24 February 2026

• The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has released India’s first comprehensive National Counter Terrorism Policy and Strategy titled PRAHAAR.
• It follows recent terror incidents including the April 2025 Pahalgam attack and growing concerns over cross-border terrorism and cyber threats.
• The policy aims to create a standardised anti- terror framework across States.

Key Highlights

1. Nature of Threats Identified

• Cross-border sponsored terrorism.
• Global terror groups (e.g., al-Qaeda, IS).
• Cyber-attacks by nation-states and criminal hackers.
• Drone-enabled attacks in border states.  Terror use of encryption, dark web, cryptocurrency.
• Risk of misuse of CBRNED (Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, Explosive, Digital) materials.

2. Protection of Critical Infrastructure Focus on safeguarding:

• Power and energy sector  Railways and aviation
• Ports and maritime assets
• Defence, space and atomic energy

3. Institutional Measures

• Uniform anti-terror structure across States.   Standardised operating procedures (SOPs).
• Legal experts to be involved at every stage of investigation.
• Strengthening coordination between Central and State agencies.

4. Counter-Radicalisation Strategy

• Engagement with religious leaders and NGOs.
• Preventing recruitment of youth by extremist organisations.

5. Terror Financing & Logistics

• Criminalisation of all terrorist acts.
• Denial of access to funds, weapons and safe havens.
• Focus on terror–organised crime nexus.

Static Linkages

• Article 355 – Duty of Union to protect States against external aggression and internal disturbance.
• Police & Public Order – State List (Seventh Schedule).
• Criminal Law & Procedure – Concurrent List.  
• Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967 – Primary anti-terror law.
• National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 – Central agency for terror offences.
• 2nd ARC Report on Combating Terrorism – Recommended institutional reforms including NCTC.
• FATF framework on terror financing.

Critical Analysis

• Prelims
  • UAPA, NIA Act, Constitutional provisions (Art.
  • 355, Seventh Schedule) Significance
  • First formal national doctrine integrating cyber, drone and CBRN threats.
  • Moves towards standardised national response.
  • Recognises evolving technology-enabled terrorism.
• Challenges
  • Federal concerns due to policing being a State subject.
  • Balancing national security with civil liberties (Articles 14, 19, 21).
  • Capacity gaps in cyber-forensics at State level.
  • Coordination issues among multiple intelligence agencies.

Way Forward

• Strengthen intelligence-sharing platforms (MAC, NATGRID).
• Improve cyber forensic and AI-based surveillance capacity.
• Judicial safeguards to prevent misuse of anti- terror laws.
• Enhance international cooperation against terror financing.
• Institutionalise community-based de- radicalisation programs.

ADULTERATED MILK KILLS FOUR

• Four elderly persons died due to acute renal failure after consuming allegedly adulterated milk in Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari district, Andhra Pradesh.
• 12 persons fell ill; 8 suffering from anuria (absence of urine) and undergoing dialysis.
• Three children below four years are critical.
• Milk was supplied by a local vendor procuring from 46 dairy farmers and supplying to 106 families.
• Samples sent for forensic testing.
• ₹10 lakh ex gratia announced by State government.
• Raises concerns regarding food safety enforcement and public health governance.

Key Exam-Relevant Points

• Anuria: Absence of urine output due to kidney failure; can result from toxic exposure.
• Possible adulterants in milk:
  • Urea
  • Detergents
  • Heavy metals
  • Pesticide residues
• FSSAI National Milk Safety Survey (2018):
  • ~7% samples unsafe (contamination/adulteration)
• Food safety governed under:
  • Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006
  • Regulated by Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI)
• Food adulteration is punishable with imprisonment and fine under FSS Act.

Static Linkages

• Article 21 – Right to life (includes right to health – SC interpretation).
• Article 47 – Duty of State to improve public health.
• Adulteration of foodstuffs – Concurrent List (Seventh Schedule).
• National Health Mission (NHM).
• Integrated Disease Surveillance Programme (IDSP).
• Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (Product liability).

Critical Analysis

• Governance Issues
  • Weak enforcement at district level.
  • Inadequate food testing infrastructure.
  • Informal dairy supply chains difficult to regulate.
• Public Health Concerns
  • Vulnerable groups (elderly, children) disproportionately affected.
  • Need for early detection and toxic surveillance.
• Administrative & Ethical Concerns
  • Accountability of food safety officers.
  • Criminal negligence vs systemic failure.   
  • Duty of State under welfare framework.

Way Forward

• Strengthen district-level food testing labs.
• Periodic mandatory testing of milk supply chains.
• Digital traceability in dairy procurement.
• Public awareness on milk adulteration detection kits.
• Strict enforcement under FSS Act.
• Integrate food poisoning alerts with IDSP.

HC CLEARS INTERFAITH MARRIAGES

• The Allahabad High Court granted police protection to 12 interfaith live-in couples in Uttar Pradesh.
• The Court held that since no religious conversion had taken place, provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 were not attracted.
• The State argued non-compliance with procedural provisions (Sections 8 & 9), but the Court rejected this.
• The Bench emphasized protection of life, liberty, privacy, and freedom of choice of consenting adults.

Key Takeaways

• Live-in relationships between consenting adults are not illegal.
• Anti-conversion laws apply only when:
  • There is actual conversion, and
  • It is induced by force, fraud, coercion, misrepresentation, undue influence, or allurement.
• Interfaith marriage or relationship per se is not prohibited.
• State has a constitutional obligation to protect life and liberty.
• Fundamental Rights cannot be denied on the basis of religion.

