Judiciary - Questlink IAS

Q.1. Supreme Court in India was established- 42nd B.P.S.C. (Pre) 1997

(a) By an Act of Parliament in 1950

(b) Under Indian Independence Act, 1947

(d) By the Indian Constitution

Ans: (d)

Exp:

The Supreme Court of India was established by the Indian Constitution, not by an Act of Parliament or the Indian Independence Act.
Article 124 of the Constitution provides for its establishment by stating that “there shall be a Supreme Court of India.”
The Constitution came into force on 26 January 1950, making India a Sovereign Democratic Republic.
The Supreme Court was formally inaugurated on 28 January 1950, two days after the Constitution came into force.
The inauguration took place in the Chamber of Princes in the old Parliament building.
Before the Supreme Court, the Federal Court of India functioned from the same place from 1937 to 1950.
In 1958, the Supreme Court shifted to its present building at Tilak Marg, New Delhi.
Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer.

Q.2. The power to increase the number of Judges in the Supreme Court of India is vested in – I.A.S. (Pre) 2014, 44th B.P.S.C. (Pre) 2000

(a) The President of India

(b) The Parliament

(d) The Law Commission

Ans: (b)

Exp:

The power to increase the number of judges in the Supreme Court of India is vested in Parliament.
Under Article 124(1) of the Constitution, the Supreme Court originally consisted of the Chief Justice of India and seven other judges.
Article 124(1) also makes it clear that Parliament may increase the number of Supreme Court judges by law.
Therefore, neither the President, nor the Chief Justice of India, nor the Law Commission can independently increase the sanctioned strength of Supreme Court judges.
This power has been exercised through amendments to the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956.
The sanctioned strength has increased over time to meet India’s growing judicial workload — from 10 judges excluding the CJI in 1956, to 13 in 1960, 17 in 1977, 25 in 1986, and 30 in 2009.
The last increase in the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court was made in 2019, when it was raised from 31 to 34 judges, including the Chief Justice of India.
Recently, the government approved the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Bill, 2026, seeking to amend the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956, to increase the sanctioned strength of the Court by four — from 34 to 38 judges, including the Chief Justice of India.
Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer.

Q3. The current sanctioned strength of Judges of Supreme Court of India is – 38th B.P.S.C. (Pre) 1992 U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2015

(a) 20

(b) 25

(d) 31

Ans:

Exp:

Under Article 124(1) of the Constitution, the Supreme Court originally consisted of the Chief Justice of India and seven other judges.
Article 124(1) also makes it clear that Parliament may increase the number of Supreme Court judges by law.
This power has been exercised through amendments to the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956.
The sanctioned strength has increased over time to meet India’s growing judicial workload — from 10 judges excluding the CJI in 1956, to 13 in 1960, 17 in 1977, 25 in 1986, and 30 in 2009.
The last increase in the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court was made in 2019, when it was raised from 31 to 34 judges, including the Chief Justice of India.
Recently, the government approved the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Bill, 2026, seeking to amend the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956, to increase the sanctioned strength of the Court by four — from 34(33+1) to 38 judges(37+1), including the Chief Justice of India.
Therefore, none of the given options is correct.

Q4. Who appoints the Judges of the Supreme Court of India ? 63rd B. P.S.C. (Pre) 2017

(a) The Prime Minister

(b) The President

(d) The Ombudsman

(e) None of the above / more than one of the above

Ans: (b)

Exp:

The President of India appoints the Judges of the Supreme Court.
The process usually begins when the Chief Justice of India and the Collegium recommend names for appointment.
The recommendation is then processed through the Union Ministry of Law and Justice.
The proposal is placed before the government for approval and is finally sent to the President.
After approval, the President formally appoints the judge to the Supreme Court.
Thus, while the CJI/Collegium plays an important role in recommending names, the actual constitutional authority to appoint Supreme Court judges is the President of India.
Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer.

Q5. The resignation letter by a Judge of Supreme Court is addressed to : U.P.P.C.S. (Pre.) 2023 U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2014

(a) The President

(b) The Prime Minister

(d) The senior most Judge of Supreme Court

Ans: (a)

Exp:

Under Article 124(2) of the Constitution, a Judge of the Supreme Court holds office until attaining the age of 65 years.
However, a Supreme Court Judge may resign before completing the tenure.
For resignation, the Judge must submit a written resignation letter under his hand. This resignation letter is addressed to the President of India.
Article 124 also provides that a Supreme Court Judge may be removed only by an order of the President after an address by both Houses of Parliament, supported by the required special majority, on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity.
Therefore, the resignation letter of a Supreme Court Judge is addressed to the President of India.
Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer.

