With over 20 million pre-election votes cast were placed in advance of the upcoming elections in 2022.

Thus according data from polling stations, Edison Investigations, and Catalist, more than 20.7 million which was before votes were cast in 46 states since around Sunday.

Three provinces have now passed the 2 million-voter mark. More than 2.8 million votes were cast in Texas, and over 2.6 million in South Carolina, and far more than 2.1 million throughout California. By Weekend, Florida counties were ordered to begin early in-person casting a vote.

Georgia has received over 1.6 million ballots, but also North Carolina is now the 5th state to receive over one million voter rolls.

Catalist, a company that delivers data, analysis tools, and other assistance to Democrats, scholars, and charitable organization issue-advocacy organisations, offers some voting information and offers additional insight into who is casting a vote prior to actually November.

Georgia has several competitor state wide elections this year, which include governor, in which Republican candidate Brian Kemp is experiencing a rematch from four years earlier against the Democrat Stacey Abrams, and the Senate, in which Republican Herschel Walker is demanding Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock in a competition that could make a decision authority of the chamber this year and next. Kemp and the Abrams will square off in the final gubernatorial discussion on Sunday.

In North Carolina, the race for the government's accessible Senate seat pits Democrat Cheri Beasley, who would become the government's first Black legislator if voted into power, against Republican Rep. Ted Budd, who has the assistance of former President Donald Trump. on Weekend that her state usually required a senator "who's going to work damn difficult to lower costs," but she dodged an inquiry about just how President Joe Biden and national Democrats had handled rising prices. In her advertisement against Budd, she also pledged to fight for abortion rights, something that she called a "real big issue." In Florida, Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis is expected to succeed to a second term, despite speculation about a presidential run in 2024 and a matchup with President.

REASONS FOR NOT MARRYING THOUGH INTENTION TO BE GOOD

Genuine intention under family pressure: In these cases though accused is ready for marriage but due to family pressure he is not able to marry the prosecutrix. The parent forces the accused not to marry the prosecutrix in such cases one cannot say that the intention is malafide. In Deelip Singh @ Dilip Kumar v. State of Bihar, Hon’ble Justice P. Venkatarama Reddi & P.P. Naolekar of Supreme Court on 3.11.2004 observed that

Things did not worked out between the couple. There have been instances where a long affair goes wrong as a result of fights or misunderstanding between the couple. Initially they planned to get married but later on it became impossible for them to tolerate each other. This usually happens with live-in relationships. Couple stays together and shares intimate moments even enter into sexual relationship and in initial years they are happy but as time passes and they realize that they are not compatible for each other. Then it is not rationale for them to get married only on the basis that they have entered into sexual relation with each other before marriage as our Indian society sees it to be immoral

"...there is no question that the convicted kept his commitment to marry her, that was the primary motivation for the victimized girl to consent to physical intercourse with man.". Girl was also overjoyed to marrying him, as she stated explicitly. However, we find no evidence to support a conclusion more than a reasonable belief that the accused seems to have no intention of marrying her from the start and that the commitment he made was fraudulent to his awareness. On the contrary hand, the girl's testimony that "later on," the accused "got ready to marry her but his father and others moved him away from the hamlet" suggests that the accused was inspired by a real intention to marry that did not materialise pursuant to pressure by his family members. It appears to be a violation of the promise of marriage rather than a contractual breach.

Sometimes despite the best of intentions the accused does not marry the girl and this can be due to the fact that he was already married to some other woman which prosecutrix was already aware of. In the beginning he wanted to marry prosecutrix and also thinks of leaving his wife but later on when he realizes that he has responsibility against his wife then his conscience does not allows him to leave her. And as a result he backs out and does not marry prosecutrix

The above said reasons can be used as a defence by the accused where he can be discharged from the liability of rape but will be prosecuted for the offence of cheating for the breach of promise to be more precise. The allegation of rape by a woman is invalid if she had sex with a man even after being aware that she could never marry him. This could be because he was already married, due to religious or caste considerations or because it was paid sex.

In case of Jintu Das v. State, the accused expressed love and affection and promised to marry prosecutrix in order to get her consent for cohabitation. The victim was grown up and knew that their marriage was not feasible as they belonged to different castes but she started cohabitating with the accused and became pregnant. Setting aside the conviction order of High Court it was held that accused was entitled to the acquittal as consent of prosecutrix was not given under misconception of fact.

Introduction of Fashion Law

Since France is the world's fashion centre or where style protection has been legal since over a generation, fashion law has now been practised for decades both inhouse and in law firms. It follows that for a considerable amount of time, conventional copyright laws were utilised to impose design preservation in the fashion business. Nevertheless, fashion-specific copyrights and trademark protection laws represent a more recent development. As a result, fashion law is still regarded as a developing topic of law globally.

