top of page

By:

Kaustubh Kale

10 September 2024 at 6:07:15 pm

Everything About Term Life Insurance

“Jo bachchon se kare pyaar, woh term insurance ko kaise kare inkaar!” If you love your family, term life insurance is indispensable. Financially securing your loved ones in the event of an untimely death is crucial, and term insurance offers this protection at an affordable cost. Protection, Not Investment Term insurance is the simplest form of life insurance. You pay a relatively small premium and receive a large life cover for a fixed period. Unlike endowment plans or unit-linked insurance...

Everything About Term Life Insurance

“Jo bachchon se kare pyaar, woh term insurance ko kaise kare inkaar!” If you love your family, term life insurance is indispensable. Financially securing your loved ones in the event of an untimely death is crucial, and term insurance offers this protection at an affordable cost. Protection, Not Investment Term insurance is the simplest form of life insurance. You pay a relatively small premium and receive a large life cover for a fixed period. Unlike endowment plans or unit-linked insurance plans, it does not combine insurance with investment. This separation is important. Insurance should protect your family, while investments should help you create wealth. Traditional insurance-cum-investment plans often provide modest returns that may struggle to beat inflation over long periods. For many people, buying adequate term insurance and investing separately through suitable mutual funds or other investments can be a more efficient approach. For instance, a healthy person in their thirties may be able to purchase a term cover of Rs 1 crore for approximately Rs 15,000 to Rs 20,000 annually, depending on age, health, policy tenure and other factors. Insurance Needed You should strongly consider term insurance if your spouse, children or parents are financially dependent on you. It is also essential if you have liabilities such as a home loan, car loan or personal loan. Even a non-working spouse may require life insurance because replacing the economic value of household responsibilities, childcare and family management can be expensive. To summarise, if you have loans or plan to take loans, have children or plan to have children, or have a financially dependent spouse or parents, term life insurance is an absolute must. Enough Cover A figure such as Rs 1 crore may sound large, but it may not necessarily be sufficient. The right amount should be calculated based on your family’s actual financial needs. First, estimate household expenses. If your family spends Rs 10 lakh annually and you want to provide for the next 15 years, you may require at least Rs 1.5 crore for basic living expenses. Second, add all outstanding loans. A home loan of Rs 35 lakh and a personal loan of Rs 5 lakh would increase the total requirement to Rs 1.9 crore. Third, include future financial goals. If your children’s higher education is expected to cost Rs 50 lakh, the required cover rises to Rs 2.4 crore. Fourth, provide an additional amount for your dependent parents or spouse. Adding Rs 20 lakh would take the total requirement to approximately Rs 2.6 crore. Finally, adjust the calculation for inflation. Inflation gradually erodes the value of money. To ensure that your family has enough to meet rising expenses, it is wise to add an appropriate inflation adjustment to each of the above steps, as necessary. Do Not Delay Term insurance is generally cheaper when purchased at a younger age and while you are in good health. Disclose all medical conditions, lifestyle habits and existing policies honestly, as incorrect or incomplete information can create difficulties during claim settlement. Life is uncertain, but your family’s financial security need not be. The purpose of term insurance is simple: even in your absence, your responsibilities should continue to be fulfilled. (The author is a Chartered Accountant and CFA (USA). Financial Advisor. Views personal. He could be reached on 9833133605.)

High-level panel to review welfare benefits

AI Generated Image
AI Generated Image

Mumbai: The state government has escalated a deeply contentious national debate over religious conversion and affirmative action by forming a high-level committee to review the welfare benefits of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe individuals who convert to other faiths.


Triggered by a heated calling attention motion during the recent monsoon session of the state legislature, the move specifically responds to allegations that Christian missionaries and priests were using financial and social inducements to convert tribal and non-tribal residents in the Navapur taluka of Nandurbar district. Yielding to aggressive demands from several lawmakers to strip converts of their constitutional concessions, the state government fulfilled its floor promise by issuing a Government Resolution to officially constitute the twenty-six-member panel.


Headed by Tribal Development Minister Ashok Uike as chairman and Minister of State Indranil Naik as vice-chairman, the committee also includes Food and Drug Administration Minister Narhari Zirwal, Dharmaraobaba Aatram, and prominent legislators like Amshya Padvi and Dr. Vijaykumar Gavit. This panel has been tasked with undertaking a comprehensive study of central and state laws to draft a unified policy on whether state subsidies and reservation benefits should continue post-conversion.


Formation of this committee thrusts Maharashtra into the center of a nationwide legal and political battle regarding the intersection of religious identity and constitutional safeguards, a landscape recently reshaped by the Supreme Court. Under the current constitutional framework, specifically Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order of 1950, Scheduled Caste status is strictly restricted to individuals professing Hinduism, Sikhism, or Buddhism.


The Supreme Court of India reaffirmed this position in a landmark March 2026 judgment in the case of Chinthada Anand versus the State of Andhra Pradesh, ruling categorically that conversion to Christianity or Islam results in the immediate and complete loss of Scheduled Caste status.


The apex court held that individuals who voluntarily convert and actively practice another faith cannot simultaneously claim statutory benefits or protections under the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act, declaring the constitutional bar absolute with no exceptions.


Legal Landscape

However, the legal landscape for Scheduled Tribes is markedly different, creating a complex asymmetry that the Maharashtra committee must now navigate. As reiterated by legal precedents like the 2004 State of Kerala versus Chandramohanan case and recent Supreme Court observations, the Constitution does not prescribe any religion-based exclusion for Scheduled Tribes. Tribal identity is treated as an ethno-cultural and sociological reality, meaning that indigenous individuals can legally retain their ST status and associated protections even after converting to Christianity or Islam, provided they continue to follow customary practices, retain tribal traits, and maintain their social organization.


This legal dichotomy has fuelled a massive socio-political campaign across India’s tribal belts, heavily championed by organisations demanding a nationwide delisting exercise to amend the Constitution and strip converted tribals of their ST benefits. They argue that indigenous identity is inextricably linked to traditional customs and ancestral rituals, which they claim are abandoned upon conversion.


Conversely, tribal rights organizations and minority groups warn that delisting would severely damage the educational and economic mobility of vulnerable populations and undermine constitutional guarantees of religious freedom.


By mandating the Uike committee to review both SC and ST benefits in the wake of the Navapur allegations, the Maharashtra government is attempting to navigate this highly volatile constitutional grey area, signalling a potential policy shift that could set a major precedent for other Indian states grappling with the complex dynamics of faith, indigenous identity, and state welfare.

Comments

bottom of page