Q6. A Judge of the Supreme Court may resign his office by writing to ? 64th B.P.C.S. (Pre) 2018

(a) The President

(b) The Prime Minister

(d) The Attorney General of India

(e) None of the above/More than one of the above

Ans: (a)

Exp:

Under Article 124(2) of the Constitution, a Judge of the Supreme Court holds office until attaining the age of 65 years.
However, a Supreme Court Judge may resign before completing the tenure.
For resignation, the Judge must submit a written resignation letter under his hand. This resignation letter is addressed to the President of India.
Article 124 also provides that a Supreme Court Judge may be removed only by an order of the President after an address by both Houses of Parliament, supported by the required special majority, on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity.
Therefore, both resignation and removal are constitutionally linked to the office of the President.
Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer.

Q7. Consider the following statements : I.A.S. (Pre) 2019

1. The motion to impeach a Judge of the Supreme court of India cannot be rejected by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha as per the Judges (inquiry) Act, 1968.

2. The Constitution of India defines and gives details of what constitutes 'incapacity and proved misbehavior of the Judges of the Supreme Court of India.

3. The details of the process of impeachment of the Judges of the Supreme Court of India are given in the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.

4. If the motion for the impeachment of a judge is taken up for voting, the law requires the motion to be backed by each House of the Parliament and supported by a majority of total membership of that House and by not less than two-thirds of total members of that House present and voting.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 and 2

(b) 3 only

(d) 1, 3 and 4

Ans: (c)

Exp:

A Judge of the Supreme Court can be removed only on the grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity.
Under Article 124(4), removal requires an order of the President after an address by each House of Parliament.
This address must be supported by a majority of the total membership of that House and by not less than two-thirds of the members present and voting.
The Constitution mentions the grounds of removal, but it does not define in detail what constitutes “proved misbehaviour” or “incapacity”; hence, Statement 2 is incorrect.
The detailed procedure for investigation and proof of misbehaviour or incapacity is provided in the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968; hence, Statement 3 is correct.
Under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, a removal motion must be signed by at least 100 Lok Sabha members or 50 Rajya Sabha members.
After considering the material and consulting persons if necessary, the Speaker or Chairman may either admit or refuse to admit the motion; hence, Statement 1 is incorrect.
Therefore, if the motion is taken up for voting, it must be passed by the required special majority in each House of Parliament; hence, Statement 4 is correct.
Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.

Q8. The age of retirement in the Supreme Court is- U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 1990

(a) 62 Years

(b) 63 Years

(d) 65 Years

Ans: (d)

Exp:

Under Article 124(2) of the Constitution, every Judge of the Supreme Court is appointed by the President of India by warrant under his hand and seal.
Article 124(2) further provides that a Supreme Court Judge holds office until attaining the age of 65 years.
In contrast, under Article 217(1), a Judge of a High Court is also appointed by the President, but holds office until attaining the age of 62 years.
Thus, the retirement age of a Supreme Court Judge is 65 years, while that of a High Court Judge is 62 years.
Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer.

Q9. What is the retirement age of the Judges of the Supreme Court ? 63rd B. P.S.C. (Pre) 2017

(a) 60 years

(b) 62 years

(d) 70 years

(e) None of the above / more than one of the above

Ans: (c)

Exp:

Under Article 124(2) of the Constitution, every Judge of the Supreme Court is appointed by the President of India by warrant under his hand and seal.
Article 124(2) further provides that a Supreme Court Judge holds office until attaining the age of 65 years.
In contrast, under Article 217(1), a Judge of a High Court is also appointed by the President, but holds office until attaining the age of 62 years.
Thus, the retirement age of a Supreme Court Judge is 65 years, while that of a High Court Judge is 62 years.
Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.

Q10. Salaries of the Judges of the Supreme Court are determined by – U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2008

(a) Pay Commission appointed by the President.

(b) Law Commission

(d) Council of Ministers

Ans: (c)

Exp:

Under Article 125(1) of the Constitution, the salaries of the Judges of the Supreme Court are determined by Parliament by law.
Until Parliament makes such a law, salaries are paid as specified in the Second Schedule of the Constitution.
Article 125(2) also provides that privileges, allowances, leave and pension rights of Supreme Court Judges are determined by or under a law made by Parliament.
However, after appointment, a Judge’s privileges, allowances, leave rights or pension rights cannot be varied to his disadvantage.
In this regard, Parliament has enacted laws such as the Supreme Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act, 1958.
Further, the High Court and Supreme Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Amendment Act, 2021 amended the Supreme Court Judges Act, 1958 and the High Court Judges Act, 1954, particularly to clarify entitlement to additional pension or family pension.
Thus, the constitutional authority to determine the salaries and service conditions of Supreme Court Judges is Parliament, not the Pay Commission, Law Commission or Council of Ministers.
Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.

Q11. What is the provision to safeguard the autonomy of the Supreme Court of India? I.A.S. (Pre) 2012

1. While appointing the Judges of the Supreme Court, the President of India has to consult the Chief Justice of India.

2. The Judges of the Supreme Court can be removed by the Chief Justice of India only.

3. The salaries of the Judges are charged on the Consolidated Fund of India to which the Legislature does not have to vote.

