There are many questions but there is no answer. Bibhuti Pati* makes an analysis of the past attempts by successive governments with regard to legislation on Seeds and echos concerns and questions raised by many who are worried that the new Seeds Bill 2025 might compromise farmers seed sovereignty and may lead to colonization of farmers seeds.
On November 12, 2025, the Union Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare (MoA&FW) revealed the draft Seeds Bill, 2025, which is a proposed legislation aimed at ensuring the quality, sale, and certification of seeds. The period for public feedback on the bill concluded on December 11, 2025. It is anticipated that the bill will be presented to parliament for cabinet approval in early 2026.
The bill aims to “regulate the quality of seeds,” “curb the sale of spurious seeds,” and “liberalise the import of seeds,” all while “protecting the rights of farmers,” as stated by the agriculture ministry in a press release. Ajai Rana, the Chairman of the Federation of Seed Industry of India (FSII), which represents multinational seed companies in the nation, expressed support for the draft bill, describing it as “a timely and much-needed step toward modernising India’s seed regulatory framework.”
Nevertheless, opponents of the bill contend that it ultimately benefits seed companies at the expense of farmers. They further assert that it is excessively centralised, thereby diminishing the authority of state governments. For many years, researchers and industry specialists have called for reforms to the Seeds Act of 1966 to respond to the transformations in the commercial seed trade that have occurred over the past sixty years. At present, the Seeds (Control) Order of 1983, enacted under the Essential Commodities Act, serves to mitigate the shortcomings of the outdated Seeds Act.
Previous efforts have been made by both the United Progressive Alliance and the National Democratic Alliance governments to introduce new legislation aimed at regulating the commercial seed trade in the country, specifically in 2004 and 2019, respectively.
India’s prolonged quest for an equitable seed law is still incomplete.
Seeds play a crucial role in determining what flourishes on India’s agricultural lands, influencing how farming adapts to changing monsoon patterns, sustaining agro-biodiversity across various terrains, and enabling millions of farmers to maintain their livelihoods in a climate-challenged environment. However, India continues to regulate seeds under an outdated law, the Seeds Act of 1966, along with the subsequent Seeds (Control) Order of 1983. These regulations were established during a time when public institutions were the primary breeders of most seed varieties, and farmers relied on saved seeds as their principal source for planting. The seed industry has evolved significantly since that period, yet the legislation has remained stagnant.
In the last twenty years, India has made four attempts to amend the law – in 2004, 2010, 2019, and now in 2025. Each effort was accompanied by promises of reform; however, none were enacted into law. The newly proposed Seeds Bill 2025, which was unveiled in November, enters a context influenced by private corporations, hybrid markets, genetically modified (GM) and gene-edited crops, global trade, and climate instability. It is more advanced than previous drafts, yet it fails to resolve a recurring conflict: whose interests should a seed law prioritize?
In the last twenty years, India has made four attempts to amend the law – in 2004, 2010, 2019, and now in 2025. Each effort was accompanied by promises of reform; however, none were enacted into law. The newly proposed Seeds Bill 2025, which was unveiled in November, enters a context influenced by private corporations, hybrid markets, genetically modified (GM) and gene-edited crops, global trade, and climate instability. This draft is more advanced than previous versions, yet it fails to resolve a recurring conflict: whose interests should a seed law prioritize?
The inception of seed law reform
The Seeds Bill of 2004 was introduced two years after the approval of Bt cotton, which was India’s first genetically modified crop. The introduction of Bt cotton signified the onset of GM technology and the swift growth of both domestic and international seed companies. Seeds transitioned from being mere planting materials to becoming a valuable proprietary technology. Consequently, regulatory measures needed to be updated.
The 2004 Bill suggested the compulsory registration of seeds and stipulated that farmers could only produce seeds if they adhered to standards akin to those of companies. Additionally, it allowed for the provisional registration of GM seeds prior to the completion of a full bio-safety assessment. These provisions faced resistance from both farmers and independent experts.
The Bill conflicted with the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights (PPV&FR) Act, 2001, which acknowledges farmers as both breeders and rights-holders. Farmer organizations contended that the draft portrayed cultivators as offenders instead of guardians. The Parliamentary Standing Committee (14th Lok Sabha, 22nd Report, 2006-07) highlighted these inconsistencies. In light of widespread opposition from farmers’ unions and experts across the nation, the Bill ultimately did not pass.
