 Welcome to the Hindu News Analysis by Shankar Iyer's Academy. The list of topics chosen for today's discussion along with the page numbers is given here for your reference. Here is the first news article. See this op-ed column in which the author talks about the impacts of frequently using the provision of sedition to curb dissent. In this context, let us have a brief idea on what is sedition, its origin, and what author is saying in today's news article. The relevant syllabus is given here for your reference. Every most of us know that free speech is one of the most significant principles of democracy. The purpose of this freedom is to allow an individual to attain self-fulfillment, assist in discovery of truth, strengthen the capacity of a person to take decisions and facilitate a balance between stability and social change. So the freedom of speech and expression can be called as the first and foremost human right and the mother of all liberties. And as we all know, article 19 of the Indian Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and expression to all citizens. However, this freedom is subjected to certain restrictions like sovereignty, integrity, security, public order, decency, etc. So here in these reasonable restrictions like sovereignty, integrity, security, public order, the offence of sedition assumes significance. See it is provided under section 124A of Indian Penal Code of 1860. It says that whoever, by words, or by signs, or by visible representation, attempts to bring into hatred or contempt are attempts to excite disaffection towards the government established by law in India amounts to sedition. Here very importantly, we should note that whatever the contempt or disaffection or hatred directed towards the government, not the country, amounts to sedition. So the ruling government can misuse this provision. According to this section, sedition shall be punished with imprisonment up to three years to a life term to which fine may be added and not just that a person charged under this law is barred from a government job, they have to live without their passport and must produce themselves in a court as and when required. The relevance of this section in a democratic country like ours is a subject of continuous debate. Why? Because sedition is a colonial legacy and thereby unsuited in a democratic country. There is an apprehension that this provision might be misused by the government to suppress dissent. Exactly in this context only, this news article has been written. It is also argued that amidst growing concerns of national security like separatism, naxalism, Maoism, communalism, sedition proves a reasonable restriction on article 19 for the security and the integrity of the country. So if properly used, sedition can be an effective tool in curbing naxalism, Maoism, separatism thereby protecting the integrity of the country. Coming to history of sedition law in India, it was initially included in Lord Macaulay's draft penal code of 1837. However, in the enacted form of 1860, this section was missing. Later in the year 1870, this section was added to Indian penal code. The punishment proposed was life imprisonment then. The intent of the section was to punish an act of exciting feelings of disaffection towards the government. Interestingly, the great freedom fighters like Bal Gangadhar Thirukh, Mahatma Gandhi were charged with sedition by the British government. So a section which was used by the colonial government against the Indians is still available in India's penal code that to after independence. So this is a matter of concern. Do India really need a sedition law? Many law commissions and many Supreme Court high court judgments tried and discussed the removal of section 124A from Indian penal code. See after independence, the most important development in this regard happened in 1962. It was Kedarnath Singh versus state of Bihar case. Here the constitution bench upheld the validity of section 124A and noted it as a reasonable restriction on free speech. But it also said that a citizen has right to say or write whatever he or she likes about the government or its measures by the way of criticism. So this shall be allowed as long as he or she is not inciting people to violence against the government established by law. So basically, if you are writing something negative about the government, we should not be charged with sedition law. But if the writings done by us are inciting people against the government or creating public disorder, then we can be charged with sedition. So this is the basic info regarding sedition, its history and what is the important case that is Kedarnath Singh case of 1962. With this, let us come back to today's opiate column. See in the recent years, the term sedition is frequently in the news. For example, a school in Karnataka and students were charged with sedition for performing a play against the new citizenship law. In the recent days, we have seen the toolkit case regarding farmer protests where a 22 year woman was arrested for sedition. In this context, we should note that Bombay High Court had issued guidelines which the police must follow before invoking the provisions of sedition. See it includes an objective evaluation of material to form an opinion on whether the words and actions cause disaffection, enmity and disloyalty to the government or whether