While reviewing the answer sheets of various aspirants, including the topper and those who didn't make it to the mains result list, I observed that many candidates possess good content but struggle with proper representation according to the question's requirements.

Some candidates include content that was not even asked, failing to adhere to the specified dimensions. It's crucial to focus on what the question demands, rather than writing everything one knows.

Others write in a disorganized manner, lacking a timeline, proper structure, and the use of relevant keywords. In contrast, the topper writes succinctly, addressing all dimensions specified in the question.

Some aspirants forget to substantiate their arguments, neglecting to provide examples where needed. It's essential to support points with relevant examples.

Lastly, some candidates mention incorrect or outdated data, emphasizing the importance of using accurate information.

Introductions and conclusions serve as the first and last impressions. Some aspirants make a poor impression by writing haphazardly.

https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1984208

The approval by the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs headed by Prime minister (CCEA) for Fair and Remunerative Price (FRP), Minimum Support Price (MSP), jute packaging, and agriculture subsidy reflects a comprehensive approach to support farmers and promote sustainable agricultural practices.

These decisions contribute to the overall framework for ensuring fair returns to farmers and encouraging environmentally friendly packaging in the agricultural sector.

‘Low rate of disposal of POCSO cases by fast-track courts’

💫With over 2.43 lakh POCSO cases pending trial in Fast Track Special Courts (FTSCs) as of January 31, 2023, a new research paper by the India Child Protection Fund (ICPF) has estimated that each of the over 1,000 such courts in the country are currently clearing just 28 cases on average every year, as opposed to the initially envisioned 165 cases per year.

💫The FTSCs were set up in 2019, specifically for trying cases related to sexual offences, those under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The idea was to allow these special courts to deal with these cases to fulfil the mandate of finishing the trial in one year. However, the research paper, titled ‘Justice awaits: an analysis of the efficacy of justice delivery mechanisms in cases of child sexual abuse in India’, estimated that under the current pendency rates, Arunachal Pradesh would take 30 years for trial in all pending POCSO cases to come to a close.

💫“The scheme was supposed to deliver the legal mandate for the completion of trial of such cases within one year and yet out of the total 2,68,038 cases that were under trial, only 8,909 cases resulted in conviction,” a statement from the ICPF said.

💫The findings cast a question mark on the efficacy of the country’s judicial system, the ICPF said.