Static Constitutional Provisions

• Article 14 – Equality before law.
• Article 15 – Prohibition of discrimination.
• Article 19 – Freedom of expression and movement.
• Article 21 – Right to life and personal liberty (expanded interpretation).
• Article 25 – Freedom of conscience and religion.
• Judicial precedents:
  • Rev. Stanislaus v. State of MP (1977) – No fundamental right to convert another person.
  • Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (2017) – Right to privacy under Article 21.
  • Recognition of live-in relationships under judicial interpretation.

Critical Dimensions

• Constitutional Angle
  • Balance between Article 25 (religion) and Article 21 (personal liberty).
  • Constitutional morality vs social morality.  
  • Scope of State’s regulatory power.
• Governance Issues
  • Risk of misuse of anti-conversion laws.
  • Need for clarity in procedural provisions.
  • Protection mechanisms for vulnerable couples.

Way Forward

• Ensure anti-conversion laws are narrowly tailored.
• Prevent misuse through clear administrative guidelines.
• Strengthen police sensitization on Fundamental Rights.
• Promote constitutional awareness among citizens.

WHATSAPP TO SC: NO DATA SHARE

• Competition Commission of India (CCI) imposed a ₹213.14 crore penalty on WhatsApp for abuse of dominant position regarding its 2021 privacy policy.
• The penalty was upheld by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT).
• WhatsApp and its parent company Meta challenged the decision before the Supreme Court of India.
• WhatsApp argued that concerns are addressed under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDP Act, 2023).
• The Supreme Court cautioned against breach of privacy and commercial exploitation of user data.

Key Points

• CCI’s Finding:
  • Abuse of dominant position under Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002.
  • “Take-it-or-leave-it” consent mechanism.
  • Users allegedly compelled to share data with Meta for continued service access.
• NCLAT Observations:
  • Core principle: restore user choice.
  • Non-essential data sharing must require express and revocable consent.
  • Five-year advertisement data-sharing ban termed redundant due to opt-in/opt-out provision.
• WhatsApp’s Argument:
  • End-to-end encryption protects private messages.
  • No unlawful sharing of message content.
  • DPDP Act provides comprehensive statutory framework for privacy protection.
• Competition Concern:
  • Data accumulation strengthens network effects and market dominance.
  • Privacy law and competition law address distinct but overlapping concerns.

Static Linkages

• Article 21 – Right to Life and Personal Liberty.
• Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v.
• Union of India (2017) – Right to Privacy recognised as Fundamental Right.
• Doctrine of Proportionality.
• Competition Act, 2002 – Abuse of Dominance (Section 4).
• Role of statutory and quasi-judicial bodies.
• Data as an economic resource in digital markets.

Critical Analysis

• Positives
  • Strengthens user autonomy and informed consent.
  • Recognises data concentration as a source of market power.
  • Promotes accountability in dominant digital platforms.
  • Aligns digital governance with constitutional privacy principles.
• Concerns
  • Potential regulatory overlap between DPDP Act and Competition Act.
  • Compliance burden on digital platforms.
  • Jurisdictional issues in cross-border data flows.
  • Difficulty in defining “essential” versus “non- essential” data.

Way Forward

• Institutional coordination between CCI and Data Protection Board.
• Clear guidelines on consent architecture and data minimisation.
• Periodic digital market audits.
• Strengthening user awareness and digital literacy.
• Balanced regulatory approach to protect innovation and fundamental rights.

• The recent deaths of three adolescent girls in Ghaziabad (Uttar Pradesh) brought national attention to child and adolescent mental health vulnerabilities.
• The incident reflects a broader rise in anxiety, depression, ADHD, and digital addiction among young people.
• Economic Survey 2025–26 highlighted growing mental health challenges linked to excessive social media and screen exposure.
• India faces a significant shortage of trained child and adolescent mental health professionals.

Key Facts & Data

• National Mental Health Survey (MoHFW):
  • 7–10% of adolescents suffer from diagnosable mental disorders.
  • 5–7% of school-aged children have ADHD.
• India has <10,000 psychiatrists for 1.4+ billion population; very few specialize in child psychiatry.
• WHO (2019) guidelines cautioned against excessive screen time in children.
• Tele-MANAS launched under National Tele Mental Health Programme to expand access.
• Public health is a State subject (List II, Seventh Schedule).
• Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 recognizes the right to access mental healthcare services.

Static Linkages

• Early childhood = period of high neuroplasticity.
• Article 21 – Right to life includes dignity and mental wellbeing.
• Article 47 – Duty of State to improve public health.
• Human capital formation depends on health and education.
• Preventive healthcare reduces long-term fiscal burden.
• Social stigma affects access to healthcare.

Critical Issues

• Structural Gaps
  • Acute shortage of mental health professionals.
  • Weak school-based emotional support systems.
  • Academic-centric education culture.  Poor referral mechanisms.
• Digital Concerns
  • Excessive screen time → sleep disturbance, poor attention, emotional dysregulation.
  • Internet addiction emerging as behavioural disorder.
  • Cyberbullying and social comparison pressures.
• Governance Challenges
  • Fragmented implementation of NMHP.  
  • Urban-rural access disparity.
  • Budgetary constraints.
  • Social stigma delaying early intervention.

Way Forward

• Institutionalize school-based mental health screening.
• Mandatory training for teachers and frontline workers.
• Strengthen NMHP and integrate with Ayushman Bharat Health & Wellness Centres.
• Expand Tele-MANAS to rural and underserved areas.
• Develop clear digital usage guidelines in schools.
• Increase funding and seats in child psychiatry training.
• Promote parent and peer-support networks.
• Behavioural change campaigns to reduce stigma.