Fundamental Rights

Q1.Consider the following statements regarding the characteristics of Fundamental Rights in the Indian Constitution: 1. They are absolute in nature and cannot be restricted by the state. 2. All Fundamental Rights are available against the actions of both the state and private individuals. 3. They are sacrosanct and cannot be repealed by the Parliament under any circumstances. 4. They are defended and guaranteed by the Supreme Court. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q2.Consider the following statements: 1. The framers of the Indian Constitution derived inspiration for Fundamental Rights from the Constitution of the USA. 2. Part III of the Constitution, containing the Fundamental Rights, is described as the Magna Carta of India. 3. Originally, the Constitution provided for seven Fundamental Rights, but one was removed, leaving the current number at six. Which of the statements given above is/are NOT correct?

Q3.With reference to the suspension of Fundamental Rights during a National Emergency, consider the following statements: 1. The rights guaranteed by Articles 20 and 21 can be suspended if the emergency is declared on the grounds of war or external aggression. 2. The six rights guaranteed by Article 19 can be suspended only when an emergency is declared on the ground of armed rebellion. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q4.Consider the following statements regarding the enforcement and modification of Fundamental Rights: 1. Parliament can curtail a Fundamental Right by passing an ordinary law. 2. Laws required to give effect to certain Fundamental Rights can be made only by the Parliament. 3. The reasonableness of restrictions imposed by the state on Fundamental Rights is ultimately decided by the courts. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q5.How many of the following are mentioned in the provided text as limitations on or restrictions to the application of Fundamental Rights? 1. Their application to members of armed forces and intelligence agencies. 2. Their application in an area where martial law is in force. 3. Laws giving effect to certain directive principles. 4. Validation of certain acts and regulations included in the 9th Schedule.

Q6.According to Article 12 of the Indian Constitution and subsequent judicial interpretations, how many of the following are included within the definition of the 'State' for the purposes of Part III? 1. The Government and Parliament of India 2. Municipalities, panchayats, and district boards 3. Statutory and non-statutory authorities like LIC and ONGC 4. A private body or agency working as an instrument of the State

Q7.Consider the following statements regarding the articles that provide exceptions to Fundamental Rights: 1. Article 31A immunises laws related to agricultural land reforms from being challenged on the grounds of contravention of Article 14 and Article 19. 2. The scope of Article 31B is wider than that of Article 31A, as it immunises any law in the Ninth Schedule from all Fundamental Rights. 3. The 42nd Amendment Act, 1976, permanently extended the protection of Article 31C to any law implementing any of the Directive Principles of State Policy. Which of the statements given above is/are NOT correct?

Q8.Consider the following pairs: 1. Kesavananda Bharati case: A Constitutional amendment can be challenged if it violates a fundamental right that forms a part of the 'basic structure'. 2. I.R. Coelho case: Laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after April 24, 1973, are completely immune from judicial review. 3. Minerva Mills case: The extension of Article 31C's protection to all Directive Principles was declared unconstitutional. How many of the pairs given above are correctly matched?

Q9.Given below are two statements: Statement I: Article 13 of the Constitution expressly provides for the doctrine of judicial review, empowering courts to declare any law inconsistent with Fundamental Rights as void. Statement II: The power of judicial review against laws contravening Fundamental Rights is conferred on both the Supreme Court under Article 32 and the High Courts under Article 226. Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?

Q10.With reference to Article 31A of the Constitution, consider the following statements: 1. A state law falling under the categories specified in Article 31A is automatically immunised from judicial review. 2. Article 31A includes a provision for payment of compensation at market value for the acquisition of land under personal cultivation within the statutory ceiling limit. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q11.With reference to the 'Rule of Law' in the Indian context, consider the following statements: 1. The Indian system has adopted all three elements of A.V. Dicey's concept of 'Rule of Law'. 2. The Supreme Court has declared the 'Rule of Law' as embodied in Article 14 to be a part of the basic structure of the Constitution. 3. The principle of equality before the law in India is absolute and does not permit any exceptions. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q12.Consider the following immunities from court proceedings available under the Indian Constitution and other conventions: 1. Immunity for a Member of Parliament for any vote given in Parliament or its committees. 2. Absolute immunity for the President from any civil proceedings for acts done in his personal capacity during his term of office. 3. Immunity for the publication of a substantially true report of the proceedings of a State Legislature. 4. Immunity for foreign diplomats from criminal proceedings. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q13.Consider the following pairs: 1. 77th Amendment Act : Consequential seniority in promotions for SCs and STs. 2. 81st Amendment Act : Allowed backlog vacancies to be treated as a separate class, bypassing the 50% ceiling. 3. 93rd Amendment Act : Empowered the state to make special provisions for EWS in educational institutions. 4. 102nd Amendment Act : Conferred constitutional status on the National Commission for Backward Classes. How many of the pairs given above are correctly matched?