4. All appointments of officers and staffs of the Supreme Court of India are made by the Government only after consulting the Chief Justice of India

Which of the statement(s) given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 and 3 only

(b) 3 and 4 only

(d) 1, 2, 3 and 4

Ans: (a)

Exp:

The autonomy of the Supreme Court is protected through constitutional safeguards relating to appointment, removal, salaries and administration.
Under Article 124(2), Judges of the Supreme Court are appointed by the President after consultation with judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts as deemed necessary.
In practice, judicial appointments are made through the Collegium System, which evolved through the Three Judges Cases and gives primacy to the judiciary in appointments.
Therefore, consultation with the Chief Justice of India in appointment of Supreme Court judges acts as a safeguard for judicial independence; hence, Statement 1 is correct.
A Judge of the Supreme Court cannot be removed by the Chief Justice of India. Under Article 124(4), removal is possible only by an order of the President after an address by both Houses of Parliament with the required special majority; hence, Statement 2 is incorrect.
Under Article 112(3), the salaries, allowances and pensions of Supreme Court judges are charged on the Consolidated Fund of India, so they are not subject to annual voting by the Legislature; hence, Statement 3 is correct.
Under Article 146, appointments of officers and servants of the Supreme Court are made by the Chief Justice of India or by another judge/officer authorised by him, not by the Government only after consulting the CJI; hence, Statement 4 is incorrect.
Therefore, only Statements 1 and 3 are correct.
Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer.

Q12. Consider the following statements: I.A.S. (Pre) 2005

1. The Parliament cannot enlarge the Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India as its Jurisdiction is limited to that conferred by the Constitution.

2. The officers and servants of the Supreme Court and High Courts are appointed by the concerned Chief Justice, and the administrative expenses are charged on the Consolidated Fund of India.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct ?

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 only

(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Ans: (d)

Exp:

Under Article 138, Parliament can enlarge the jurisdiction and powers of the Supreme Court by law with respect to matters in the Union List.
The Supreme Court may also get further jurisdiction over other matters through a special agreement between the Government of India and a State Government, if Parliament provides for it by law.
Therefore, the statement that Parliament cannot enlarge the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is incorrect.
Under Article 146, the officers and servants of the Supreme Court are appointed by the Chief Justice of India or by a judge/officer authorised by him.
The administrative expenses of the Supreme Court are charged on the Consolidated Fund of India.
Under Article 229, the officers and servants of a High Court are appointed by the Chief Justice of that High Court or by a judge/officer authorised by him.
However, the administrative expenses of a High Court are charged on the Consolidated Fund of the State, not the Consolidated Fund of India.
Hence, Statement 1 is incorrect and Statement 2 is also incorrect.
Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer.

Q13. The Judges of the Supreme Court, after retirement, are permitted to carry on practice before – U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 1997

(a) Supreme Court only

(b) High Courts only

(d) None of the Courts

Ans: (d)

Exp:

Under Article 124(7) of the Constitution, a person who has held office as a Judge of the Supreme Court is prohibited from pleading or acting in any court or before any authority within India.
This restriction applies after retirement also.
Therefore, a retired Supreme Court Judge cannot practise before the Supreme Court, High Courts, or any other court or authority in India.
Hence, retired Supreme Court Judges are not permitted to carry on legal practice before any court.
Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer.

Q14. Acting Chief Justice of India is appointed by the – U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2000

(a) Chief Justice of India

(b) Chief Justice of India with previous consent of the President

(d) President on consultation with the Chief Justice of India

Ans: (c)

Exp:

Under Article 126 of the Constitution, an Acting Chief Justice of India is appointed when the office of the Chief Justice of India is vacant.
An Acting Chief Justice may also be appointed when the Chief Justice of India is unable to perform the duties of office due to absence or any other reason.
In such a situation, the duties of the office are performed by another Judge of the Supreme Court.
That Judge is appointed for this purpose by the President of India.
Therefore, the Acting Chief Justice of India is appointed by the President, not by the Chief Justice of India.
Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.

Q15. Ad hoc Judges are appointed in the Supreme Court when– I.A.S. (Pre) 2000

(a) Some Judges go on long leave.

(b) No one is available for permanent appointment.

(d) There is no quorum of the Judges available to hold.

Ans: (d)

Exp:

Under Article 127 of the Constitution, ad hoc Judges may be appointed in the Supreme Court when there is no quorum of judges available to hold or continue any session of the Court.
In such a situation, the Chief Justice of India may request the attendance of a qualified High Court Judge as an ad hoc Judge.
This can be done only with the previous consent of the President.
The Chief Justice of India must also consult the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court before making such a request.
The High Court Judge so designated attends the sittings of the Supreme Court for the required period.
While serving as an ad hoc Judge, he has the same jurisdiction, powers, privileges and duties as a Judge of the Supreme Court.
Therefore, ad hoc Judges are appointed in the Supreme Court when there is no quorum of judges available to hold or continue a session.
Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer.

