JSA in
News

MeitY is pushing to reduce India’s dependence on foreign cyber-forensics tools, which involve recurring licensing costs and external vendor reliance. The government is encouraging development of indigenous forensic solutions to strengthen data sovereignty, security and investigative capabilities. However, Indian tools still face a credibility and capability gap compared with established global platforms. The initiative aims to build a stronger domestic cyber-forensics ecosystem while reducing strategic dependence on overseas technologies. Yajas Setlur, Partner at JSA Advocates and Solicitors, tells AIM that Indian cybersecurity and testing laboratories have historically relied on foreign tools because they are considered the global standard for threat intelligence and vulnerability assessment. “These tools leverage global scale and compute power to gather and process vast amounts of intelligence. They have a robustness that is still developing in the domestic context,” Setlur says. He cautions that moving exclusively to domestic tools could also create risks by potentially isolating Indian organisations from international threat intelligence and updates. “Using exclusively domestic tools or software would isolate these companies and cut their access to international threat updates and increase their exposure to foreign threats,” Setlur states. However, Setlur said excessive dependence on foreign technology can itself create security, operational and supply-chain risks. Read more

Employees earning up to Rs 21,000 monthly are entitled to a bonus between 8.33% and 20% of their wages. The bonus is calculated on a capped wage base, not actual earnings. Employers must pay bonuses within eight months, or face legal action. Employees can claim unpaid bonuses within three years. Bhavya Sriram, Partner – JSA Advocates & Solicitors, said to ET Wealth Online that as per Section 26(1) of the Code on Wages, 2019, an drawing wages not exceeding Rs 21,000 per month is eligible for statutory bonus, provided the said employee has worked for at least 30 days in the accounting year. Sriram says: “If an employee’s monthly wages exceed Rs 21,000, they fall entirely outside the statutory bonus framework and the employer has no legal obligation to pay them bonus under this statute.” Read more

This quote also appeared in News Bytes.

FSSAI’s intensified crackdown on food companies for regulatory violations marks a significant shift in India’s food safety enforcement. Major brands and outlets have been targeted, sparking debates on the fairness of actions. The industry faces challenges and opportunities, with a pivot towards health-focused products and innovations. “There is a distinction between the underlying ingredients and composition of a product being permitted by FSSAI, and the particular tagline or marketing claim that is used for that product,” said Saurya Bhattacharya, partner at JSA, a law firm.  Amidst much outcry over the actions, Bhattacharya said: “FSSAI is within its regulatory powers to conduct inspections and, depending on its findings, take various enforcement actions. Whether a particular inspection was conducted properly, whether the findings were justified, and whether the resulting order was fair, reasonable or proportionate are separate questions.” Read more

This quote also appeared in print in Business Standard.

The JSA Boardroom Connect in Chennai highlighted the need for faster regulatory implementation and predictability in India’s manufacturing sector. Key discussions included AI governance, regulatory frameworks, and competitiveness. Emphasizing AI and data integration, the session called for improved transparency and enforcement to boost manufacturing capabilities. Varun Sriram, Partner, JSA Advocates & Solicitors, said the roundtable, held on July 24, brought together participants from diverse industries, with a strong representation from the manufacturing sector. The discussion covered evolving regulatory and legal issues, succession planning, business continuity, data protection and AI governance. “We discussed various evolving regulatory and legal issues and trends. We also shared some thoughts with respect to succession planning, business continuity planning, data protection and AI governance, and what we really see in the next five to 10 years and where possibly the regulatory landscape lies ahead,” Sriram said. Read more

The article discusses the complexities of creator rights in commercial content use, emphasizing the need for clear contracts to avoid disputes. It highlights the legal implications of vague terms and unauthorized content use, while noting that new technologies like AI are introducing additional challenges. Minhaz Lokhandwala, Partner at JSA Advocates and Solicitors, similarly said that commissioning and paying a creator is not a safe substitute for a written rights grant. “The bottom line: commissioning a creator and paying them does not, by itself, transfer copyright. You need a written assignment,” Lokhandwala said. The legal picture becomes more layered when the creator is themselves part of the content. If a creator appears in a video or provides a voiceover, performer rights may operate independently of copyright. Personality and publicity rights can also become relevant when a person’s name, face, voice, likeness or persona is commercially exploited. Lokhandwala said brands should therefore look beyond a generic copyright clause and explicitly deal with copyright assignment, performer consent and personality or publicity rights where relevant. The two words causing trouble: ‘usage rights’ One of the biggest risks in creator agreements may be contracts that simply state that the brand has “usage rights”, without specifying where, how or for how long those rights can be exercised. “The phrase ‘usage rights’ is vague and does not have a defined legal meaning,” he said, adding that disagreements can emerge because brands and creators may have completely different interpretations of what was actually agreed. Lokhandwala said creators can potentially seek interim and permanent injunctions, damages and an account of profits in copyright disputes. Copyright infringement can also carry criminal consequences in India. Under the Copyright Act, knowing infringement can attract imprisonment and fines, with higher penalties for repeat offences. But in practice, many disputes may never reach a full trial. “What actually moves brands is a cease-and-desist letter backed by a credible interim-injunction threat,” Lokhandwala said. Read more