Q14.With reference to the criteria for reservation, which of the following statements is NOT correct? 1. The 'creamy layer' concept for OBCs excludes children of persons holding constitutional posts like Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts. 2. For determining EWS status, the property held by a family in different locations is clubbed together to apply the property holding test. 3. The income limit for the 'creamy layer' among OBCs and the gross annual family income limit for EWS are currently the same, at ₹8 lakh. 4. The Narasimha Rao Government's proposal for a 10% reservation for poorer sections of higher castes was upheld by the Supreme Court in the Mandal case.

Q15.Statement I: In the Mandal case (1992), the Supreme Court upheld the 27% reservation for OBCs in government jobs but stipulated that the advanced sections, or 'creamy layer', must be excluded from the benefit. Statement II: The same judgment ruled that reservation in promotions is constitutionally valid and that the total reserved quota should not exceed 50% under any circumstances.

Q16.Consider the following rights: 1. Right to form co-operative societies 2. Right against tapping of telephonic conversation 3. Right to obtain recognition of an association 4. Right to move out of the country How many of the above rights are protected under Article 19 of the Constitution of India?

Q17.With reference to Article 18 of the Constitution of India, consider the following statements: 1. It prohibits the state from conferring any title, including military or academic distinctions, on any person. 2. A citizen of India is prohibited from accepting any title from any foreign state. 3. The Supreme Court has ruled that National Awards like the Bharat Ratna are violative of Article 18. Which of the statements given above is/are NOT correct?

Q18.Consider the following statements regarding preventive detention in India: 1. The constitutional protection under Article 22 against preventive detention is available only to citizens of India. 2. The detention of a person cannot exceed three months unless an advisory board, consisting of High Court judges, reports sufficient cause for extended detention. 3. The Parliament has exclusive authority to make a law of preventive detention for reasons connected with the maintenance of public order. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q19.The Supreme Court, through various judgments, has expanded the scope of Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty). Consider the following rights: 1. Right to speedy trial 2. Right to information 3. Right to strike 4. Right to free education up to any level How many of the above have been declared as part of Article 21 by the Supreme Court?

Q20.With reference to the abolition of 'untouchability' under Article 17 of the Indian Constitution, consider the following statements: 1. The term 'untouchability' has been explicitly defined in the Constitution to prevent any ambiguity in its application. 2. The fundamental right guaranteed under Article 17 is available against private individuals. 3. The Mysore High Court held that Article 17 covers the social boycott of a few individuals. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q21.Consider the following statements regarding Article 23 of the Indian Constitution: 1. The protection against traffic in human beings and forced labour is available only against the actions of the State. 2. The State is permitted to impose compulsory service for public purposes, but it is bound to pay remuneration for such service. 3. The term 'forced labour' includes compelling a person to work for less than the minimum wage due to economic circumstances. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q22.With reference to the legislative framework for the 'Right Against Exploitation', consider the following Acts: 1. The Minimum Wages Act, 1948 2. The Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 3. The Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 4. The Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 How many of the above Acts were enacted to enforce the provisions of Articles 23 and 24 of the Constitution?

Q23.Consider the following statements: Statement I: Article 25 guarantees the rights of individuals to freedom of religion, while Article 26 guarantees the rights of religious denominations. Statement II: The rights guaranteed under both Article 25 and Article 26 are subject to public order, morality, health, and other provisions relating to the Fundamental Rights.

Q24.Consider the following pairs with respect to the Supreme Court's interpretation of a 'religious denomination' under Article 26: 1. Ramakrishna Mission : A religious denomination 2. Ananda Marga : A religious denomination 3. Aurobindo Society : Not a religious denomination How many of the pairs given above are correctly matched?