Q16. Consider the following statements about the collegium system : 69th B.P.S.C. (Pre) 2023

1. The Supreme Court collegium is a five-member body, which is headed by the incumbent Chief Justice of India (CJI) and comprises four other seniormost Judges of the Court at that time.

2. The Parliament by law has evolved the collegium system.

3. The Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts are appointed only through the collegium system.

4. The collegium system was introduced in the year 1993 by Justice P. N. Bhagwati in the landmark First Judges Case.

Which of the above statements is/are correct?

(a) Only 1

(b) 1 and 2

(d) 1 and 3

Ans: (d)

The collegium system is used for the appointment and transfer of judges in the higher judiciary, that is, the Supreme Court and High Courts.
The Supreme Court collegium is a five-member body headed by the incumbent Chief Justice of India and includes the four other senior-most judges of the Supreme Court. Therefore, statement 1 is correct.
High Court collegiums are led by the Chief Justice of the High Court and include the two other senior-most judges of that court.
The government may seek clarifications on collegium recommendations, but if the collegium reiterates a name, the government is bound to approve it.
The collegium system is not mentioned in the Constitution and was not created by a law made by Parliament. It evolved through Supreme Court judgments, popularly known as the Judges Cases. Therefore, statement 2 is incorrect.
Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts are appointed through the collegium system, although the formal appointment is made by the President. Therefore, statement 3 is correct.
The collegium system was not introduced in the First Judges Case. It evolved mainly through the Second Judges Case in 1993, which gave primacy to the judiciary in judicial appointments. Therefore, statement 4 is incorrect.
Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer.

Q17. Ad hoc Judges are appointed in the Supreme Court when– I.A.S. (Pre) 2000

(a) Some Judges go on long leave.

(b) No one is available for permanent appointment.

(d) There is no quorum of the Judges available to hold.

Ans. (d)

Exp:

Under Article 127 of the Constitution, ad hoc Judges may be appointed in the Supreme Court when there is no quorum of judges available to hold or continue any session of the Court.
In such a situation, the Chief Justice of India may request the attendance of a qualified High Court Judge as an ad hoc Judge.
This request must be made in writing and only with the previous consent of the President.
The Chief Justice of India must also consult the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court before making such a request.
The High Court Judge so designated attends the sittings of the Supreme Court for the required period.
While serving as an ad hoc Judge, he has the same jurisdiction, powers, privileges and duties as a Judge of the Supreme Court.
Therefore, ad hoc Judges are appointed in the Supreme Court when there is no quorum of judges available to hold or continue a session.
Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer.

Q18. The Indian Constitution provides for the appointment of “Ad hoc Judges” in– U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2004

(a) Supreme Court

(b) High Courts

(d) All the above

Ans: (a)

Exp:

The Indian Constitution provides for the appointment of Ad hoc Judges in the Supreme Court under Article 127.
Ad hoc Judges may be appointed when there is no quorum of judges available to hold or continue any session of the Supreme Court.
In such a situation, the Chief Justice of India may request a qualified High Court Judge to attend the sittings of the Supreme Court as an ad hoc Judge.
This can be done only with the previous consent of the President and after consultation with the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court.
The Judge so appointed has the same jurisdiction, powers, privileges and duties as a Judge of the Supreme Court during that period.
Therefore, the Constitution specifically provides for the appointment of Ad hoc Judges in the Supreme Court.
Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer.

Q19. With reference to the Indian judiciary, consider the following statements : I.A.S. (Pre) 2021

1. Any retired judge of the Supreme Court of India can be called back to sit and act as a Supreme Court judge by the Chief Justice of India with prior permission of the President of India.

2. A High Court in India has the power to review its own judgement as the Supreme Court does.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 only

(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Ans: (c)

Exp:

Under Article 128 of the Constitution, the Chief Justice of India may request a retired judge to sit and act as a Judge of the Supreme Court.
This can be done only with the previous consent of the President.
Such a request may be made to a person who has served as a Judge of the Supreme Court, Federal Court, or a High Court Judge duly qualified for appointment as a Supreme Court Judge.
The retired judge must also give his consent to sit and act as a Judge of the Supreme Court.
While sitting and acting, such a judge has the same jurisdiction, powers and privileges as a Judge of the Supreme Court, but is not otherwise deemed to be a permanent Judge of that Court.
Therefore, statement 1 is correct.
Under Article 215, every High Court is a court of record and has all powers of such a court, including the power to punish for contempt of itself.
As a court of record, a High Court also has the power to review its own judgments, similar to the Supreme Court.
Therefore, statement 2 is correct.
Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.

