Revision summary
Options range from waiting for a blast, to a communal round-up, to a lawful mix of cyber disruption, targeted cases and livelihood outreach. The right bundle is evidence-led disruption plus jobs and counselling, briefed to the civilian government. The set-up needs range-level cyber skill, platform liaison, beat trust, force hygiene and a public line that the State will not hunt a community. Intelligence should map handlers and tasked youth with audit logs, lawful intercept and financial trails. A boy who liked a video is not the same file as a handler who sends a task.
Model answer
Copper italics in this answer — like this — are the key facts. Each one is unpacked in the Facts & figures rail.
Introduction
Raman is a new Director General of Police. Unemployment in the State is high. A global terrorist brand is recruiting unemployed youth, with special focus on one community. The Cyber Cell finds many of those youth six to eight hours a day on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter, endorsing handlers. This is security, livelihood, speech and fraternity on the same desk. A clumsy communal sweep will gift the recruiter a story. A sleepy DG will gift him a cohort.
Body
(a) Options available to Raman
First, he can treat it as ordinary crime statistics and wait for the first blast, which is omission. Second, he can order a mass communal round-up of the targeted community’s youth, which is fast, illegal in spirit, and excellent propaganda for the group. Third, he can shut the State’s internet for weeks, which punishes farmers and students and drives the traffic to darker apps. Fourth, he can build a lawful disruption package: cyber take-down and tracing with MHA/CERT and platforms, financial intelligence on handlers, targeted arrests where conspiracy is evidenced, and open political communication that unemployment is the State’s wound, not a community’s guilt. Fifth, he can pair police work with livelihood and counselling: employment fairs, campus and madrasa/youth-club outreach with credible community voices, exit ramps for the merely curious, and hard cases for the already tasked. Sixth, he can ask for a central force and sit back, which abdicates a DG’s role morality. The serious bundle is fourth plus fifth, sequenced, recorded, and briefed to the Chief Secretary and the elected government without becoming a partisan tool.
(b) Strengthening the set-up against penetration
People. Specialised cyber and OSINT cells in every range, not one tired team in the capital; language skills of the recruiter’s tongue; women officers for family outreach. Law. Standard operating procedures that separate sympathy, incitement, and conspiracy; UAPA and ordinary law used with file-able facts, not mood. Platforms. 24-hour liaison, hash-sharing of known terrorist content, rapid legal process for account data. Community. Beat officers who already know the youth, not a new communal census; parents and teachers as partners, not informers of last resort only. Livelihood. A written ask to the labour and skill departments so police are not fake employment exchanges, but jobs still arrive. Internal hygiene. Watch the force for communal bias and for penetration; rotate sensitive desks; mental health for officers who live online hate. Narrative. A DG who speaks once, calmly, that this State will not hunt a community and will not tolerate a handler. Fraternity (Preamble) is operational, not a civics slide.
(c) Intelligence-gathering plan
Aim: early, lawful, precise knowledge of who is tasked, who is only angry, and which account is a handler. Open source: cyber cell maps public endorsements, time patterns (the 6–8 hours), cross-platform identities, with audit logs so the unit cannot freelance a communal list. Human: beat-level trust, prison intelligence on older modules, family counselling that is not a trap for every worried mother. Technical: lawful interception only with statutory sanction; no bulk scrape of a whole faith. Financial: small hawala and wallet trails. Coordination: IB, NIA as needed, neighbouring SPs, university deans for campus rumours. Ethics: Kant forbids using a boy as a mere sensor without care for his future; Mill allows harm prevention when violence is near. Do not pay a communal entrepreneur to invent a module. Debrief in writing. Protect sources. Share with the government what is threat, not what is vote. The plan succeeds if the first arrest is of a handler, not of a boy who liked a video.
Flow diagram
Conclusion
Raman should disrupt the handler online and on the money trail, arrest on evidence, and treat unemployment as a State duty rather than a community stain. A communal sweep and a long internet ban would recruit for the other side. Intelligence must be lawful, local and aimed at the tasking adult, not at a faith.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Case study. With a multipronged strategy of the Central and State Governments, the naxalite problem has been resolved to a large extent. However, there are a few pockets where it still persists. Rohit is posted as SP (Special Operations). He established an excellent intelligence network. Leading a contingent, he got a message that about ten hard core naxalites were hiding in a particular village. His team overpowered all the naxalites along with their automatic weapons. Meanwhile more than five hundred tribal women surrounded the village demanding immediate release of the insurgents. Two of those apprehended were hard core top insurgents with prize money of ten lakhs on their heads. If he did not release them, the situation could get out of control. (a) What are the options available with Rohit to cope with the situation? (b) What are the ethical dilemmas being faced by Rohit? (c) Which of the options, do you think, would be more appropriate for Rohit to adopt and why? (d) In the present situation, what are the extra precautionary measures to be taken by the police in dealing with women protesters?