Q25.With reference to Article 28 of the Constitution, consider the following statements about religious instruction in educational institutions: 1. In an institution wholly maintained by the State, religious instruction is completely prohibited. 2. In an institution administered by the State but established under an endowment or trust, religious instruction is permitted. 3. In an institution recognised by the State, no person can be required to attend religious instruction without their consent (or their guardian's consent, if a minor). Which of the statements given above is/are NOT correct?

Q26.Consider the following statements regarding Cultural and Educational Rights under the Indian Constitution: 1. Article 29 grants protection only to religious and linguistic minorities. 2. The right under Article 30 to establish and administer educational institutions is confined only to minorities. 3. The term 'minority' is explicitly defined in Article 30 of the Constitution. Which of the statements given above is/are NOT correct?

Q27.Consider the following pairs: 1. Habeas Corpus : To have the body of 2. Mandamus : To forbid 3. Certiorari : By what authority 4. Quo-Warranto : To be certified How many of the pairs given above are correctly matched?

Q28.With reference to the writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and the High Courts in India, consider the following statements: 1. The Supreme Court can issue writs for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights only, whereas a High Court can issue them for any other purpose as well. 2. The territorial jurisdiction of the Supreme Court for issuing writs is wider than that of a High Court. 3. A remedy under Article 32 is discretionary, similar to the remedy under Article 226. 4. Both the Supreme Court and High Courts can issue the writ of quo-warranto against a person holding a private office. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q29.With reference to the writ of Mandamus, which of the following statements is/are correct? 1. It is a command issued to a public official to perform his official duties. 2. It can be issued against a private individual or body. 3. It can be issued against the President of India or the state governors. Select the correct answer using the code given below:

Q30.Given below are two statements: Statement I: The writ of Prohibition is issued by a higher court to a lower court or tribunal to prevent the latter from exceeding its jurisdiction, and it directs inactivity. Statement II: The writ of Certiorari is both preventive and curative, as it can be used to transfer a pending case or to quash an order already passed by a lower court or tribunal. Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?

Q31.Consider the following statements regarding the Right to Property in the Indian Constitution: 1. The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 abolished the Right to Property as a Fundamental Right. 2. The Right to Property is now a constitutional right under Article 300A in Part XII. 3. The Right to Property is considered a part of the basic structure of the Constitution. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q32.With reference to the powers of the Parliament concerning Fundamental Rights, consider the following statements: 1. Under Article 33, both Parliament and state legislatures are empowered to restrict the fundamental rights of armed forces personnel. 2. Under Article 34, Parliament can pass an Act of Indemnity to protect a government servant for acts done during the enforcement of martial law. 3. The expression 'martial law' is explicitly defined in Article 34 of the Constitution to guide Parliament's legislative power. How many of the statements given above are correct?

Q33.Consider the following statements regarding the implications of the Right to Property being a legal right instead of a Fundamental Right: 1. It can be curtailed or modified by an ordinary law of the Parliament without a constitutional amendment. 2. It protects private property against legislative actions but not against executive actions. 3. An aggrieved person can directly move the Supreme Court under Article 32 for its enforcement. Which of the statements given above is/are NOT correct?

Q34.Consider the following points, which are often cited in the critique of Fundamental Rights in the Indian Constitution: 1. They are subject to numerous exceptions, restrictions, and qualifications. 2. They primarily consist of political rights, largely omitting social and economic rights like the right to work. 3. They are considered sacrosanct and cannot be curtailed or abolished by the Parliament. 4. The inclusion of preventive detention is a feature shared by most major democratic constitutions globally. How many of the above points represent valid criticisms mentioned in constitutional analysis?

Q35.Given below are two statements: Statement I: The declaration of martial law in an area does not ipso facto result in the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. Statement II: The concept of martial law has been borrowed in India from the English common law and has not been explicitly defined in the Constitution. Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?

Q36.Consider the following statements regarding Martial Law and National Emergency in the Indian context: 1. Martial Law suspends the government and ordinary law courts, whereas a National Emergency does not. 2. A National Emergency can be imposed for the breakdown of law and order, while Martial Law is restricted to war, external aggression, or armed rebellion. 3. The Constitution has a specific and detailed provision for Martial Law, making it explicit. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q37.Consider the following pairs: 1. Article 17 : Abolition of titles 2. Article 21A : Right to elementary education 3. Article 24 : Prohibition of traffic in human beings and forced labour 4. Article 29 : Right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions How many of the pairs given above are correctly matched?

