Inherent Powers of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973

This thesis is shows the result of the research work on the inherent Powers of the High Court in criminal jurisdiction. The criminal justice system in India recognizes inherent powers only of the High Court. The Theory and Philosophy of inherent powers are concerned the Distinction between civil and Criminal laws are of very little consequence. In formulating the research programme the confusion created by the concept of inherent powers and its application by High Court form the central point. How fully the concept is understood, how correctly the power is used, and how far it has enhanced the rationale of the administration of criminal justice, what is its importance and what are the solutions for the inherent power to earn a permanent status in the province of criminal jurisprudence are the themes of this study. The precipitation of new dimensions is the yardstick to acknowledge the inherent powers of the High Court and Supreme Court. It is of instant value in criminal justice system. This study concludes innovativeness provided by the inherent powers has helped the justice administration draw inspiration from the Constitution. A jurisprudence of inherent powers has developed with the weilding of inherent powers of the Supreme Court and the High Court. It is to unravel mystery of jurisprudence caused by the operation of the concept of inherent powers this research work gives emphasis. Its significance is all the more relevant when the power is exercised in the administration of criminal justice. Application or non application of inherent powers in a given case would tell upon the maturity and perfection of the standard of justice

Socio-Economic Dimensions of Health Care Development Among Tribals in Kerala: A Study of Tribal Communities in Wynad

The contemporary explanations and discussions of the relationship between medicine and health, and society centre around assumptions that can be broadly classified into three setsl. The first set considers health and illness as predominantly ‘biological’ and therefore, having nothing to do with the social and economic environment in which it occurs. The struggle to combat illness therefore, lies entirely within the purview of modern medicine which is neutral to economic or social change. The second considers practice of medicine as a natural science. It allows the doctor to separate himself from his subject matter, the patient, in the samelway as the natural scientist is assumed to separate himself from his subject matter, the natural world. As a 'science' and with the scientific method, it can produce unchallengable and autonomous body of knowledge which is free from the wider social and economic context. The third, different from the above, recognises the relationship between health, medicine and society. Social and environmental aspects as determinants of illness or of health comes to sharp focus here and it assigns to medicine the status of a mediator, the only viable mediator, between people and diseases. In this scheme of things the usefulness of medicine is unquestionable but the problem lies in not having enough of it to go arounds.