From amendments to a new bill
It took four years following the report from the Parliamentary Standing Committee for the government to implement 72 amendments, resulting in the 2010 iteration of the Seed Bill. This draft eliminated the GM fast-track and reinforced exemptions for farmers’ rights to save, reuse, exchange, and sell unbranded seed. It also introduced compensation for seed failures, but required claims to be processed through the Consumer Protection Act, which could compel farmers to seek resolution in courts that are not well-equipped to handle crop-loss disputes. Farmer organizations called for a specific redress mechanism to be included in the Seeds Act. This version continued to regard farmers primarily as consumers within a formal seed market, rather than as co-creators of seed diversity.
The 2019 draft, now presented as a new Bill, was introduced following nearly ten years of legislative stagnation. Earlier, the revised Seeds Bill of 2004 consistently appeared on the Parliament agenda but was never addressed. In the meantime, outside of Parliament, the dynamics of seed politics remained vigorous: states resisted central authority, farmers’ organizations continued to demand compensation and price regulation, and prolonged disputes regarding Bt cotton seed pricing and trait fees underscored the necessity for active seed governance.
The 2019 draft embodied a fresh policy environment influenced by the principle of “ease of doing business.” It proposed “deemed registration,” which permitted companies to market seeds while awaiting approvals, thereby transferring all risk to farmers. Compensation continued to be processed through consumer courts, and mandatory registration increased opportunities for private hybrids and imports. Smaller producers encountered greater compliance challenges. Opposition began to rise once more, leading to the eventual withdrawal of this draft.
Technological advancements, known deficiencies
The Draft Seeds Bill 2025 represents the most technologically advanced initiative to date. It introduces digital traceability, QR codes, a National Seed Traceability Portal, standardized accreditation, Value for Cultivation and Use (VCU) trials, and graded penalties. Furthermore, it permits the inclusion of foreign trial data and certification agencies, disregarding the potential irrelevance of such data to the varied agro-climatic conditions in India. Additionally, there have been concerns regarding the dilution of biosafety measures.
These changes address the fact that India’s formal seed industry, currently valued at approximately ₹34,000 crores (₹340 billion), is largely dominated by the private sector, which accounts for about 70% of seed production. Public agencies manage the remainder, while a significant portion of staples – including cereals, pulses, and oilseeds – continues to be sourced from farm-saved seeds outside the formal market.
Currently, inferior and counterfeit seeds continue to negatively impact farmers. Farmers across at least 10 states have demonstrated against these substandard or counterfeit seeds, indicating that the issue is extensive. The government’s seed-testing statistics further highlight this extent – approximately 43,000 samples did not meet quality standards out of nearly 600,000 tested from 2022 to 2025, with states such as West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, and Madhya Pradesh reporting thousands of “non-standard” seeds.
There is a clear necessity for stricter oversight and traceability. Nevertheless, in the pre-legislative consultation call note, the government indicates that one of the aims of the Bill is to “decriminalise minor offences…promote ease of doing business and reduce compliance burden.” This certainly signifies a change in focus. Previous drafts emphasized quality control and fraud prevention; the 2025 draft introduces market facilitation as an objective. It is uncommon to see “Ease of Doing Business” explicitly referenced within the text of the Bill itself.
Compensation and Federalism
Since 2004, one of the most enduring criticisms has been the lack of a transparent and farmer-friendly compensation system. Fines imposed on violators are directed to the state rather than to the farmers. This indicates that cultivators are left to seek recourse through consumer courts or rely on the goodwill of arbitrary state-level decisions, both of which fail to provide prompt justice.
Dr. G.V. Ramanjeneyulu, an agriculture policy expert at the Centre for Sustainable Agriculture (CSA), states, “The Seeds Bill must be enacted as a law that prioritizes the protection of farmers, rather than one that solely promotes business interests. It should not overlook the necessity of compensating farmers for losses incurred due to inferior seeds.”