Q38.The Fundamental Rights are considered significant as they constitute the bedrock of the democratic system in India. In this context, how many of the following are valid reasons for their significance? 1. They check the absoluteness of the authority of the government. 2. They lay down the foundation stone of social equality and social justice. 3. They facilitate the establishment of rule of law in the country. 4. They strengthen the secular fabric of the Indian State.

Q39.Statement I: The Constitution of India, under Article 34, provides for the restriction of Fundamental Rights while martial law is in force in any area. Statement II: The concept of Martial Law is explicitly defined with detailed provisions in the Constitution of India.

Q40.With reference to the Fundamental Rights in the Indian Constitution, consider the following statements: 1. The Parliament is empowered to modify the application of Fundamental Rights for members of the armed forces. 2. The right to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights is itself a Fundamental Right. 3. The Right to Property is a Fundamental Right guaranteed under Article 31. Which of the statements given above is/are NOT correct?

Q41.In the context of the recent World Press Freedom Index report, the Indian government has cited its power to impose 'reasonable restrictions' on the freedom of speech and expression. According to Article 19(2) of the Constitution, on which of the following grounds can this freedom be restricted? 1. Sovereignty and integrity of India 2. Contempt of court 3. Preventing the spread of 'fake news' 4. Public order, decency or morality How many of the above grounds are explicitly mentioned in Article 19(2)?

Q42.Considering the ongoing debate on decriminalizing defamation in India, as highlighted by the Supreme Court's 2025 observations, analyze the following statements based on the principles of Fundamental Rights: 1. The argument that criminal defamation has a "chilling effect" on free speech directly invokes the protections guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution. 2. The Supreme Court's 2016 judgment in *Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India*, which upheld criminal defamation, justified it as a 'reasonable restriction' on free speech, a concept explicitly permitted by the Constitution for Fundamental Rights. 3. The assertion that the 'Right to Reputation' is a facet of the 'Right to Life' under Article 21 forms the primary constitutional basis for arguments *against* decriminalizing defamation. 4. Since Fundamental Rights are sacrosanct and permanent, any law like criminal defamation that curtails them is inherently unconstitutional. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q43.Consider the following statements regarding the nature of Fundamental Rights in the context of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA): 1. The debate around CAA's validity under Article 14 (Right to Equality) is pertinent because this right is guaranteed to all 'persons', not just citizens. 2. The justiciable nature of Fundamental Rights is what allows individuals and groups to petition the Supreme Court to test the constitutional validity of the CAA. 3. The Parliament passed the CAA by exercising its power to curtail Fundamental Rights through a constitutional amendment, as they are not sacrosanct. 4. Fundamental Rights are absolute, and therefore, any law like the CAA that creates a classification is inherently unconstitutional. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q44.Consider the following statements regarding the application of 'Constitutional Morality' in interpreting Fundamental Rights: 1. The decriminalization of consensual same-sex relations in *Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India* by invoking constitutional morality primarily upholds the principles of equality and dignity embedded in Articles 14 and 21. 2. The Supreme Court's ruling in the *Sabarimala* case, which allowed women's entry, prioritized the Fundamental Right to Equality (Article 14) over discriminatory religious customs, demonstrating constitutional morality overriding societal morality. 3. The establishment of the 'Basic Structure Doctrine' is an example of the judiciary using constitutional morality to place limitations on Parliament's power to amend Fundamental Rights, ensuring they are not rendered meaningless. How many of the above statements correctly illustrate the application of 'Constitutional Morality' to interpret and protect Fundamental Rights?