Next question on this syllabus topic (2024 · Q9). View answer →
-
Should the DG ban the three apps?
A short, reasoned, targeted restriction during a proven spike can be argued. A weeks-long State blackout is usually a gift to rumours and to the recruiter’s private channels.
-
Is outreach ‘soft’ on terror?
Exit ramps for the curious and hard cases for the tasked are one policy. Softness is ignoring the handler. Cruelty is booking a community.
Same topic · past papers
UPSC has asked this before
These previous-year questions sit on the same topic. Open one to practise the earlier ask.
-
2024 · Q11 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. With the summer heat being exceptionally severe, the district has been facing severe water shortage. The District Collector has taken strict measures for stopping the over-exploitation of groundwater. Farmers are agitated that they are not being allowed to irrigate their crops while big industries located near the river are drawing huge amounts of water. The farmers allege that the administration is anti-farmer and corrupt. The industry cannot be closed as this would result in a large number of workers being unemployed. (a) Discuss all options available to the District Collector as a District Magistrate. (b) What suitable actions can be taken in view of mutually compatible interests of the stakeholders? (c) What are the potential administrative and ethical dilemmas for the District Collector? -
2025 · Q11 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Program, MGNREGA was earlier known as National Rural Employment Scheme, NREGA. It is an Indian Social Welfare Program that aimed at fulfilling the 'Right to Work' provisions made in the Constitution. MGNREGA was launched in 2006 under Rural Employment Sector by the Ministry of Rural Development. Main objective of the program is to give legal guarantee of wage employment to the adult members of rural households who are willing to do unskilled manual labour work subject to a maximum of 100 days per year for every household. Every rural household has the right to register under the scheme, job card is issued to the registered, Job Card holder can seek employment; State Government shall pay 25% of minimum wage for the first 30 days as compensatory daily unemployment allowance to the families and of wage for remaining period of the year. MGNREGA work was undertaken by various Gram Panchayats. You have been appointed as an Administrator Incharge of the District. You have been given the responsibility of monitoring MGNREGA work undertaken by various Gram Panchayats. You are also given the authority to give technical sanctions to all MGNREGA works. In one of the Panchayats in your jurisdiction, you notice that your predecessor has mismanaged the Program in terms of: (i) Money not disbursed to actual job-seekers.(ii) Muster Rolls of the Labourers not properly maintained.(iii) Mismatch between the work done and payments made.(iv) Payments made to fictitious persons.(v) Job Cards were given without looking into the need of person.(vi) Mismanagement of funds and to the extent of siphoning of funds.(vii) Approved works that never existed. (a) What is your reaction to the above situation and how do you restore the proper functioning of MGNREGA Program in this regard?(b) What actions would you initiate, to solve the various issues listed above?(c) How would you deal with the above situation?
More from this topic
Q12 · UPSC Mains 2026 · GS IV · 20 marks · Solution
Case study. Ajit has been recently promoted as the Head of the Department of Weapon Sales (DWS) in the Ministry of Defence Production (MDP). His charter of duties includes international sales of weapons produced domestically by MDP. In two recent wars, MDP weapons have performed admirably, resulting in many countries showing interest in buying them, particularly long-range artillery and missiles. Country A and country B have asked for these weapons. However, production constraints restrict DWS to accept only one purchase order. Country A is a developing nation with a sound technology base. MDP is planning R&D collaboration with it for the next generation of weapons. It is not part of any security alliance and needs weapons for protection from a troublesome neighbour. It seeks a large acquisition on a long-term loan. Country B is also a developing nation. Military strength is its priority, with the military budget often ingressing into allocations for human resources and infrastructure development. It is in security alliance with a superpower who has a large military base there and periodically allots it financial grants. It is a member of an economic bloc with which the government is currently negotiating a free trade agreement. It is not a signatory of NPT but possesses smaller nuclear weapons and delivery systems. It supports some guerrilla forces abroad. It has sought a smaller acquisition and is prepared to make some advance payment. It is currently negotiating arms purchases from another nation too. Ajit discussed this case with his counterparts in the related departments. Therein, the significant economic benefits, employment generation and stronger diplomatic relations arising from this sale were highlighted. It was also emphasized that refusing the deal could result in country B purchasing weapons from some other supplier. Ajit was aware that in arms sales, due diligence at each stage was pivotal to ensure conformity to national policy and international treaties. (a) Discuss the options available to Ajit. Which option should he select and why? (b) How can Ajit balance nation's economic and strategic interests with ethical considerations?