Although there are many different legal areas that fall under the umbrella of fashion law, including labour laws and advertising laws, it is most increasingly investigated as well as implemented in the context of intellectual property laws. This includes the manufacturing of counterfeit goods both and without the logo of both the original product in addition to the outright stealing of design elements by one manufacturer from another.

The businesses and designers who drive technological and artistic development in the modelling industry would struggle to survive without statutory recognition and safeguarding of their creations and The establishment of the Fashion Law Committee by the New York Bar Association in 2011 to "research and advise on a broad range of legal problems connected the with fashion business" was a significant indicator of the rising popularity in fashion law from professional, industrial, and academic spheres.

Over the years, groups like the FLC have facilitated group meetings on a variety of topics, including licencing concerns, trademark and copyright laws, international economies, and the effect of Covid on the modelling industry. They have indeed encouraged conversation and youth development of Fashion Laws between many law firms in addition to fashion enterprise Trademarks.

Even though the importance of being knowledgeable of one's rights is becoming more and more obvious to excel inside this company or organization, many law institutes now offer courses and training in the area of fashion law, and the business aspect of the sector has evolved into a central focus point of learning in fashion and design institutions around the world.

HISTORY OF ARBITRATION

King Salomon was the first one to address the matter as to who was the true mother of an innocent fetus, as per religious theories. In the book, 2 mothers argued for one boy. Two of them had taken with them baby young men. One child was died on that night and the dead child mothers was saying that the living child is her son.

Lord Solomon suggested dividing the child in half and giving one half to either of the wives because none of them was able to give up their case. The sincere mother retorted that she would rather send her child to the next lady than have her child killed. Solomon proclaimed the woman who had displayed love to be the true mother, and he gave her child back. In this way, he learned how to gather information. As early as 337 B.C.6, Alexander the Great's father, Philip the Second, used mediation to settle regional conflicts resulting from a peace deal he had signed with Greece's southern conditions.

Later on, assertion owed its origins to business query, which started with associates deciding exchange questions as far back as the Babylonian days. In Babylon, the Sumerian Code of Hammurabi (c. 2100 BC) was promulgated, and it was the sovereign's responsibility to regulate equity by arbitration.

As a result of their Egyptian ancestors' influence, the Greeks resorted to intervention. This then progressed with the times into the Roman era, where it was increasingly influenced by Roman laws. Both within the Roman Empire and among the nations in which Rome traded, there was a lot of activity.Long before the King's courts were established, assertiveness existed in England. Since 1224, England has used assertion as a common method for assessing market problems, according to Massey.

It was established as a means for vendors and dealers to keep a safe distance from the courts. The earliest known confirmation relating to a written law of mediation in the United Kingdom dates from 1698. Intervention was considered in India's Panchayat system as it moved eastward. Indian human progress was an outspoken supporter of empowering dispute resolution by tribunals chosen by the groups themselves. Typically, the tribunals were made up of the group's wise men. The first Bengal Regulations, enacted in 1772 amid English guidance, were followed by a some more specific enactment, in the Indian Arbitration Act 1940, which was later modernised with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996. Before beginning a history of international arbitration cases, it would be fascinating to consider the early development of the concept and hypothesis of discretion as proposed in various proposals sketched out by political scholars in the past.' In the field of global law, a declaration of regret for-first swinging to hypothesis is not really necessary, since marketing specialists play such an important role, inadvertently preparing to a significant degree the future's law through their work.

The first evidence of a specified arrangement for the mediation of universal debate dates from the mid-14th century, around I3O6, when Pierre Dubois, a regal supporter of Normandy, composed a flyer in which an elaborate arrangement for the recovery of the Holy Land was established. Since the success of a Crusade was contingent on a general state of peace in Europe, Dubois pressed for arbitration to resolve major disputes.

SINGAPORE'S ACTIONS TO PROMOTE ARBITRATION

Singapore's recent efforts to promote arbitration include:In Singapore, there are two legal systems that regulate arbitration. The Arbitration Act (revised 2002) or the International Act (IAA) will apply in situations where the (seat) of arbitration is Singapore. The Arbitration Act, which replaced the previous Arbitration Act in Toto on March 1, 2002, governs all domestic arbitrations in Singapore. In the case of international arbitration agreements, the relevant legislation is the International Arbitration Act (IAA), which applies to both domestic and international arbitrations where the parties have agreed to apply Section II of the IAA and the Model Law.

Arbitration is considered international under the IAA if: By the time the arbitration agreement was concluded, at least one of the parties had a place of business in a state other than Singapore; or the agreed place of arbitration is situated outside the state where the parties had their place of business.