Farmers’ Unions such as the Samyukta Kisan Morcha (SKM) and the All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) have initiated calls for nationwide protests against the proposed draft. AIKS General Secretary Vijoo Krishnan emphasizes, “When a seed fails, a farmer loses an entire season, not merely a product; however, the law safeguards the transaction rather than the cultivator. Compensation should be automatic, timely, and encompass both cultivation expenses and lost yield, without subjecting farmers to tedious legal procedures.” CSA, SKM, and AIKS have submitted their comprehensive responses to the government.
Another unresolved concern is the federal imbalance. Agriculture is designated as a state subject under the Constitution of India. The performance of seeds is influenced by local soil conditions, rainfall, pest and disease challenges, and farming practices. Nevertheless, the Bill centralizes accreditation and registration, thereby limiting the ability of states to restrict varieties that are not suitable for their specific regions. Telangana has publicly highlighted this concern. In its official response, Kerala cautions that the Bill centralizes nearly all essential functions – including registration, accreditation, pricing, certification, and rule-making – which diminishes the real authority of states despite agriculture being a state subject. Kerala contends that this framework undermines federal principles and neglects regional agro-ecological requirements.
Community seed systems
While the reform of seed laws has been stagnant for two decades, India has experienced a quiet yet significant resurgence of Indigenous, heirloom, and folk seed varieties, propelled by farmers, women’s collectives, farmer groups, NGOs, and community organizations. These varieties have been revived, preserved, and exchanged outside of formal markets. They function without any intellectual property claims and incur minimal or no costs. This is not merely a marginal trend; this silent revolution is one that cannot be ignored.
Many of these farmers and groups have been acknowledged through Genome Saviour Awards under the PPV&FR Act, and numerous individuals have received national honors, including Padma awards. Seed diversity blocks, community seed banks, seed festivals, and exchange melas contribute significantly to these efforts. These initiatives are essential in maintaining and providing varieties that are well-suited to local environments, safeguarding genetic diversity, and often offering planting materials that are more appropriate for local challenges than commercial hybrids.
However, the newly proposed Seeds Bill does not adequately acknowledge community seed systems as a unique and expanding sector. Without such acknowledgment, these decentralized systems may be subjected to licensing, registration, and traceability regulations intended for commercial enterprises. Even the mere act of branding by these groups to foster trust in natural farming or traditional seeds may be perceived as a commercial endeavor.
Advocates for seed rights caution that this situation could gradually lead to the extinction of decentralized village-level systems, resulting in increased corporate consolidation within the seed industry. As Kavitha Kuruganti warns, “Seed regulation cannot claim to be neutral. When legislation overlooks farmers as both breeders and custodians, it ultimately reinforces corporate seed systems while undermining the very community seed networks that preserve diversity.”
Prices and farmers’ rights are overlooked
The draft lacks sufficient price regulation. The repeal of the Seeds (Control) Order, 1983, will eliminate a crucial mechanism for controlling prices. The Bill permits state intervention solely in “emergent conditions.” However, occurrences of seed monopolies and price increases are not uncommon. States should maintain the authority to intervene whenever pricing becomes inequitable, not just in times of crisis.
Additionally, the Bill is not in alignment with the PPV&FR Act, which acknowledges farmers as breeders, innovators, and stewards of genetic resources, a legal framework that is distinct in global intellectual property regimes. Conversely, the Seeds Bills continue to categorize farmers merely as end-users within a licensed supply chain. The Parliament Standing Committee of 2006 had recommended that the government fully implement the PPV&FR Act prior to the Seeds Bill, 2004, to ensure coherence between the two. Two decades later, numerous farmer-focused provisions of the PPV&FR are yet be executed, while a conflicting Seed Bill is being reintroduced.
After two decades and four drafts, the focus has shifted from improving the drafting process to determining the purpose of a seed law. If the intention is to regulate the seed market, then the 2025 draft, which includes QR codes, national portals, and central oversight, aligns with that objective. Conversely, if the aim is to promote biodiversity, enhance agro-ecological resilience, and support farmer livelihoods, then it is crucial to incorporate statutory compensation, price regulation, support for community seed systems, and empower state-level authorities.
Seeds should not be viewed as mere industrial components. They are dynamic, living entities influenced by climate, soil, culture, and human creativity. A law that enhances regulation while undermining the essential foundations for diversity and sovereignty puts agriculture at risk. For a seed law to be effective, India must prioritize these critical aspects.
