Doctrine of Equivalents: The Paradox of Patent Protection

Section 60 of the Indian Patents Act 1970, specifically the Doctrine of Equivalents, is still giving me headaches. On one hand, it's meant to prevent patent trolls from abusing the system by using equivalent variations of patented products. But isn't it just a license for patent holders to stifle innovation by making it too broad? I mean, if a device can function in the same way as the patented one, but with slightly different components, does that really make it an infringement? It feels like a classic case of overprotection. I've seen cases where small changes to the claims have led to different outcomes, leaving students like me scratching our heads. Is it just me or is this doctrine more a hindrance than a help to genuine innovators?