they incite violence or tend to create public disorder. So it means police should evaluate the words or actions made by the persons before invoking the provisions of sedition. And not just that, the High Court also directed to obtain legal opinion in writing from a law office of the district, followed by a second opinion from state's public prosecutor. Here are the saying that these co-directions are mostly ignored by the police force because the author cites a report of National Crime Records Bureau. It says that between 2016 and 2019, the number of sedition cases increased by 160%. At the same time, the rate of conviction dropped to 3.3% from 33% in 2016. It means police are invoking sedition frequently without proper evidence. So the cases are not leading to conviction. This is why it is said that aim of imposing sedition is not to punish or convict anyone but to incarcerate them and the process itself is the punishment. For example, if I am charged with sedition, suddenly some media outlets may start treating me as an anti-national and then comes the Twitter where every person sees me as some separatist. So the process itself is incarcerating or destroying my character. So the aim of imposing sedition is not punishing or convicting but to incarcerate them. So this process itself is a punishment. Even if I am acquitted by the court, say after two years, the two years the agony which I go through is a very big punishment. So because of these reasons, the sedition provisions in IPC should be revisited. Here Law Commission's 2018 paper on sedition is also significant. It has said that people should be at liberty to show their affection towards their country in their own way. For doing the same, one might indulge in constructive criticism or debates or pointing out the loopholes in the policy of the government. So these kind of expressions might be harsh or unpleasant to some people like government. But that does not render the actions to be branded seditious. So just my opinion of criticizing the government should not result in charging me with sedition. So section 124A should be invoked only in cases where the intention behind any act is to disrupt public order or go through the government with violence and illegal means. For this, author gives a solution to adopt an effect-based test for slapping sedition, which means effects of the seditious text should be considered rather than content of the text. That is why this column is titled, Sedition lies in the effect not in the content. So this is all about the discussion of this news article. Have a brief idea on what is sedition? What are the negatives of sedition? Because these are very important to write a mains answer. Let us move on to next news article discussion. See these two news articles which mention the pleas filed in the High Court of Madras regarding the absentee voters and Section 60C of Representation of People Act of 1951. So in this discussion let us try to understand who are absentee voters and what is Section 60C and what are the issues with this section. Before going further, the relevant syllabus is given here for your reference. See the first article mentions a repetition to get the list of absentee voters to a particular political party. Generally when elections happen, the electoral role or the list in which all the names of electors is contained will be shared with political parties. So this is a regular norm. But why is this political party went to High Court to get a list of absentee voters? See under the conduct of election rules 1961, certain categories of electors or voters have been given the provision to vote by postal ballot. Postal ballot is a type of voting whereby ballot papers are distributed to voters and they are returned by voters after casting their vote through post. So generally instead of going to polling booth, certain categories of voters can cast their vote through post. That is called postal ballot. Many of you might have seen this in many movies, where in last vote comes through postal ballot and a good person wins the election. So here this rule provides for the categories of persons who are entitled to vote through postal mechanism. This includes special voters, service voters, voters on election duty, electors subjected to preventive detention and persons notified under section 60C of RPA 1951, including the absentee voters. Here the last one is a new category added by conduct of elections, amendment rules of 2019 and further it was amended by 2020 amendment rules. So basically absentee voters are a new category of voters and who are considered as absentee voters? It is defined in this rule, according to which absentee voter means a person belonging to such class of persons as may be notified under section 60C of RPA 1951 and who is employed in essential services. So basically absentee voter means all categories of persons who are notified in section 60C of RPA 1951. So currently it includes persons above 80 years of age during June 2020. This age limit of 80 years was reduced to 65 and if you remember we even covered about this happenings and there was lot of criticism also. But this move was retracted by election commission in July itself. Then persons with disability are also eligible for absentee voters. Third, it also includes COVID-19 suspects or COVID-19 affected persons. So that is those electors who are tested