A seed system cannot be safeguarded through legislation. It is protected by trust – by those who sow the seed, gamble on the harvest, and bear the outcomes. A QR code can track the path of a seed. However, it cannot revive a lost crop. With centuries of Indigenous wisdom and contemporary experience, farmers appear to have decisively expressed their stance once more: It is a definitive no to the Seeds Bill, 2025.
New provisions of the bill
One of the significant new provisions in the bill mandates the printing of QR codes or labels on seed packets, which provide information regarding seed health, anticipated seed performance, and producer certification. This information can be generated via the Centralised Seed Traceability Portal, a central government body responsible for monitoring seed production and distribution. Malavika Dadlani, the former Joint Director (Research) at the ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute in New Delhi, states, “If the system operates effectively, it can enhance seed quality control across the nation. Varietal traits and expected performance should be evaluated by accredited centers and communicated to farmers.” Dadlani also expressed support for the “pro-farmer” provision that allows for evaluation trials to determine the Value for Cultivation and Use (VCU) of seed varieties.
Nevertheless, Kavitha Kuruganti, the founder of ASHA-Kisan Swaraj, a network of farmers driven by volunteers, contends that the bill facilitates a consolidation effort for large seed corporations. She highlights the suggested Central Accreditation System, which would enable multinational seed companies to function across various states once they receive accreditation from the central government, thus diminishing regulatory checks for the ‘ease of business’. “I would not hesitate to assert that this provision did not originate from the law ministry but rather from one of the seed industry organizations,” she remarked, referring to the ‘ease of business’ provision.
Abrasion of State Authority
The updated institutional framework for seeds, as outlined in the draft Seeds Bill of 2025, suggests the establishment of a 27-member Central Seed Committee (CSC) and a 15-member State Seed Committee (SSC) for each state government. In contrast to the 1966 Act, which allowed for 22 state representatives in the CSC, the new bill only allocates five.
Dadlani states, “The suggested makeup of the CSC lacks balance. Ideally, every state should be represented; if that is not feasible, at least three member states from each geographical region should be included on a rotational basis, taking into account the agricultural zones and crops. The new bill also introduces seed price regulation during emergencies, yet the responsibility remains with the union government. It is essential to consult the states regarding the regulation of seed prices.
Kuruganti stated, “It is essential to decentralize decision-making to the appropriate level. What is currently occurring in Indian agriculture, particularly in the area of seeds, is that nearly all decisions are being made by the union government. However, when farmers face a crisis, it is the state government that first experiences the impact of any protests or resistance, or even the necessity to provide financial compensation. The rising prices of seeds, especially for vegetables and certain high-value crops, have placed significant pressure on farmers. It is imperative that seed prices are regulated outside of emergency situations to help lower the cost of cultivation for farmers and maintain affordability.”
Kuruganti further remarked, “The lack of regulation in seed prices is clearly evident in the industry’s expansion over the past few decades. The seed industry’s value has surged from approximately ₹4,000 crores two decades ago to between ₹60,000 and ₹70,000 crores,” she noted. The market share of the formal seed sector has remained consistent during this time frame. A recent nationwide study indicates that the overall contribution of the formal seed sector has risen from 45% to 54% between 2016 and 2018.”
“When it becomes evident that another party is benefiting financially at the cost of farmers, any forthcoming legislation ought to consider the regulation of prices. This will also compel the regulatory body to create a formula for establishing the price range, thus enhancing transparency regarding the expenses incurred by seed companies in the process of seed production, which includes payments made to contract seed multiplying farmers. Consequently, it will illuminate the exploitation faced by seed multiplying farmers within the nation,” Kuruganti stated.
Differences with an existing Act
The Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights (PPV&FR) Act, 2001, represents one of the key seed-related legislations in the nation. This statutory framework was established by India to safeguard farmers’ intellectual property rights upon its accession as a founding member of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in 1995.
As outlined in the draft Seeds Bill, 2025, this legislation will be applicable to all seed dealers, distributors, and producers who are not classified as farmers. Importantly, the law will not impede the rights of farmers to “grow, sow, re-sow, save, use, exchange, share or sell their farm seeds of any kind or variety that is registered under this Act.”