Ethics Case Studies
This case study examines ethical dilemma in defense exports, balancing economic gains, strategic partnerships, and non-proliferation norms. Ajit must choose between Country A for R&D collaboration and self-reliance, or Country B for immediate financial gains and FTA leverage. The recommended course prioritizes long-term strategic security, technological synergy, and international humanitarian norms over short-term mercantile interests.
Q11 · UPSC Mains 2026 · GS IV · 20 marks · Solution
Case study. Rajapuram is a border district. Jhara and Biru, its two major communities are in continual conflict with each other. The social fabric is fractured and demands mending. Ethnic tensions between the two communities have erupted into violence resulting in a large number of deaths. The stated causes are conflicting land claims, uneven resource allocation and inadequate political representation in government bodies. Separate relief camps had to be created for the two communities. The situation is volatile and appears to be getting out of control. Rajan has been appointed the District Magistrate (DM) of Rajapuram and tasked to quickly get the situation under control. His immediate tasks include restoring administrative authority, reopening the highway and initiating peace talks. On taking over his appointment, Rajan realized that the inter-community rivalry had even seeped into the local administration and police. With functional neutrality being the immediate casualty, it had made both communities distrustful of the government. The neighbouring country could utilize the opportunity to spur insurgent activity and further aggravate the situation. Rajan favoured a controlled approach starting with opening the highway to restore food and medical supplies. He toyed with the idea of requisitioning CRPF units to help restore administrative control. (a) Discuss the ethical issues that need to be addressed in this case. (b) What are the options open to Rajan? Which option would ensure protection of his non-partisan image without compromising ethics?
Ethics Case Studies
This GS4 case study examines the ethical dilemmas faced by a District Magistrate in managing an ethnic conflict in a sensitive border district. It analyses the ethical issues involving neutrality, human life, security, and institutional trust. It evaluates options ranging from purely coercive measures to inclusive peace-building. The recommended approach balances administrative firmness with transparent, unbiased stakeholder engagement to uphold public service values.
Q10 · UPSC Mains 2026 · GS IV · 20 marks · Solution
Case study. Vikas is a government officer with over a decade of service in public administration. He has recently moved as the District Collector (DC) of Nainipura, a remote hilly district bordering a forest. Due to Nainipura's low levels of economic development, one of his major duties is to ensure proper functioning of the public distribution system (PDS) amongst the economically weaker sections (EWS). During his on-site visits, Vikas was apprised of a typical administrative challenge in operating the PDS. To prevent leakages, all distributors were required to carry out real-time biometric identification of the beneficiaries, whose fingerprints were tallied with identity card records. This was creating problems as the operating system sometimes rejected fingerprint matching in the cases of growing children, manual labourers and senior citizens. The problem was further compounded in periods of low WIFI connectivity. The distributors, in such cases, resorted to personal discretion when they could identify the recipient. Vikas had to address this problem on priority. Strictly adhering to 'government regulations' would ensure fiscal probity but would greatly trouble the proposed beneficiary, i.e., EWS. It may even impinge on their fundamental right to life as per Article 21 of the Constitution. Conversely, leaving the resolution solely to the discretion of the distributors could lead to misuse and leakages. (a) What are the options open to Vikas? How should he balance fiscal probity with empathy towards the designated beneficiaries? (b) Discuss the ethics of using technology as a gatekeeper for welfare schemes.
Ethics Case Studies
• Balance strict digital rules with human empathy to prevent vulnerable citizens from losing entitled rations due to technical failures. • Avoid extreme approaches like rigid enforcement (causing exclusion) or unchecked discretion (causing leakage and corruption). • Implement practical offline workarounds like manual registers, paper slips, or OTPs backed by periodic audits. • Treat procedural norms and technology as tools for human welfare rather than rigid ends in themselves. • Recognize that digital gatekeeping creates ethical tensions between fiscal efficiency and the exclusion of genuine beneficiaries. • Guard against technology violating human dignity by forcing vulnerable groups to repeatedly prove their identity against system errors. • Ensure administrative accountability so systemic technological failures are not unfairly blamed on the citizens.