COVID-19 positive and those who are under quarantine due to COVID-19. So these are the persons who are notified under section 60C of RPA 1951. Further to use the postal ballot route, the absentee voters have to intimate the returning officer. For that the absentee voter has to apply including the required particulars like age, COVID-19 details etc. Such application should reach the returning officer during the period from date of announcement of election to five days following the date of notification of election. So though these time periods are not important we should understand that only after election is notified the persons can apply to become an absentee voter. Now the repetition has sought the list of such possible absentee voters in advance. And for this Tamil Nadu's CEO that is chief electoral officer has said that it would not be possible to share the list of absentee voters. Because as we saw the applications by the possible absentee voters will be filed until five days after the date of election notification. So basically the list is not yet ready so cannot be shared and very importantly sharing of such profiling of electors before they file application may amount to invasion of their privacy. So come into second article which is about another repetition. This repetition has asked the court to declare section 60c as unconstitutional that is to strike off the section 60c. As we just saw persons notified under this section are entitled to vote by post. But the issue raised is regarding the powers of election commission of India under this section. See this section empowers election commission of indium to notify new category who will be entitled to postal ballot after consultation with the government. So simply election commission can make changes to this section to add a new category of absentee voters. Accordingly election commission has also notified consequent statutory rules and guidelines. So the repetition is requesting the court to declare this clause rules and even guidelines as unconstitutional. Because this power of election commission of India to notify new category of voters as absentee voters is leading to delegation of uncontrolled legislative function to the executive. Which means generally this kind of power of notifying new voters should be done by legislature that is parliament. But the power has been delegated to election commission of indium. So the repetition has stated that this power is leading to unguided or uncontrolled legislative function on the executive leading to excessive delegation. So this provision should be termed unconstitutional and should be removed. So this is all about these two news articles. In first article they are asking for the list of absentee voters. In the second article they are asking for a judicial review of section 60c. So let us wait and watch what high court decides. In these cases in this context try to remember who is absentee voter, what is section 60c and who has the power to notify new categories under section 60c. Let us move on to next news article discussion. See this news article which says that former union minister and current member of parliament has filed a petition last year challenging the provisions of RTI amendment act of 2019. So let us have a brief discussion on what are the amendments made in 2019 act and also what is RTI reasons for its introduction and the challenges associated with it. The relevant syllabus is given here for your reference. See RTI act of 2005 was enacted to provide the right to information for citizens. This act repealed erstwhile freedom of information act of 2002 and signifies the citizens right to information and also mandates public officials for proactive sharing of information in public platforms. So this act of 2005 was amended by RTI amendment act of 2019. The amendments dealt with the issues of tenure and salary of chief information commissioner and information commissioner both at central and state level. Coming to changes made by the amendment act, firstly know that the original act of 2005 prescribes the tenure of chief information commissioner and the information commissioner to be five years, same with the state level as well. But the amendment removed this provision stating that the term of office for CIC and IC both at central and state levels will be notified by the central government. Secondly, the original act mentions that the information commissioners will be paid in equal terms with the members of election commission. That is the salary of CIC and ICs at central level will be equivalent to salary paid to chief election commissioner and election commissioners respectively. CIC will get same salary as CEC and IC will get same salary as EC. Similarly, salary of CIC and ICs at state level will be equivalent to salary paid to election commissioner and chief secretary to the state government respectively. This provision was removed by the amendment and it stated that salaries, allowances and other terms and conditions of CIC and ICs both at central and state level will be determined by central government. So since the act came out many sections including the opposition criticized the move. Why because diluting the term powers and terms of service will reduce the efficiency of the right to information act. So the reason stated by center for bringing the amendment is salary, allowances and other terms of