Nevertheless, the term ‘farmer’ as outlined in the new legislation varies from the definition provided in the PPV&FR Act. According to the draft Seeds Bill of 2025, a farmer is characterized as “any individual who (i) cultivates crops by personally working the land; or (ii) cultivates crops by directly overseeing the cultivation of land through another individual; or (iii) conserves and preserves, either alone or in collaboration with others, any wild species or traditional varieties, and enhances the value of such wild species or traditional varieties by selecting and identifying their beneficial properties.”
Kuruganti contends that the definition ought to be quoted verbatim from the PPV&FR Act, which explicitly encompasses various farmer-producer organizations and cooperatives. The singular definition of a farmer in the new bill creates issues, as community institutions such as Self-Help Groups (SHGs), farmers’ cooperatives, and community seed banks risk being criminalized under this act. Furthermore, the closer the seed producer is to the seed consumer, the lower the likelihood of compromising quality.
Conversely, Daldani presented his logic, “Farmer producer organizations are registered under the Companies Act and sell seeds while maintaining a profit margin; it is reasonable to assert that they should operate under a brand name and [that they are subject to regulation].”
Provisions for Punishment and Compensation
The newly proposed legislation introduces a system of graded penalties, imposing sanctions for trivial, minor, and major offences, including the sale of unregistered seeds. These penalties range from a written notice to a fine of ₹30 lakhs (₹3 million) and may also include the cancellation of registration. “In addition to increasing penalties, it may be more relevant for the specific amount of punishment to be determined based on the merits of each individual case and adjudicated by an authorized individual or panel, similar to the procedures followed in a court of law,” stated Dadlani.
Kuruganti further suggests the establishment of an adjudication committee that would include representatives from the farming community to acknowledge offences and administer justice. At present, the legislation does not include provisions for compensation. The creation of a seed compensation fund, supported by both the central and state governments, would assist in mitigating the losses faced by farmers. This fund could also be supplemented by the penalties collected for violations under the Act, which could subsequently be used to provide compensation to farmers.
What lies ahead for the Bill?
According to Dadlani, “The implementation of the Seeds Bill will guarantee that farmers have access to high-quality seeds of the finest varieties at competitive prices, while also deterring dishonest and transient seed companies.
Nevertheless, Kuruganti views the suggested statutory framework as insufficient to safeguard the interests of farmers. We will only endorse a statute that prioritizes farmers, respects the constitutional authority of state governments, and promotes community seed systems, which have been fundamental to India’s food security and sovereignty for the past seventy to eighty years.
In the meantime, leaders within the seed industry are of the opinion that the Seeds Bill, 2025, merits approval. “This legislation is forward-thinking and inclusive; it has the potential to facilitate business operations by alleviating compliance burdens, while also protecting the rights of farmers and researchers. It emphasizes the importance of quality seeds, streamlines offences and penalties, and seeks to harmonize the seed regulatory framework nationwide,” stated R K Tripathi, Director of the National Seed Association of India.
The New seeds legislation should be farmer friendly
Enhanced seeds, particularly high yielding varieties (HYVs) of wheat and rice, were fundamental to the agricultural transformation of the 1960s, resulting in a more than two-fold increase in both productivity and production of foodgrains.
During this same time-frame, hybrid seeds for crops such as maize and jowar were also introduced. The National Seed Corporation was founded in 1963 to produce and distribute HYV seeds to meet the demand for F1 hybrid seeds that exhibit heterotic vigor, which is essential for fully leveraging the benefits of hybridization.
The subsequent expansion of hybrid technology to additional food and horticultural crops intensified the demand for seeds. This led to the creation of numerous state seed corporations and the involvement of the private sector in the seed industry. The accessibility of these seeds contributed significantly to the success of the Green Revolution, transforming Indian agriculture from subsistence farming to commercial farming.
The gradual advancement of the public sector prompted the involvement of private entities such as Indo-American Seeds and Maharashtra Hybrid Seed Company, initially concentrating on vegetable and flower seeds.
The National Seeds Project, established in 1975, initially backed the public sector; however, its enhanced infrastructure also provided support to private seed manufacturers. The late 1970s to early 1980s witnessed a surge in the establishment of seed companies. The liberalization policies of the 1990s further facilitated the entry of foreign investors into the seed industry. Presently, India boasts over 700 seed companies across both public and private sectors, with the private sector playing a crucial role and holding a substantial portion of the seed market, especially in high-value and hybrid seeds.