Q45.Consider the following statements regarding the relationship between Parliament's amending power and the judiciary's power of review, in light of the First Amendment and subsequent judicial interpretations: 1. The Supreme Court's ruling in the Shankari Prasad case (1951) interpreted the term 'law' in Article 13(2) to exclude constitutional amendments, thereby permitting Parliament to amend Fundamental Rights. 2. The First Amendment Act, 1951, introduced Article 31B and the Ninth Schedule, creating a mechanism to immunize certain laws from judicial review on the grounds of violating any Fundamental Right. 3. The I.R. Coelho case (2007) judgment established that any law placed in the Ninth Schedule after April 24, 1973, is subject to judicial review if it violates the 'basic structure' of the Constitution. 4. The Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) completely reversed the Shankari Prasad ruling by declaring that Parliament has no power to amend Fundamental Rights. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q46.Considering the recent Supreme Court hearing on the existence of Article 31C, analyze the following statements: 1. The 42nd Amendment Act, 1976, 'substituted' the original text of Article 31C to expand its protective scope to all Directive Principles of State Policy. 2. The Supreme Court's judgment in the Minerva Mills case (1980) invalidated the expansion of Article 31C made by the 42nd Amendment. 3. The 'doctrine of revival' is an argument suggesting that the original, pre-42nd Amendment version of Article 31C automatically came back into force after the Minerva Mills judgment. 4. An opposing argument contends that a 'substituted' provision, once invalidated, does not automatically revive its original form unless explicitly reinstated by the legislature. How many of the above statements accurately describe the legal complexities surrounding the current status of Article 31C?

Q47.Consider the following entities in the context of Article 12 of the Constitution and the recent Supreme Court ruling in S. Shobha vs. Muthoot Finance Ltd (2025): 1. A Non-Banking Financial Company (NBFC) regulated by the RBI. 2. The Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC). 3. A private university that receives significant government funding and performs educational functions. 4. A District Board responsible for local administration. Based on the 'function test' and the definition of 'State', how many of the above would typically fall within the meaning of 'State' for the purpose of enforcing Fundamental Rights?

Q48.Considering the recent Supreme Court reiteration that promotion is not a fundamental right, evaluate the following statements regarding the evolution of reservation in promotions in India: 1. The Indra Sawhney (1992) judgment conclusively established that Article 16(4) does not permit reservations in matters of promotion, treating it as an aspect of equality of opportunity under Article 16(1). 2. The 77th Amendment Act, 1995, was a direct legislative response to the Indra Sawhney case, inserting Article 16(4A) to empower the State to provide for reservation in promotions for SCs and STs. 3. The M. Nagaraj (2006) judgment, while upholding the validity of Article 16(4A), introduced the 'creamy layer' exclusion for SCs and STs in the context of promotional reservations. 4. The Jarnail Singh (2018) judgment overruled the M. Nagaraj verdict entirely, removing all pre-conditions for granting promotional quotas to SCs and STs. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q49.In the context of the Punjab and Haryana High Court quashing the Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Act, 2020, consider the following constitutional arguments that could be used to challenge such a law: 1. The law infringes upon the fundamental right to practise any profession or carry on any occupation under Article 19(1)(g) by restricting an employer's freedom to hire based on merit and suitability. 2. The law violates the principle of Article 16(2), which prohibits discrimination on the ground of 'residence' in respect of any employment under the State. 3. The law is beyond the legislative competence of the State, as Article 16(3) grants Parliament the exclusive power to prescribe residence as a condition for certain public employment. 4. The law creates an unreasonable classification and violates the principle of equality before the law and equal protection of laws enshrined in Article 14. How many of the above arguments are constitutionally valid grounds for challenging the domicile-based reservation in the private sector?

Q50.In light of the Supreme Court's 2024 ruling in the Jaseela Shaji vs. Union of India case, consider the following statements regarding the safeguards under Article 22 of the Constitution: 1. The ruling reinforces the detenu's right to make an effective representation by mandating the supply of all documents relied upon for detention. 2. The judgment effectively amends Article 22(5) by introducing a new constitutional requirement for documents to be in a language understood by the detenu. 3. The ruling nullifies the provision that allows the state to withhold facts considered against the public interest. 4. The emphasis on providing documents in an understandable language is an interpretation that operationalizes the pre-existing constitutional guarantee of being afforded an opportunity to make a representation. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q51.In light of the Supreme Court's recent emphasis on a stricter approach to custodial deaths, consider the following constitutional safeguards: 1. The right to live with human dignity and the right against inhuman treatment, as interpreted under Article 21. 2. The protection against self-incrimination under Article 20(3), which discourages the use of coercive interrogation methods to extort confessions. 3. The right to be produced before a magistrate within 24 hours of arrest under Article 22, which limits the duration of unmonitored police custody. 4. The right to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner, guaranteed under Article 22 for arrests under ordinary law. How many of the above statements represent constitutional provisions that are directly relevant to preventing custodial violence and ensuring the safety of a person in custody?

