data: Invest in Indian microbiome research; link AMR + mental health surveillance.
• Integrated Care: Combine psychiatry, gastroenterology, nutrition, and public health.
• Traditional Knowledge: Promote fermented foods as natural probiotics.

Logs in Himachal floodwaters, SC response

Basics

• Context: Supreme Court (SC) took suo motu note of videos showing timber logs washed away in Himachal floods.
• Prima facie concern: Possible case of illegal felling of trees in Himalayan states.
• Bench: Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice BR Gavai.
• Parties involved: Centre, NDMA, MoEFCC, Jal Shakti Ministry, NHAI, States (HP, Uttarakhand, Punjab, J&K).
• Deadline: 2 weeks to respond.

Relevance: GS I (Geography – Himalayan Ecology) + GS II (Polity – Judicial Intervention, Environmental Governance) + GS III (Disaster Management).

Key Issues Highlighted

• Flood-linked destruction: Logs floating downstream → linked to landslides, deforestation.
• Ecological damage: Loss of forest cover → destabilises slopes, worsens floods.
• Illegal logging nexus: Timber mafia suspected behind large-scale tree felling.
• Infrastructure vulnerability:
  • Example: 14 tunnels between Chandigarh–Manali face landslide risks.
  • “Near-death trap” situation during blockages; 300 people stranded on one occasion.
• Development vs Ecology: CJI observed – “Development has to be there, but must balance with ecology.”

Petitioner’s Concerns

• Call for national-level plan: Mechanism for disaster prevention & eco-protection in Himalayan states.
• Eco-fragility: Frequent cloudbursts, flash floods, landslides intensifying due to unchecked deforestation, road cutting, dam projects.
• Pristine ecology threat: Himalayan biodiversity and rivers at stake.

SC Observations

• Unprecedented landslides and floods in HP, Uttarakhand, Punjab.
• Videos show timber logs in floodwaters → indicates systemic illegal felling.
• Urged immediate response from officials to prevent future ecological collapse.

Overview

• Environmental Angle:
  • Deforestation weakens slope stability → landslides and flash floods.
  • Floating logs = dual disaster (physical obstruction + ecological loss).
  • Fragile Himalayan ecosystem cannot sustain large-scale construction + deforestation.
• Governance & Policy Issues:
  • Weak enforcement of Forest Conservation Act, 1980 & Indian Forest Act, 1927.
  • Poor coordination between state forest departments and NHAI during road expansion.
  • Need for stricter timber tracking, community monitoring, and green clearances.
• Disaster Management Angle:
  • NDMA and states lack real-time flood and landslide monitoring.
  • Rescue challenges in tunnels/remote highways highlight poor contingency planning.
  • Ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction (Eco-DRR) largely missing.
• Socio-economic Angle:
  • Local livelihoods disrupted (farmers, transporters, small traders).
  • Increased vulnerability of downstream communities (Punjab flood plains).
  • Hidden costs of “development-at-all-costs” approach.
• Way Forward:
  • Independent probe into illegal logging in Himalayas.
  • Strict forest clearance norms for infrastructure.
  • Eco-sensitive zone expansion + carrying capacity studies.
  • Investment in early warning systems, slope stabilisation, tunnel safety.
  • Promotion of community-led forest monitoring & afforestation.

New Foreigners Act, 2025

Basics

• Law: Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025 (in force from Sept 1, 2025).
• Objective: Overhaul India’s framework on entry, stay, movement, and exit of foreigners.
• Consolidation: Merges 4 earlier Acts –
  • Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920
  • Registration of Foreigners Act, 1939
  • Foreigners Act, 1946
  • Immigration (Carrier’s Liability) Act, 2000
• Need for change: Old laws = fragmented, colonial, ambiguous, poor enforcement.

Relevance: GS II (Polity – Migration, National Security, Citizenship & Foreigners Laws, Centre–State Powers).