Singapore being a recent entrant to the sphere of International Arbitration has already seen its fair share of controversial cases in spite of the Judiciary being very stringent. The judicial intervention has been very limited and clear. Below are some of the cases that affected Arbitration in Singapore:

VV and Another v VW [2008] SGHC: This is most likely the first case in Singapore to deal with a party's application to set aside a costs award under the new IAA. In this case, VV and another party entered into a contract with VW for a design project in VW's country, where disputes arose between the parties, and the parties referred the dispute to arbitration under an arbitration clause, where VV claimed a sum of US $927,000 in response to which VW raised two defenses and ten counterclaims totaling US$20 million, which the arbitrator dismissed. The suit was dismissed by the High Court, which stated that because the parties had decided to resolve their disagreements through private litigation, regardless of how unfair the judgement is, it would not be against public policy, and any mistake on the part of the arbitrator would be a factual error that could not be investigated by the courts.

Insigma Technology Co Ltd v Alstom Technology Ltd [2008] SGHC:This case concerns the authority of one agency to perform proceedings under the laws of another, as well as its validity. The following are the facts of the case: Sigma Technology Co Ltd and Alstom Technology Ltd signed an agreement in which the parties agreed to resolve disputes by consultations before referring to arbitration before the SIAC in compliance with ICC law. Following that, disagreements emerged between the parties, and after unsuccessful negotiations, Alstom referred the matter to arbitration at the International Chamber of Commerce, to which in sigma objected, despite the agreement clearly naming SIAC as the institution to administer the arbitration.

In sigma brought an action in the High Court to overturn the tribunal's ruling, which was rejected by the court. However, the court noted that "in theory, there is no issue with one organization conducting arbitration proceedings in place of another set of rules selected by the parties." The High Court also clarified that the supervising authority and the procedural rules to be followed do not have to be the same, and that the two should work together if there is no significant difference.

Sri Krishna Committee's main Recommendations and Suggestions

Following the committee's observations, the reasons for institutional arbitration's unpopularity in India were discovered. The Commission makes many proposals for improving the role in public of arbitration tribunals and to improve administrative arbitration in India based on the reasons set out in the preceding section. In addition, they also make many recommendations.

The following suggestions are made to improve the efficiency and performance of arbitral institutions and to address problems in their operations:”

Establishment of a Statutory Autonomous Body: At the national level, the Arbitration Promotion Council of India (APCI) should be created. Representatives from the government, the legal profession, and arbitral institutions will make up this autonomous body. The members of the body must have extensive arbitration experience. The key role will be to rate arbitral institutions according to the grading policy, make recommendations for institutional governance, conduct research, and make every effort to promote Institutional Arbitration in India The APCI ratings indicate that arbitrator accreditation is important, as this is one of the major issues that arbitral institutions face. High and Supreme Courts may be encouraged to name arbitral organizations as authority for naming arbitrators based on the APCI ratings suggests that arbitrator accreditation is essential, as this is one of the major issues that arbitral institutions face. The public's perception of organizations would be changed by a jury of qualified and professional arbitrators. The professionals must have extensive qualifications, considerable experience as an arbitrator and their ethical and professional status to be approved as members of an arbitration court. The application process can include interviews, qualifying examinations, advanced degrees from prestigious institutions, and other considerations. It will not be governed by a separate organization; rather, it will be administered by APCI.

Establishment of a specialist bar: The Committee believes that a specialist arbitration bar and arbitration benches should be established in India for the speedy and effective governance of arbitration proceedings. The arbitration bar will be made up of a young and well-trained arbitrator with the extensive experience in arbitration and also with the APCI accreditation. The set-up of a specialist tribunal on the other hand will address arbitration problems, including an appeal for an award pursuant to Section thirty-four of the Act. Commercial judges form the court will function in this panel, which regular seminars on existing arbitration practices will be given. This would aid in the reform of arbitration by providing lawyers and well-informed judges who could encourage international arbitration best practices in India.

Establishment of a Standing Committee: Under the jurisdiction of APCI, a standing committee should be established to ensure that Indian arbitration laws and procedures are up to date. The committee's duties range from updating the government's arbitration policies to supporting formal arbitration. It will also be tracking the rules of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act on a regular basis.

Government's Expanded Function: The government's role will be to actively promote formal arbitration while still providing infrastructure funding. The government could make institutional arbitration easier by assisting in the construction of physical infrastructure and taking measures to create integrated infrastructure, such as Maxwell Chambers.

Promoting mediation as such a viable ADR mechanism: This committee believes that a distinction should be made between ADR and litigation. Other types of conflict resolution are also significant. The committee emphasized the importance of promoting mediation, as the use of mediation as a means of conflict resolution is on the rise. There has been a significant improvement in the way mediation is conducted. The "Med-Arb" hybrid is often lauded for being more effective and giving parties more control than either mediation or arbitration alone. It is proposed that all arbitral institutions create a cell to provide mediation services. The APCI has been given the authority to establish criteria for the mediators' enrollment.