At Singapore Convention Week 2026, Senior Advocate Gourab Banerji said India’s rapid renewable-energy expansion will lead to more disputes moving from electricity regulators to arbitration. While tariff disputes will remain within the regulatory framework, disputes involving EPC contracts, supply, operations and maintenance, storage, performance and shareholders could increasingly be arbitrated or mediated with technical experts. JSA Partners Divyam Agarwal and Poonam Verma Sengupta also participated, highlighting the need for certainty, clarity and consistency in dispute resolution and stronger mechanisms to manage regulatory and payment risks in renewable-energy investments. Divyam Agarwal, Partner at JSA Advocates & Solicitors, distilled the requirements of foreign investors into what he called the “three Cs”: certainty, clarity, and consistency. “If you are able to achieve all three, possibly it’s a good investment,” Agarwal said. He stressed that investors need greater certainty over which disputes will go before regulators and which can be arbitrated. Currently, the line between regulatory and arbitrable disputes in the Indian energy sector is often blurred, creating unpredictability. Read more

India’s shift to renewable energy is increasing arbitration in resolving disputes, with issues ranging from contractor to payment risks. Experts emphasize the need for arbitration backed by technical expertise and highlight the importance of institutional arbitration. The energy transition is also changing how damages and valuations are assessed, requiring more nuanced approaches. Divyam Agarwal, Partner at JSA Advocates & Solicitors, said foreign investors required what he described as the “three Cs”: certainty, clarity and consistency. “If you are able to achieve all three, possibly it’s a good investment. Agarwal said investors needed greater certainty over which disputes would go before regulators and which could be arbitrated. He also flagged inadequate contractual mechanisms and the possibility of policy changes following a change in government as concerns for investors. He added that the choice of arbitral seat should be made with enforceability in mind. “It is not about conducting, let’s say an arbitration, it is about recovering that money. No point of having an award which you can’t ultimately enforce.” Read more

This story also appeared The Law Monitor.

The EPFO has launched the Employees’ Enrolment Campaign (EEC) 2026, giving employers a one-time opportunity to enrol eligible employees who were left out of EPF coverage between April 1, 2009 and March 31, 2026. The campaign runs until October 31, 2026. Employees can benefit from retrospective EPF, pension and insurance coverage, while employers receive compliance relief, including waiver of the employee’s contribution where it was not previously deducted. Enrolment must be completed digitally through the EPFO portal. Sonakshi Das, Partner at JSA Advocates & Solicitors, explained to ET Wealth Online that the EEC 2026 campaign is intended to cover employees who were required to be covered under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (EPF Act) between April 1, 2009 to 31 March 2026, but were not enrolled by their employers despite being eligible for coverage. Read more

Efforts to enable dual listing at GIFT City are progressing, focusing on allowing Indian companies to raise capital from global investors. Discussions involve Sebi and IFSCA, addressing regulatory, financial, and operational challenges. The framework aims to facilitate international fundraising while ensuring compliance with domestic regulations. “Sebi has raised several issues from price variations to the minimum public float. There are various other genuine concerns that need to be addressed before allowing dual listings,” said a source aware of the developments. The authorities are also looking at how the capital raised will be monitored, with custodians at GIFT City likely to play a key role. Other areas under consideration include minimum public float, currency fluctuations, depth of investor participation and tax implications. “Indian listed companies are required to maintain at least 25 per cent minimum public shareholding Rules taking shape On the table: Sebi and IFSCA are working on listing, takeover and insider-trading norms Dollar fundraising: Companies may raise capital from global investors in dollars; domestic investors may be excluded Minimum public float hurdle: IFSC-held shares may not count towards Sebi’s 25% requirement Cross-market oversight: Depositories, ownership records and surveillance must work across both markets Direct listing criteria: Unlisted issuers need $20m revenue, $1m pre-tax profit or $50m post-listing market cap under the domestic framework. IFSC separately prescribes its own minimum public offer requirements,” said Rajul Bohra, Partner, JSA Advocates & Solicitors. Read more

This story also appeared Online.

The article discusses the preference for Indian courts over emergency arbitration for urgent asset protection, despite the latter’s growing recognition. The Supreme Court’s ruling in Amazon v Future Retail supports emergency arbitration in India-seated cases. However, foreign-seated arbitration orders face varied responses from Indian High Courts. The MCIA offers quick arbitrator appointments, but immediate orders are not assured. Lawyers faced with an urgent threat to assets in India will still turn to courts despite the availability of emergency arbitration, JSA Partner Dheeraj Nair said on Thursday. Read more

This quote also appeared in The Law Monitor.

India has the world’s third-largest rare earth resource base, but its deposits are dominated by low-grade Light Rare Earth Elements, while economically extractable Heavy REEs remain limited. The key challenge is developing the full value chain from mining and separation to NdPr oxides, metals, alloys and magnets. With rare-earth magnet demand projected to double by 2030, India remains import-dependent. The government’s ₹7,280-crore REPM scheme and planned Rare Earth Corridors aim to build domestic manufacturing capacity. JSA Partner Vishnu Sudarsan highlighted commercial viability, technology and regulatory hurdles. According to Vishnu Sudarsan, Partner, JSA Advocates and Solicitors, “The real test will be whether they can establish and operate the full value chain from NdPr oxide to metals, alloys and finished magnets at a commercially viable scale.” This will rely upon acquiring a steady supply of a competitively priced NdPr oxide, and there is uncertainty about domestic supply, allocation, imports, and long-term pricing, which could impact project financing and margins. Read more