Key Provisions & Analysis

• Documentation Rules:
  • All foreigners must carry valid passport/visa; penalties for non-compliance.
  • Defined immigration posts for legal entry/exit.
• Defined Registration & Monitoring:
  • Mandatory registration with Foreigners Regional Registration Officers (FRROs).
  • Hotels, transport, religious institutions, employers → must report foreign clients/workers.
• Special Permits:
  • Required for restricted/prohibited areas (esp. border/tribal zones).
• Enforcement & Penalties:
  • Powers of entry, search, arrest with due procedure.
  • Fines from ₹10,000 to ₹5 lakh.
  • Offences: overstaying, fake documents, illegal entry, visa misuse.
• Delegation & Centralisation:
  • Central government retains core powers; can delegate to states.
  • Emergency provisions for quick directions.
• Exemptions & Categories:
  • Special rules for Tibetans, Sri Lankan Tamils, Bhutanese/Nepalese citizens, minorities from Pakistan–Afghanistan–Bangladesh.
  • Limited protection for bona fide mistakes.
  • Different fine slabs (e.g., Tibetan/Bhutanese migrants, Rohingya, Buddhist monks).
• New in the statute:
  • Digital records: compulsory reporting by hotels, universities, hospitals.
  • Diplomatic clauses: rules for warships, foreign military, diplomats.
  • Exemption categories: tighter listing for humanitarian cases, minorities, Tibetans, Sri Lankans.

Likely Impact

• Positive:
  • Single law → clarity & consistency.
  • Stronger enforcement & digital monitoring.
  • Better national security management.
• Concerns:
  • Risk of over-centralisation.
  • Compliance burden on institutions (hotels, universities).
  • Possible misuse against vulnerable groups (e.g., refugees).

PVTGs (Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups) and Enumeration Issues

Basics

• PVTGs: Sub-category within Scheduled Tribes (STs), identified as the most vulnerable.
• Origin of Concept: Based on the Dhebar Commission (1960–61) which noted disparities among tribal groups → recommended identification of “Primitive Tribal Groups” (renamed as PVTGs in 2006).
• Criteria for Identification:
  • Declining/stagnant population
  • Low literacy
  • Pre-agricultural level of technology (hunting, gathering, shifting cultivation)
  • Economic backwardness
  • Geographical and social isolation

Relevance: GS II (Polity – Migration, National Security, Citizenship & Foreigners Laws, Centre–State Powers).

Overview

Historical Context

• 1975: Govt identified 52 tribal groups as PVTGs.
• 1993: 23 more added → total 75 PVTGs.
• Spread across 18 States + 1 UT (A&N Islands).

Enumeration Issues

• So far, PVTGs never separately enumerated in Census (treated under STs).
• Govt now wants separate data on PVTGs for targeted schemes like Pradhan Mantri Janjati Adivasi Nyaya Maha Abhiyan (PM-JANMAN).
• Challenge: Lists of STs (and PVTGs) are state-specific, not uniform nationally.

Past Efforts

• Census 2011: Some PVTGs (Baigas in MP, Abujh Marias in Chhattisgarh, Kamars) enumerated separately, but not uniform.
• 2013: Abujh Marias + Hill Korbas in Chhattisgarh included in ST list by Parliament law.
• 2016 Lok Sabha Reply: 75 PVTGs officially recognized (40 listed as “single-entry” groups under Article 342).

Current Situation

• As per 2011 Census, 13 PVTGs were listed under single-entry STs.
• Examples: Great Andamanese, Onges, Jarawas, Sentinelese (Andaman), Kutia Kondh, Birhor, Korwa, Sahariya etc.
• Population estimates (2011–13 survey):
  • Total: 27.45 lakh PVTGs across India.
  • Highest population: Madhya Pradesh (6.57 lakh).
  • Lowest: Andaman & Nicobar tribes (few hundred) – e.g., Sentinelese (population ~50).

Policy Significance

• PM-JANMAN Scheme (2023): Rolled out to improve housing, health, education, livelihood support, and basic amenities in 200+ districts.
• Enumeration critical for:
  • Addressing health gaps (maternal/child mortality, malnutrition, endemic diseases).
  • Education & livelihoods (preserve skills, provide access).
  • Infrastructure planning (housing, roads, connectivity).
  • Monitoring inclusion in welfare schemes.

Challenges

• Identification Criteria outdated (still uses Dhebar Commission benchmarks).
• Social exclusion & isolation → remote forests, islands.
• Data Gaps → many still not fully counted, esp. uncontacted tribes like Sentinelese.
• State-specific lists complicate uniform national policy.

 Larger Significance

• Ensuring inclusive development without eroding tribal autonomy & culture.
• Supports SDGs: poverty reduction, health, education, inequality.
• Strengthens tribal justice framework under Constitution (Art. 46, 275, 342).