Double-Blind Peer Review Policy

Internal Quality Assurance Cell of Kumar Bhaskar Varma Sanskrit and Ancient Studies University publishes E-Āntarikī following a Double-Blind Peer Review Policy to ensure fairness, transparency, and academic integrity in the publication process.

This policy eliminates bias based on:

• Name
• Institution
• Academic status
• Gender
• Religion
• Seniority
• Other personal identifiers

Manuscript Submission

The author must submit:

• A main manuscript without any personal identification
• A separate document containing author details

The editorial team examines the submission for:

• Plagiarism
• Relevance to the journal’s scope
• Removal of identifying information from the manuscript

Publication Restriction

No author whose article has been published in one issue will be permitted to publish another article in the immediately succeeding issue.

Reviewer Assignment

Editors assign the manuscript to expert reviewers whose expertise matches the subject area.

Reviewers Receive

• Manuscript with anonymous content
• Review form and instructions

Reviewers Must

• Not attempt to discover the author’s identity
• Not share or discuss the manuscript with others
• Provide a fair, evidence-based assessment
• Maintain full independence and confidentiality

Editors’ Assignment

After receiving an article, the editors:

• Remove the author’s name, affiliations, and biography from the manuscript
• Avoid self-citations that reveal identity (e.g., “In our earlier work…”)
• Use “Author, Year” style for self-references until the final submission

After reviewers submit their reports, the editors decide whether to:

• Accept
• Request Minor Revision
• Request Major Revision
• Reject

The review reports are then sent to the author without revealing the reviewers’ identities.

Ethical Rules for Blind Peer Review

• Reviewers must not upload or store the manuscript on personal platforms
• Reviewers must decline the review if the manuscript topic is outside their expertise
• Editors must ensure that all identifying information (e.g., acknowledgements, footnotes, and file metadata) is removed
• Reviewers should disclose if they suspect they know the author’s identity
• Communication should take place strictly through the editorial office