conditions of the information commission members is equal to election commission in the original act. But when you see the chief election commissioner and election commissioner are treated in equal terms with the judge of Supreme Court. So therefore chief information commissioner, state chief information commissioner as well as information commissioners become equivalent to a judge of Supreme Court in terms of salaries, allowances and other terms and conditions of service. Now the issue is that functions being carried out by information commissioners and election commissioners are totally different. In addition to this their mandates are also different. Further election commission is a constitutional body while information commission is a statutory body established under R.J.A. Act. So there comes a need to rationalize their status and service conditions accordingly. So salaries, allowances, terms and conditions of a statutory body cannot be equated to a constitutional body which is equaling to judges of Supreme Court. So based on this reason the union government brought an amendment empowering itself to make rules over the tenure, salary, allowances and other terms of service. And as I said before the amendment empowered the central government to make changes to salary, tenure of the information commissioners. Therefore it is affecting the autonomy or independence of information commission. So this may result in hampering the information demanded by the citizens. Additionally by reducing the position of information commissioners from being equal to Supreme Court judge the ability of chief information commissioner or information commissioner to direct senior government officials is also brought to question. So previously they were equal to Supreme Court judges in terms of salary, terms of service, etc. So previously they had more respect and integrity to call on any government official including the secretaries. Now that their position has been diluted the efficiency of information commission as well as right to information act is now questioned. So let us wait and see what Supreme Court is going to do with respect to RTA amendment act. Will it focus the amendments or strikes of the amendment? We have to wait and see. Let us move on to next news article discussion. Let us take up this comment column from today's editorial page. This is a very interesting column wherein the author links science and technology with diplomacy. He also talks on the current position of India in the globe with respect to development of science and technology and how India is taking initiatives to utilize its science and technology prowess as a soft power in international relations. So we will try to understand all these aspects before going further. The relevant syllabus is given here for your reference. See we should know that science and technology is a key element for economic growth and in this regard technology should be a strong priority area of the government and government is aiming to make technology more people centric. So first let us have an understanding on the development of science and technology in India from a historical perspective. See India's global priorities in science and technology were clearly mentioned by our first Prime Minister Nehru who showed India's intention of seeking international scientific advances for the development and prosperity of our nation. At the same time he was also aware of both constructive and destructive power of science. So this was the basic strategy of development during 20th century. But this met with mixed results because more powerful states like US sought to curb or limit India's ambitions in critical spears like nuclear and space programs. For example when India went nuclear in 1990s US has put sanctions on India. Similarly we were refused cryogenic technology for our space programs. But despite all these India still managed to indigenously develop all this technology and also to assist its partners from the global south. See generally global south means developing our underdeveloped countries broadly referring to regions like South America, Asia, Africa and Oceania. It is similar to terms like third world periphery which denote regions outside Europe and North America. So mainly low income or often politically or culturally marginalized countries are called global south. So this was the case in 20th century. In the late 20th century India went for economic reforms in 1991 and this led to more proactive assertion of India's interest in science and technology development. And by early years of 21st century India sought to reduce its dependence on foreign countries and then to emerge as a net provider of development assistance in the international system. See in 20th century we were dependent on funds from big countries. Now India has evolved into a position where we are funding the other countries. Interestingly if you remember we even offered a line of credit to Russia to develop its eastern region. Further China's aggressiveness and India's smooth rise with US and European countries helped our nation to design and develop in strategic spheres like nuclear space technology and also led to signing of strategic partnerships in sectors like science, space, nuclear, nanotechnology, et cetera. So within 70 years of independence India managed to show its prowess in international sphere when