Q20. The minimum number of Judges of the Supreme Court required for hearing any case involving interpretation of the Constitution is – U.P.P.C.S.(Pre) 2012

(a) Ten

(b) Nine

(d) Five

Ans: (d)

Exp:

Under Article 145(3) of the Constitution, a minimum of five judges of the Supreme Court must sit to decide any case involving a substantial question of law relating to the interpretation of the Constitution.
The same minimum strength of five judges is also required for hearing a reference made by the President under Article 143.
Such a Bench is generally known as a Constitution Bench.
If a smaller Bench finds that a case involves a substantial constitutional question, it must refer that question to a Bench of at least five judges.
Judgments of the Supreme Court are delivered in open court and require the concurrence of the majority of judges present at the hearing.
Therefore, the minimum number of judges required is five.
Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer.

Q21. The minimum number of Supreme Court Judges who can hear a case involving a substantial question of law as to the Interpretation of the Constitution is – U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2012

(a) Five

(b) Seven

(d) Thirteen

Ans: (a)

Exp:

Under Article 145(3) of the Constitution, at least five judges of the Supreme Court must sit to decide a case involving a substantial question of law relating to the interpretation of the Constitution.
Such a Bench is commonly known as a Constitution Bench.
The same minimum strength of five judges is also required for hearing a Presidential reference under Article 143.
If a smaller Bench finds that a case involves a substantial constitutional question, it must refer the matter to a Bench of at least five judges.
Therefore, the minimum number of Supreme Court judges required in such cases is five.
Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer.

Q22. The power of the Supreme Court of India to decide disputes between the Centre and the State falls under its– I.A.S. (Pre) 1996, 2014

(a) Advisory jurisdiction

(b) Appellate jurisdiction

(d) Constitutional jurisdiction

Ans: (c)

Exp:

Under Article 131 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in certain federal disputes.
Original jurisdiction means that such disputes can be filed directly before the Supreme Court, without going first to any lower court.
This jurisdiction applies to disputes between the Government of India and one or more States.
It also applies to disputes between the Government of India and any State or States on one side and one or more other States on the other side.
It further applies to disputes between two or more States.
Such disputes must involve a question of law or fact on which the existence or extent of a legal right depends.
Therefore, disputes between the Centre and the State fall under the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction.
Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.

Q23. The power of the Supreme Court of India to decide disputes between the Centre and the State falls under its - 70th B.P.S.C Re-Exam 2024

(a) Appellate jurisdiction

(b) Original jurisdiction

(d) Constitutional jurisdiction

Ans: (b)

Exp:

Under Article 131 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in disputes involving the Centre and States.
Original jurisdiction means that such disputes can be brought directly before the Supreme Court.
This jurisdiction covers disputes between the Government of India and one or more States.
It also covers disputes between the Government of India and one or more States on one side and one or more other States on the other side.
It further includes disputes between two or more States.
Such disputes must involve a question of law or fact on which the existence or extent of a legal right depends.
Therefore, the power of the Supreme Court to decide disputes between the Centre and the State falls under its original jurisdiction.
Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer.

Q24. Which of the following are included in the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court? I.A.S. (Pre) 2012

1. A dispute between the Government of India and one or more States.

2. A dispute regarding elections to either House of the Parliament or that of Legislature of a state.

3. A dispute between the Government of India and a Union Territory.

4. A dispute between two or more States.

Select the correct answer using the codes given below:

(a) 1 and 2

(b) 2 and 3

(d) 3 and 4

Ans: (c)

Exp:

Under Article 131 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in certain federal disputes.
It includes disputes between the Government of India and one or more States. Therefore, statement 1 is correct.
Disputes regarding elections to either House of Parliament or the Legislature of a State are dealt with under election law, not under the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Therefore, statement 2 is incorrect.
A dispute between the Government of India and a Union Territory is not covered under Article 131, as the provision specifically refers to disputes involving the Government of India and States, or disputes between States. Therefore, statement 3 is incorrect.
Article 131 also includes disputes between two or more States, if the dispute involves a question of legal right. Therefore, statement 4 is correct.
Hence, only statements 1 and 4 are correct.
Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.

Q25. Which of the following statements is not true about the power of Supreme Court of India? U.P. P.C.S. (Mains) 2017

(a) It has the exclusive power to issue writs to protect the fundamental rights of the People.

(b) It has original and exclusive jurisdiction in intergovernmental disputes.

(d) It has power to review its own judgment or order.

Ans: (a)

Exp:

Under Article 32, the Supreme Court has the power to issue directions, orders or writs for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.
These writs include habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari.
However, this writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is not exclusive.
Under Article 226, High Courts also have the power to issue writs for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights and for any other purpose.
Therefore, statement (a) is not true, because the Supreme Court does not have exclusive power to issue writs.
Statement (b) is true, as the Supreme Court has original and exclusive jurisdiction in intergovernmental disputes under Article 131.
Statement (c) is true, as the Supreme Court has advisory jurisdiction under Article 143 on questions of law or fact referred by the President.
Statement (d) is true, as the Supreme Court has the power to review its own judgment or order under Article 137.
Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer.