In the period of 2024-25, the Union Agricultural Ministry estimated the seed requirement to be 48.20 lakh tonnes. According to the National Seed Association of India, the current valuation of the Indian seed sector stands at $3 billion, making it the fifth largest globally. It is anticipated to expand at a compound annual growth rate of 5.55% during the 2025-30 timeframe. The sector has undergone significant transformation due to innovations in hybridisation, biotechnology, commercial processing, and international trade. This growth is largely driven by the consistent supply of improved seed varieties from the public sector, which accounted for approximately 85% of the varieties released between 2014 and 2025.
The seed industry, however, is not exempt from malpractices, including the presence of spurious, fake, or counterfeit seeds that are of inferior quality, diseased, and exhibit poor germination rates. These issues frequently lead to pest infestations in crops, reduced yields, and in some cases, complete crop failure. Additionally, the problem encompasses the adulteration of high-quality seeds with lower-grade varieties, the inclusion of inert materials, the relabeling of old stocks as new, and operations conducted without the necessary licenses. It is estimated that seeds which are either counterfeit or do not comply with quality standards account for nearly 25% of the overall seed market.
The matter at hand is intricate, encompassing vulnerabilities within the supply chain as well as deficiencies in the regulatory framework, particularly where the certification clause “truthfully labeled seed” is frequently exploited.
In August 2025, the Union Minister of State for Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare reported that 43,001 seed samples were deemed “non-standard” during the period of 2022-25. West Bengal represented 62% (26,603) of these seeds, followed by Tamil Nadu (4,448) and Madhya Pradesh (3,517). The widespread failure of maize and chilli crops in Telangana, numerous vegetable crops in Rajasthan, and cotton (Bt) in Andhra Pradesh along with other cotton-producing states serve as prominent recent examples of the extensive issue of counterfeit seeds in the market.
In order to regulate the seed market within a legal framework, the Seed Act of 1966 addresses quality control, while the Seed Control Order of 1983 focuses on licensing and accountability. The legal recognition of seed certification was established with the introduction of the Seed Rules in 1968. Additionally, the National Seed Policy of 2002 highlighted various legal provisions, emphasizing plant variety protection, quality assurance, seed distribution, marketing, the promotion of the domestic seed industry, and the enhancement of the monitoring system. The Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights (PPV&FR) Act of 2001, which became operational in 2005, marked a significant advancement in the protection of plant breeders’ rights, as well as in safeguarding farmers’ traditional rights to save, use, exchange, and sell their saved seeds, albeit without any brand name.
The Sanyukt Kisan Moracha convener Jagjit Singh Dallewal says, “This new draft bill concerning seeds resembles a sugar-coated pill, and the entire nation must oppose it. It contains a perilous clause stating that if a seed has been registered in any country worldwide, it does not need to be registered in India. Furthermore, there used to be a representative from every state in India on the committee, responsible for monitoring seed quality; however, now there will be a committee appointed by the central government consisting of only 5 to 7 members of its choosing. This system will encourage the proliferation of GM seeds. Consequently, the corporate sector will disseminate GM seeds and generate greater profits. The farming system of the entire nation will be ruined. This outcome is precisely what we sought to avoid when we previously halted this system. Now, the government has cleverly reintroduced GM seeds through this new draft bill concerning seeds. This will obliterate our genetic farming practices and traditional agricultural systems and seeds. This seeds bill will alter the physical DNA levels in our bodies. We will certainly oppose this draft and will never permit it to become legislation in our country, which boasts a rich agricultural heritage.
The Draft Seeds Bill of 2025, which is presently being discussed across the nation, seeks to supersede the Seeds Act of 1966. It mandates the registration of all seed varieties available for sale, imposes stricter quality standards, and ensures traceability and authenticity. Significant penalties, including fines and imprisonment, have been established for the sale of counterfeit or unregistered seeds. The provisions for farmers outlined in the PPV&FR Act of 2001 have been maintained. Additionally, the draft improves access to global seed varieties for research and trials, thereby liberalizing seed imports.
Bibhuti Pati
( Bibhuti Pati is a Senior Media Person and Author. The views expressed here are his own. He can be contacted at bibhujournalist@gmail.com -Editor)
Comments
0 comments