it comes to science and technology. Now let us see where India currently stands in terms of science and technology development. See India ranks third among most attractive investment destinations for technology transactions in the world. Also India is among the top most countries in the field of scientific research and also positioned as one of the top five nations in the field for space exploration. Yes is very famous right? Last year India moved four places to reach 40th rank and made to the top 50 countries in the global innovation index for the first time. Further know that India also moved up to fifth rank in global R&D funding forecast of 2020. So basically India as a country is improving in science and technology, innovation, research, funding, et cetera. So author says that government is extensively promoting research parks, technology business incubators, et cetera to promote the innovative ideas till they become commercial ventures. And it is expected that R&D expenditure in India will reach to at least 2% by 2022. And as we discussed at the start of the month under the union budget, government announced the largest ever allocation of rupees 6,000 crores to Ministry of Science and Technology. So the funding is also increasing. So this is all about science and tech. How this is affecting our diplomacy, here author talks about ongoing vaccine my three campaign in which India is provisioning that is giving or granting COVID-19 vaccines to countries around the world. Yes, we are known as pharma capital of the world. And according to author, this is one of the most important recent initiatives to leverage science and technology advantages to benefit foreign policy objectives. Many small countries like Maldives, South African countries, even Latin American countries have applauded our support with vaccine my three. And not just that, India's COVID-19 response also came closely aligned with its neighborhood first, actist and Indo-Pacific and look west policies. So even the delivery of vaccines was made according to foreign policy objectives. But as we all know, still India lacks behind China and many Western countries when it comes to science and technology research. So what are the solutions given by the author so that our nation can holistically develop as a world leader in technology? First, India's financial share to science and technology related to research must rise to enable the country's own rise. Second, participation of India's states, universities and private sector in research and development efforts must be strengthened. For example, Oxford University and AstraZeneca came together to develop a vaccine. But in India, most of the vaccines are being developed by only pharma companies. So universities, research labs should come together for developmental efforts. Then India's young scientists and technologists should be made more aware of countries foreign policy objectives so that they can align their objectives with India's needs. Finally, the country should enable all stakeholders in the policy establishment to learn more about science and technology to bridge the intellectual divide only by bridging or limiting the intellectual divide we can enable all the stakeholders in formulating the policies regarding science and technology. So these are the solutions given by the author to develop India into a world leader in technology. So this is all about the discussion of this news article. We had a brief discussion on how science and technology evolved in India and how India is leveraging its science and technology prowess to match its foreign policy objectives and what are the solutions given by the author. Let us move on to next news article discussion. See this opiate article which talks about the role played by a scientist in the pandemic. At one point, she notes that studies predict that India will be a hotspot for possible zoonotic disease emergence. And further, global meta-analysis revealed that zoonotic diseases tend to emerge in areas with certain characteristics. So for example, the characteristics include areas with many mammal species, areas having high land use and land cover change and areas of high human population density. If you see almost India qualifies in all the categories. So in this regard, let us try to understand what is a zoonotic disease? See, zoonotic disease is any disease or infection which is naturally transmissible from vertebrate animals to humans. For example, Ebola. Here, zoonotic pathogens may be bacterial, viral or even parasitic or sometimes they also involve unconventional agents. So it can spread to humans through direct contact or through food, water, environment, et cetera. So in short, zoonotic diseases are caused by germs that spread between animals and people. Simply put, the diseases come from animals. So zoonotic. Even the COVID-19 or the coronavirus are also zoonotic because it is said that the virus came from rats in China. So there are around 200 known types of zoonotic diseases and they comprise a large percentage of newly identified infectious diseases and also existing diseases in humans. So why zoonotic diseases are assuming significance? Because humans have a close relationship with animals in agriculture. Animals has companions and even animals in the natural environment. So zoonotic diseases represent a major public health problem around the world. And