President Biden fulfils new drone attack regulations for the United States

US authorities said on Friday that President Joe Biden officially authorized a long-awaited confidential guideline strengthening the guidelines for the CIA and the Pentagon may undertake lethal drone attacks and commando assaults outside of conventional conflict zones. The US still conducts terrorist strikes from a distance in nations like Somalia, Yemen, and now Afghanistan, but only Iraq and Syria are still regarded by the United States as "areas of continuous conflicts" or traditional war torn countries. In actuality, the policy change indicates that the US is reducing its dependence on drone attacks, a tactic that was once widely used to combat terrorism but has come under growing scrutiny in recent decades as a result of a number of high-profile exposes involving the deaths of civilians.

As stated by a high-ranking administration official, the current policy names the person who must approve a deadly drone attack or commando operation before it can be conducted on a specific counterterrorism subject, while it allows empower the president to ignore that criterion and others at his discretion. The governor must also authorize the list of organizations in each nation whose individuals are thought to be possible targets. The new regulations were initially covered by the New York Times. Additionally, it institutionalizes a set of requirements for taking any action against with a target, along with the requirement that counterterrorism operatives prove with "virtual certainty" that no civilians would be killed during the attack and that the target still constitutes a serious danger to the United States.

According to the senior government official, the policy additionally stipulates that operators must receive approval from the head of mission for the State Dept in the relevant nation.

The advice "prompts [the Biden] Management to be making judgments and adaptable in safeguarding Americans against adapting global terrorist challenges," according to White House Domestic Security adviser Liz SherwoodRandall, who led the approximately 2 evaluations that produced the new policy.

It also "necessitates that U.S. counterterrorism activities meet standards of specificity and strictness, as well as for choosing suitable objectives and minimising civilian causalities."

In several of the nations affected by the new strategy, US military drone strikes have sharply declined in recent years. The Foundation for the Defence of Democracies' data shows that since 2018 and 2019, accordingly, there haven't been any US drone attacks in Yemen or Pakistan. Since Biden began office, US drone attacks in Somalia have sharply decreased.

It is significantly more challenging to assess how the CIA's activities have changed over time since, unlike the military, the CIA is not obligated by Congress to provide information about its own terrorist actions, particularly civilian losses.

Several recently departed intelligence agencies go further, asserting that CIA drone strikes destroy significantly fewer civilians than military ones. However, since the agency's statistics are confidential and outside organisations that monitor drone strike loss of life claim the US military routinely undercounts its collateral deaths, it is challenging to make an accurate comparison.

Further division in the United Nations Security council regarding North Korea's missile.

The Security Council of United Nation was divided on Wednesday regarding how to respond to a North Korean ballistic missile as Japanese territory, with both Russia and China arguing that regional joint military exercises led by the United States had incited North Korea to act. Despite repeated warnings from the United States and its allies that perhaps the authority's failure to come to a unanimous agreement on North Korea's massive number of ballistic missiles this year was actively supporting North Korea and trying to undermine the power of the United Nations' most powerful entity, the discussion on Wednesday finished with really no contract on the next steps. This committee needs to be aware that it will be scrutinized and that their reputation is on the line.

Hiroshi Minami, Japan's assistant envoy to the United Nations, was one of those trying in vain to persuade the council to return to its previously unifying stance over North Korea's launches. "This assembly must respond, should take a decision that re-establish its reputation. Missile launch by North Korea Its lengthiest weaponry test—a nuclear-capable missile system that flew over Japan and has the power to reach Guam and other U.S. Pacific territories—took place on Tuesday.

It compelled the Japanese administration to halt railroads and publish emergency notices. According to the U.N., North Korea has launched a record number of ballistic missiles this year—more than 40—and looks to be advancing toward a sixth nuclear test explosion. Just 22 minutes apart, early on Thursday, North Korea successfully launched long range missiles it toward eastern waters, according to authorities. Kim Jong Un, the dictator of North Korea, is working to build a fully functional nuclear weapons that could endanger the United States continent and the territories of its allies. with the motive of wresting concessions from the other countries as per some expert’s reports.

Kim's launch on Tuesday was his first to target Japan since that time. It happened soon after a training operation conducted by the United States in the Japanese Sea with Japanese and South Korea as allies. A U.S. aircraft with nuclear propulsion participated in the drill.

Anna Evstigneeva, Russia's senior U.N. ambassador, argued to the Security Council that North Korea's conduct was caused by the "irresponsible behavior" of that U.S.-led exercises and developing U.S. partnerships with Asia-Pacific region countries area.