Q52.Consider the following statements regarding the 'test of reasonableness' for restrictions on fundamental rights, in light of the State of Madras vs V.G. Row case: 1. The 'test of reasonableness' established in the V.G. Row case is applicable only to restrictions concerning the right to form associations under Article 19(1)(c). 2. The Supreme Court held that the reasonableness of a restriction depends on factors like the nature of the right infringed and the proportionality of the restriction to the issue addressed. 3. The right to form associations under Article 19(1)(c) includes the fundamental right to have the association recognized by the State. 4. The principles from the V.G. Row case have influenced the judicial scrutiny of modern preventive detention laws like the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). How many of the above statements are correct?

Q53.With reference to the recent Allahabad High Court observations on religious conversions, consider the following statements regarding the interpretation of Article 25 of the Indian Constitution: 1. The Allahabad High Court recently opined that the right to 'propagate' under Article 25 of the Constitution does not include the right to convert another person to one's own religion. 2. The Supreme Court, in the Rev. Stainislaus vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (1977) case, established that the right to propagate one's religion includes the fundamental right to convert others. 3. According to the text of Article 25, the right to propagate religion is an absolute right, not subject to any restrictions. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q54.Considering the Supreme Court's recent judgment on the UP Madarsa Act, 2004, which distinguished between 'religious education' and 'religious instruction', evaluate the following statements in the context of Article 28 of the Indian Constitution: 1. The UP Madarsa Act was upheld because the institutions it governs are considered established under an endowment or trust, thus permitting religious instruction under Article 28(2). 2. The Supreme Court's ruling implies that providing education about different religions to promote communal harmony is permissible in state-aided institutions. 3. According to Article 28, a minor attending a state-recognized madrasa cannot be required to attend religious worship without the consent of their guardian. 4. The distinction made by the court means that while teaching the tenets of Islam is 'religious education', compelling students to perform specific rituals would be 'religious instruction'. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q55.Consider the following statements regarding the rights of minority educational institutions in light of the ongoing Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) case: 1. The right of minorities under Article 30 to establish and administer educational institutions is absolute and cannot be regulated by the state. 2. An educational institution established by a minority community loses its minority character if its administration is regulated by a statute passed by the legislature. 3. Minority educational institutions have the right to choose their governing body and appoint teaching staff, subject to eligibility conditions prescribed by the State. 4. The protection under Article 30 is confined only to religious or linguistic minorities and does not extend to any 'section of citizens' as under Article 29. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q56.In the context of the recent Bombay High Court ruling upholding a college's ban on hijabs, consider the following statements regarding the interplay between individual rights and the autonomy of educational institutions under the Constitution: 1. The right of a minority educational institution under Article 30 to administer itself includes the power to set a uniform dress code as a regulatory measure for discipline and academic standards. 2. The right under Article 29(2) guarantees that no citizen shall be denied admission on grounds of religion, which implicitly protects their right to wear religious attire post-admission against institutional rules. 3. The Supreme Court has clarified that the right conferred on minorities under Article 30 is to ensure equality with the majority, not to grant them a more advantageous position, thus subjecting them to general laws of the land related to welfare and public order. 4. The right to 'conserve' one's culture under Article 29 is an absolute right that overrides any administrative regulations, including uniform dress codes, imposed by an educational institution. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q57.Consider the following statements regarding the remedial powers of the Supreme Court, in light of the recent DMRC vs. DAMEPL curative petition case: 1. A curative petition is a judicial innovation to prevent a miscarriage of justice, whereas the power to issue writs under Article 32 is an explicitly guaranteed Fundamental Right. 2. The Supreme Court cannot refuse to exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 32, but the decision to entertain a curative petition is highly discretionary and reserved for rare cases. 3. The writ of certiorari is primarily preventive and curative for orders of lower courts or tribunals, while a curative petition is exclusively curative for the Supreme Court's own final judgments. 4. The objective of a curative petition, to rectify a grave miscarriage of justice, is functionally similar to the Supreme Court's power to issue a writ of certiorari for an 'error of law' by a lower body. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q58.With reference to the Supreme Court's verdict in the Newsclick case and the constitutional framework of Fundamental Rights, consider the following statements: 1. The Supreme Court's emphasis on providing written grounds for arrest directly enforces the procedural safeguards guaranteed under Article 22(1) of the Constitution. 2. The stringent bail provisions of the UAPA, which place a reverse burden of proof on the accused, exemplify the criticism that the Constitution confers arbitrary powers on the State through provisions for preventive detention. 3. The judicial doctrine of 'due process of law', applied in the Newsclick verdict, serves as a substantive check on the 'procedure established by law', a concept that was originally favored over 'due process' during the framing of the Constitution. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q59.The historical criticism that Fundamental Rights are difficult to enforce due to an expensive and complex judicial process has been a long-standing issue. In the context of recent judicial reforms aimed at creating a 'Fast, Fair, and Transparent Judiciary', consider the following statements: 1. The e-Courts project and the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG) directly address the criticism that the judicial process is too expensive and inaccessible for the common person. 2. The live-streaming of Constitutional Bench hearings helps counter the critique that the Constitution is a 'paradise for lawyers' by making judicial reasoning more accessible to the public. 3. The abolition of the Right to Property as a Fundamental Right in 1978 has been the primary factor in resolving the current crisis of massive case pendency mentioned in the 2025 report. 4. The institutional push for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) via the Mediation Act, 2023, directly tackles the problem of an overburdened formal court system, which has historically hindered the timely enforcement of rights. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q60.Consider the following pairs regarding restrictions on rights and their basis: 1. Restriction on freedom of speech for armed forces personnel : Article 33 of the Constitution 2. Deprivation of property without it being a Fundamental Right violation : Article 300A of the Constitution 3. Prolonged pre-trial detention being unconstitutional despite stringent bail laws like PMLA : Violation of Article 21 as interpreted by the Supreme Court How many of the above pairs are correctly matched?