as we all know, COVID-19 became a pandemic which is a zoonotic disease. Additionally, they also affect economic activity as zoonotic diseases can cause disruptions in the production and trade of animal products for food and other uses. If we take the example of bird flu, last month, Tamil Nadu Kerala reported the cases of bird flu. So whenever bird flu comes, the sale of chicken will drastically come down. So trade and economic activity will come down. So can we prevent zoonotic diseases? The answer is both yes and no. See, there are some diseases which are 100% preventable through vaccination and other methods. For example, Tecrabis, which can be preventable through vaccination. But it is difficult to have a common prevention method as prevention methods differ for each pathogen. But still these practices are recognized as effective in reducing the risk. The practices are given here. Most of the things we know, like cleaning our hands, standards for clean drinking water waste removal, appropriate guidelines for animal care in agriculture sector, et cetera. Next author talks about main issue in handling zoonotic diseases in India. The main issue is that India's approach to addressing these diseases is reactive, which means we act only after disease comes out like COVID-19. So research and public health interventions begin only when there is an outbreak, like in the case of COVID-19. So the need of however is proactive prediction of an outbreak. But it is not a simple task because for this, the viral and bacterial diversity from wild reservoirs like bats in our biodiversity hotspots need to be sampled. We need to understand ecological and evolution dynamics of possible pathogens. Finally, we should be able to monitor such possible hotspots of virus so as to detect a disease occurrence. Simply put, we need more research in biotechnology and healthcare. And to make this possible, the main need is teams of interdisciplinary scientists along with sustained efforts. So this is what the author of this article is saying. What is a zoonotic disease? Can we prevent them? And how to predict them even before they occur? Have a basic idea on all these aspects? Let us move on to next news article. See this question, which is framed based on this news article. With reference to joint comprehensive plan of action, consider the following statements. Statement one, it was signed between Iran and P5 countries of UNSC along with Saudi Arabia. This statement is incorrect because the deal is between Iran and P5 countries along with Germany. Statement two, the permanent five members of UNSC will have the sole responsibility to verify the nuclear related provisions of the agreement. This statement is also incorrect because the compliance to agreement will be verified by International Atomic Energy Agency. So both statements are incorrect. So answer is option D, neither one nor two. So coming to article, what article says is the IAEA, that is International Atomic Energy Agency announced a temporary solution or a three month arrangement to allow Iranian facility inspections to continue. So what happened was in 2018, the then US President Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew from the agreement and even imposed sanctions on Iran. The America accused Iran of supporting Hezbollah and Hamas groups of West Asia. So citing this reason, US unilaterally withdrew from the agreement. After that for a while, Iran followed the agreement and then it announced that it will not follow the limit set under the agreement and will start enriching the uranium. So if Iran starts enriching the uranium, in the future it can prepare nuclear weapons. And in the last year, that is December, Iran's parliament passed a law demanding suspension of inspections by International Atomic Energy Agency if US failed to lift sanctions by this Sunday. But so far, US neither rejoined agreement nor lift the sanctions. But for a very long, we have been hearing that US may rejoin the agreement under new president of Joe Biden. And as I said before, Atomic Energy Agency has announced a temporary solution to continue the inspections in Iran. So if US comes back to deal within three months, then Iran may stop enriching and will abide with the limits set by IAEA and JCPOA agreement. That is joint comprehensive plan of action. Just have a brief idea on JCPOA and recent happenings with respect to this agreement. Let us move on to next news article. Say this question framed based on this news article. Consider the following statements. Statement one, both India and Maldives are members of SARC, Indian Ocean Reem Association and BIMSTEC. This statement is incorrect because yes, India and Maldives are members of SARC and Indian Ocean Reem Association, but Maldives is not a member of BIMSTEC. If you take members of BIMSTEC, they're all the peripheral states of Bay of Bengal. As Maldives lies southwest of India, it is not part of BIMSTEC. Statement two, the eight-degree channel separates India's Minicoid Island from Maldives. Yes, this statement is correct. The eight-degree channel separates Minicoid Islands of Lakshadweep from Maldives. So statement two is correct. Therefore, the correct answer is option B two only. Coming to news article, as the title says, Maldives Parliament debates defense deal with India. So two days back, India and Maldives has signed a defense deal. Following