Q26. The Supreme Court of India is a ‘Court of Record.’ It implies that – U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2008

(a) It has to keep a record of its decisions

(b) All its decisions have evidentiary value and cannot be questioned in any court.

(d) No appeal can be made against its decisions.

Ans: (b)

Exp:

Under Article 129 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court of India is declared to be a Court of Record.
A Court of Record means that its judgments, proceedings and acts are recorded for permanent memory and testimony.
The records of such a court have evidentiary value and are accepted as authoritative.
These records cannot be questioned when produced before any court.
A Court of Record also has the power to punish for contempt of itself.
Therefore, the Supreme Court being a Court of Record mainly implies that its decisions have evidentiary value and cannot be questioned in any court.
Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer.

Q.27. Which of the following Courts in India is/are known as the Court (s) of Record? U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2008

(a) The High Courts only

(b) The Supreme Court only

(d) The District Courts

Ans. (c)

Exp:

Under Article 129 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court is a Court of Record.
Under Article 215, every High Court is also a Court of Record.
A Court of Record means that its judgments, proceedings and acts are recorded and have evidentiary value.
The records of such courts are treated as authoritative and cannot be questioned when produced before any court.
Both the Supreme Court and High Courts also have the power to punish for contempt of themselves.
District Courts are not declared as Courts of Record under the Constitution.
Therefore, both the High Courts and the Supreme Court are known as Courts of Record.
Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.

Q28. The Supreme Court holds its meetings in New Delhi, but it can meet elsewhere – U.P.P.C.S. (Spl) (Mains) 2008

(a) With the approval of President.

(b) If the majority of Judges of Supreme Court so decide.

(d) On the request of State Legislature.

Ans. (a)

Exp:

Under Article 130 of the Constitution, the seat of the Supreme Court is in Delhi.
However, the Supreme Court may also sit at such other place or places as may be appointed from time to time.
Such appointment is made by the Chief Justice of India.
The Chief Justice of India can appoint another place for the sitting of the Supreme Court only with the approval of the President.
It does not require the approval of Parliament, the majority of Supreme Court judges, or the request of a State Legislature.
Therefore, the Supreme Court can meet outside Delhi with the approval of the President.
Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer.

Q29. In which of the following cases, the Supreme Court of India enunciated the ‘Doctrine of Basic Structure’? U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2012

(a) Golaknath

(b) A.K. Gopalan

(d) Menka Gandhi

Ans: (c)

Exp:

The Doctrine of Basic Structure was enunciated by the Supreme Court in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, 1973. It was decided by a 13-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court.
The Court held by a 7:6 majority that Parliament has wide powers to amend the Constitution, but it cannot alter or destroy the basic structure of the Constitution.
The doctrine is used as a form of judicial review to test the validity of constitutional amendments. If an amendment damages or destroys the basic features of the Constitution, it can be declared unconstitutional.
Some basic features identified by the Court include judicial review, rule of law, federalism, democratic republic structure, and later, judicial independence.
The doctrine acts as a check on unlimited parliamentary power and protects the core values of the Constitution.
It has been criticised because it is not expressly mentioned in the text of the Constitution, but it remains a major constitutional principle in India.
Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.

Q30. Which one of the following cases propounded the concept of ‘Basic structure’ of the Indian Constitution?

(a) Indira Sahni Case

(b) Shankari Prasad’s Case

(d) None of the above

Ans: (d)

Exp:

The concept of Basic Structure of the Indian Constitution was propounded in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, 1973.
In this case, a 13-judge Constitution Bench held that Parliament can amend the Constitution, but it cannot destroy or alter its basic structure.
Since Kesavananda Bharati case is not given in the options, the correct answer is None of the above.
Indra Sawhney case dealt mainly with reservation and OBC quota.
Shankari Prasad case upheld Parliament’s power to amend Fundamental Rights.
Rudal Shah case is related to compensation for illegal detention under Article 32.
Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer.