Q61.Consider the following statements regarding the Right to Property in India, in light of the Supreme Court's judgment in the *Property Owners Association v State of Maharashtra Case (2024)*: 1. The 44th Amendment Act, 1978, which moved the Right to Property from a fundamental to a legal right under Article 300A, has been interpreted by the 2024 judgment to mean that any deprivation of property must strictly adhere to the 'authority of law'. 2. The 2024 judgment completely nullified Article 31C, preventing the state from enacting any law for the implementation of Article 39(b). 3. The court's new tests for resource qualification, requiring a resource to be both 'material' and 'belong to or serve the community', effectively overturn the broader interpretation from the *Ranganath Reddy* case. 4. The judgment implies that while the Right to Property is not a fundamental right, its protection under Article 300A cannot be arbitrarily overridden by a wide interpretation of Directive Principles like Article 39(b). How many of the above statements are correct?

Q62.Considering the ongoing debate in India regarding the 'Right to Be Forgotten' (RTBF), as highlighted by recent Supreme Court proceedings, analyze the following statements in the context of Fundamental Rights: 1. The judicial recognition of RTBF as an implicit component of the 'Right to Privacy' is primarily derived from the interpretation of Article 21 of the Constitution. 2. The challenge in implementing RTBF involves balancing it against the 'Right to Information', which is often considered an extension of the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19. 3. The inconsistent rulings by various High Courts on RTBF could be seen as undermining the principle of 'Equality before law' as enshrined in Article 14. 4. Individuals seeking the enforcement of RTBF are utilizing the 'Right to Constitutional Remedies' under Article 32 to approach the Supreme Court. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q63.Considering the lessons from the 1975 National Emergency, analyze the following statements regarding the safeguards introduced by the 44th Amendment Act, 1978: 1. It made the rights guaranteed by Articles 20 (protection in respect of conviction for offences) and 21 (protection of life and personal liberty) non-suspendable during a National Emergency. 2. It replaced the vague ground of 'internal disturbance' with 'armed rebellion' for the proclamation of a National Emergency. 3. It mandated that the President can proclaim an emergency only on the basis of a written recommendation from the Cabinet. 4. It completely removed the power of the Parliament to extend the duration of a National Emergency beyond one year. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q64.Considering the recent legal discussions around 'Personality Rights' sparked by AI developments, evaluate the following statements in the context of Indian Fundamental Rights: 1. The legal protection for personality rights in India is primarily derived from the Right to Life and Personal Liberty under Article 21. 2. The Right of Publicity, a key component of personality rights, is explicitly enumerated as a Fundamental Right in Part III of the Constitution. 3. The significance of Fundamental Rights in checking the absoluteness of authority, as stated in the static text, can be extended to protect individuals from the unauthorized commercial use of their persona by both state and private entities like AI companies. 4. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act (2023) is the first and only specific statute in India enacted to regulate personality rights in the digital domain. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q65.Considering the recent Supreme Court discussions on regulating online content and the constitutional framework for Fundamental Rights, analyze the following statements: 1. The judiciary can introduce new grounds for restricting free speech beyond those listed in Article 19(2) to address the unique challenges of the digital era. 2. The Information Technology Act, 2000, which governs online speech, derives its constitutional legitimacy from the reasonable restrictions permitted under Article 19(2). 