the signing of this agreement, few MPs of Maldives raised an emergency motion to discuss or debate the defense deal with India. If you remember last year, Maldives signed a deal with US also. For very long, India was objecting the deal between Maldives and US because India does not want any other big power to meddle into India's neighbors. After many years of negotiations, India welcomed the deal between Maldives and US. If you see, until 2018, Yamin was the president of Maldives. He's a pro-Chinese president. Consequently, many of the India's efforts made to develop diplomacy between the countries has been negated because of his proximity towards China. After the defeat of Yamin in 2018, Ibrahim Mohammad Soli became the president of Maldives and has been pursuing India's first policy. But all the MPs of Maldives are not happy with the deal with India. So they wanted an emergency motion to discuss and debate the deal. But as of now, the deal was signed and we have to see what the fate of deal is going to be. Just have a brief idea on the location of Maldives, the recent diplomatic relations between India and Maldives and why Maldives is important in the security of Indian Ocean region because Maldives lies at the strategic location in the Indian Ocean. Just have a brief idea on all these issues. We will be having editorial or op-ed in the coming days. Then we'll have a elaborate discussion on India-Maldives relations. Let us move on to practice questions discussion session. See this question. Which of the following organizations release the Global Innovation Index? Four options are given here. International Bank for Reconstruction and Development is IBRD. B, World Intellectual Property Organization that is WIPO, World Economic Forum and International Science Council. The correct answer is option B, World Intellectual Property Organization. This index ranks the innovation performance of countries and economies across the world based on 80 plus indicators. Know that this index is co-published by World Intellectual Property Organization, Cornell University and INSEED. See this question. Consider the following statements. The Central Information Commission was set up under Right to Information Act of 2005. Yes, the statement is correct. Statement two, the salaries and allowances of Chief Information Commissioner at central level are equal to that of Chief Election Commissioner. This statement is correct before the amendment of 2019. So after the 2019 amendment, the salaries, allowances and terms of service of Chief Information Commissioner will be determined by Union Government. So statement two is incorrect. So correct answer is option A, one only. Consider the following. See the question asks, which of the above constitutes the reasonable restrictions on fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression? So simply they're asking, what are the reasonable restrictions for Article 19? So first one, security of the state. Yes. Second one, friendly relations with other countries. Yes, correct. Three, morality. Yes, correct. And four, defamation. Yes, this is also correct. So all the four should be in answer. So correct answer is option D, one, two, three and four. See this question. Which among the following diseases is or are not a zoonotic disease? Salmonellasis, West Nile virus, rabies. Say here all the three are zoonotic diseases. So the correct answer is option D, none of the above. See Salmonellasis is caused by bacteria called Salmonella, which is widely distributed in domestic and wild animals. Coming to West Nile virus, it is a mosquito-borne disease and is maintained in nature in a cycle involving transmission between birds and mosquitoes. Rabies is a vaccine preventable zoonotic viral disease. It can spread to people and pets if they are bitten or scratched by rabid animal like bats, raccoons, et cetera. But in most of the cases, domestic dogs are responsible for rabies virus transmission to humans. So all three are zoonotic. So the correct answer is option D, none of the above. Consider the following class of persons. Persons with disability, members of armed forces of union, employees of government of India, posted outside India, senior citizen above 65 years of age. Who among the above is entitled to vote by post at an election in a parliamentary or assembly constancy? If you see one, two, three are correct. Fourth one is incorrect because it is not 65 years of age, it is above 80 years of age. So persons above 80 years of age are eligible to vote by post. So if you remove four, we can arrive at the answer that is option C, one, two, and three only. Say this main question. While it is essential to protect national integrity, sedition should not be misused as a tool to curb free speech. In this context, discuss the relevance of section 124A in independent India. So first try to explain first line why sedition should not be a tool to curb free speech to protect national integrity. In this context, discuss the provisions of section 124A and whether they are necessary. You can discuss Kedarnath Singh case, law commission 2018 report and take a stand in the conclusion. So whether it should be properly used or it should be removed. Write the answer and post it in comment section. Thank you for watching our video. If you find this video resourceful, like, comment, share, and subscribe to our YouTube channel.