Q31. Consider the following statements: I.A.S. (Pre) 2022

1. Pursuant to the report of H.N. Sanyal Committee, the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was passed.

2. The Constitution of India empowers the Supreme Court and the High Courts to punish for contempt of themselves.

3. The Constitution of India defines Civil Contempt and Criminal Contempt.

4. In India, the Parliament is vested with the powers to make laws on Contempt of Court. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 and 2 only

(b) 1, 2 and 4

(d) 3 only

Ans: (b)

Exp:

A committee was set up in 1961 under the chairmanship of H.N. Sanyal, then Additional Solicitor General, to examine the law and issues relating to contempt of court in India and abroad. Therefore, statement 1 is correct.
Under Article 129 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court is a court of record and has all the powers of such a court, including the power to punish for contempt of itself. Therefore, statement 2 is correct.
Similarly, under Article 215, every High Court is a court of record with the power to punish for contempt.
The Constitution does not define civil contempt or criminal contempt; these definitions are provided under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Therefore, statement 3 is incorrect.
Under Article 142 of the Constitution, Parliament is empowered to make laws for enforcing decrees, orders, and punishments for contempt of court, giving it legislative authority over contempt of court. Therefore, statement 4 is correct.
Therefore, the correct option is (b).

Q32. The second largest bench Constituted by the Supreme Court till date was in the – U.P.P.C.S. (Spl) (Mains) 2004

(a) Golaknath Case

(b) Minerva Mills Case

(d) T.M.A. Pai Foundation Case

Ans. (a)

Exp:

Golaknath Case (1967): Golaknath v. State of Punjab ruled, by a 6:5 majority, that Parliament cannot amend or curtail Fundamental Rights; heard by an 11-judge Constitution Bench.
Minerva Mills Case (1980): Strengthened the Basic Structure doctrine and struck down parts of the 42nd Amendment; heard by a 5-judge Constitution Bench.
Bank Nationalisation Case (1970): R.C. Cooper v. Union of India struck down the nationalisation of 14 major private banks for violating Article 31(2); heard by an 11-judge Constitution Bench.
T.M.A. Pai Foundation Case (2002): Defined autonomy of private and minority educational institutions; heard by an 11-judge Constitution Bench.
Largest Bench: The largest bench of the Supreme Court was in the Kesavananda Bharati Case (1973), which had 13 judges and laid down the Basic Structure doctrine of the Constitution.
Therefore, the correct option is (a).

Q33. In which of the following cases, Supreme Court held that? “Fundamental Rights enable a man to chalk out his life in the manner he likes best “? U.P.P.C.S.(Pre) 2012

(a) Indira Gandhi Vs. Raj Narain

(b) Golaknath Vs. The State of Punjab

(d) Azhar Vs. Municipal Corporation

Ans. (b)

Exp:

I.C. Golak Nath and Ors. vs State of Punjab and Anr. (1967) is a landmark case where the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of Fundamental Rights.
The Court observed that “Fundamental Rights enable a man to chalk out his life in the manner he likes best,” highlighting their role in protecting individual liberty.
The court observed, they are modern natural rights, essential for the development of human personality, and also safeguard the rights of minorities and disadvantaged communities.
Therefore, the correct option is (b).

Q34. Consider the following statements and state which one of them is correct? U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2010, 2013

(a) Supreme Court of India has only Original Jurisdiction.

(b) It has only Original and Appellate Jurisdiction.

(d) It has Original, Appellate as well as Advisory Jurisdiction

Ans. (d)

Exp:

Under Article 131 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court of India is vested with original jurisdiction in disputes between the Government of India and one or more States, between the Government of India and some States on one side and other States on the other, and between two or more States if the dispute involves a question of law or fact affecting legal rights.
Under Articles 132 to 136, the Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters from High Courts, including the power to hear appeals involving substantial questions of law, death sentences, and special leave to appeal from any court or tribunal in India.
Under Article 143, the Supreme Court has advisory jurisdiction, allowing the President to refer questions of law or fact of public importance to the Court for its opinion.
Therefore, the Supreme Court exercises original, appellate, as well as advisory jurisdiction.
Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer.

Q35. Which of the following is concerned with the Supreme Court of India? 68th B.P.S.C. (Pre) 2022

(a) Collegium system

(b) Appellate jurisdiction

(d) More than one of the above

(e) None of the above

Ans. (d)

Exp:

The Collegium System is concerned with the appointment and transfer of judges in the Supreme Court of India, ensuring judicial independence (though not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, it evolved through Supreme Court judgments).
The Supreme Court also has appellate jurisdiction (Articles 132–136), which allows it to hear appeals from High Courts in civil and criminal matters, and original jurisdiction (Article 131), which enables it to adjudicate disputes between the Union and States or among States themselves.
Since both the Collegium System and the Court’s original and appellate jurisdiction are directly related to the Supreme Court of India, more than one option applies.
Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer.

Q36. Which Article of the Constitution of India deals with the Appellate Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in connection with Constitutional Cases? U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2004, U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2001

(a) Article 131

(b) Article 132

(d) Article 133 read with Article 134 A

Ans. (c)

Exp:

Article 132 of the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to hear appeals from High Courts in cases where the High Court certifies that a substantial question of law regarding the interpretation of the Constitution is involved.
Article 134A lays down the procedure for issuing such a certificate. The High Court may issue the certificate on its own motion or must issue it if requested by an aggrieved party, confirming that the case involves a substantial constitutional question for Supreme Court adjudication.
Once the certificate is granted, any party may appeal to the Supreme Court on the ground that the constitutional question has been wrongly decided by the High Court.
Therefore, appellate jurisdiction in constitutional cases is governed by Article 132 read with Article 134A.
Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.