3. The principle that Fundamental Rights 'check the absoluteness of the authority of the government' applies only to the executive and legislature, not to the judiciary's interpretations of these rights. 4. The freedom of the press, which is implicitly covered under Article 19(1)(a), is considered part of the 'bedrock of democratic system' and is therefore absolute. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q66.Consider the following statements regarding the constitutional implications of 'bulldozer justice', where properties of accused individuals are demolished: 1. The practice infringes upon the Right to Shelter, which the Supreme Court has interpreted as part of the Right to Life under Article 21. 2. It violates Article 300-A, as the 44th Amendment Act, 1978, while removing property as a fundamental right, still mandates deprivation of property only by 'authority of law'. 3. The selective application of such demolitions against certain communities can be challenged under Article 14, which guarantees equality before the law. 4. The action represents a 'colourable exercise of power', subverting the separation of powers by allowing the executive to impose punishment. How many of the above statements are correct arguments against this practice?

Q67.In the context of the 'bulldozer justice' controversy, which of the following statements regarding Fundamental Rights and legal procedures is NOT correct?

Q68.Match the constitutional articles (List I) with their most relevant interpretation in the context of the 'bulldozer justice' debate (List II). List I (Article) A. Article 14 B. Article 21 C. Article 32 D. Article 300-A List II (Interpretation/Implication) 1. Guarantees the right to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights, acting as a primary safeguard against arbitrary state action. 2. Prohibits deprivation of property except by 'authority of law', requiring a fair legal procedure. 3. Interpreted to include the Right to Shelter, making sudden punitive evictions a violation of the Right to Life. 4. Ensures equal protection of the laws, making selective targeting of properties based on community or dissent a violation.

Q69.With reference to the practice of 'Bulldozer Justice' and its constitutional implications, consider the following statements: 1. The practice infringes upon the Right to Shelter, which the Supreme Court has interpreted as an integral part of the Right to Life under Article 21. 2. It violates the principle of equality under Article 14 when authorities selectively target properties of specific communities or political dissenters. 3. The act of demolition without a fair judicial process contravenes Article 300-A, which mandates that no person shall be deprived of their property except by the authority of law. How many of the above statements are correct?

Q70.Consider the following pairs in the context of the constitutional concerns raised by 'Bulldozer Justice': Concept : Implication 1. Rule of Law : Subverting the sequence of Allegation, Investigation, Adjudication, and Punishment. 2. Separation of Powers : Executive usurping judicial function by acting as judge, jury, and executioner. 3. Colourable Exercise of Power : Using municipal laws for demolition as a pretext for punishing an accused without trial. 4. Collective Punishment : Infringing upon the rights of innocent family members who co-own or reside in the property. How many of the above pairs are correctly matched?

Q71.In the context of punitive demolitions and the Right to Property, which of the following statements is NOT correct? 1. The Right to Property was deleted from the list of Fundamental Rights and made a legal right by the 44th Amendment Act, 1978. 2. Currently, the Right to Property is protected under Article 300-A in Part XII of the Constitution. 3. Since the Right to Property is only a legal right and not a fundamental right, the state can deprive a person of their property through executive action without legislative backing. 4. The Right to Shelter, often affected by demolitions, is considered a fundamental right as it is judicially interpreted to be part of the Right to Life under Article 21.