Q37. Curative Petition in India can be filed in Supreme Court under Article – U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2014

(a) 138

(b) 140

(d) 146

Ans. (c)

Exp:

A curative petition is the last legal remedy available in the Supreme Court of India after a review petition against a final judgment is dismissed. It is meant to prevent miscarriage of justice and to ensure that no gross error or violation of principles of natural justice occurs.
The Supreme Court, in Rupa Ashok Hurra vs Ashok Hurra (2002), laid down the principles for curative petitions:
Can be filed if there was violation of natural justice or the petitioner was not heard.
Can be admitted if there is apprehension of bias by the judge.
Must be rare and exceptional, certified by a senior advocate, and circulated to the three senior-most judges and judges of the original bench.
Article 142 of the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to pass any decree or order necessary to do complete justice in any case, and this provision forms the constitutional basis for entertaining curative petitions.
Since curative petitions are filed under the Supreme Court’s power to do complete justice, the correct answer is Article 142.
Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.

Q38. Which Article of the Constitution permits the Supreme Court to review its judgement or order? U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2009

(a) Article 137

(b) Article 130

(d) Article 138

Ans. (a)

Exp:

Article 137 of the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to review any judgment or order pronounced by it, subject to the provisions of any law made by Parliament or rules made under Article 145.
Article 145 provides the Supreme Court the power to make rules regulating its practice and procedure, including:
Conditions and procedure for review of judgments.
Time limits for filing review applications.
Rules regarding costs, fees, bail, stays, and summary disposal of frivolous appeals.
The review under Article 137 allows the Court to correct any error apparent on the face of the record, ensuring justice is properly administered.
Therefore, the Supreme Court’s review jurisdiction is constitutionally based on Article 137, while Article 145 provides the procedural framework for such reviews.
Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer.

Q39. Which one of the following is correct with regard to the power to review any judgment pronounced or order made by the Supreme Court of India? U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2011

(a) The President of India has the power of review such judgment or order.

(b) The Supreme Court has the power to review its judgment or order.

(d) The Supreme Court does not have the power to review its judgment or order.

Ans. (b)

Exp:

The Supreme Court of India has the constitutional power to review its own judgments or orders under Article 137.
This power allows the Court to correct errors apparent on the face of the record and ensures justice is properly administered.
The review process is internal to the Supreme Court and is not subject to approval by the President, Cabinet, or any other authority.
The procedure for review is guided by rules made under Article 145, which specify conditions, time limits, and other procedural aspects for filing a review petition.
Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer.

Q40. Which one of the following is correct about the Supreme Court regarding its Judgment? U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2005

(a) It can change the Judgment

(b) It can not change the Judgment

(d) Only the Ministry of Law can change the Judgment.

Ans: (a)

Exp:

The Supreme Court of India has the power to review and modify its own judgments or orders under Article 137 of the Constitution.
This power allows the Court to correct any error apparent on the face of the record to ensure justice is properly administered.
The review is internal to the Court; it is not dependent on the Chief Justice, Ministry of Law, or any other authority.
The procedure for review is regulated by rules made under Article 145, which include conditions, time limits, and formalities for filing a review petition.
Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer.

Q41. With reference to the constitution of India, prohibitions or limitations or provisions contained in ordinary laws cannot act as prohibitions or limitations on the constitutional powers under Article 142. It could mean which one of the following? I.A.S. (Pre) 2019

(a) The decisions taken by the Election Commission of India while discharging its duties cannot be challenged in any court of law.

(b) The Supreme Court of India is not constrained in the exercise of its powers by laws made by the Parliament.

(c) In the event of grave financial crisis in the country, the President of India can declare Financial Emergency without the counsel from the Cabinet.

(d) State Legislatures cannot make laws on certain matters without the concurrence of Union Legislature.

Ans. (b)

Exp:

Article 142 of the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to pass any decree or make any order necessary to do complete justice in any case before it.
This power is extraordinary and plenary, meaning that the Court cannot be restricted by ordinary statutes or limitations imposed by Parliament.
Essentially, even if a law passed by Parliament places certain restrictions or procedures, the Supreme Court can override those laws in the exercise of Article 142 powers to ensure complete justice.
This makes Article 142 a constitutional override over ordinary legislation in matters pending before the Court.
Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer.

Q42. In India, Judicial Review implies: I.A.S. (Pre) 2017

(a) the power of the Judiciary to pronounce upon the constitutionality of laws and executive orders.

(b) the power of the Judiciary to question the wisdom of the laws enacted by the Legislatures.

(d) the power of the Judiciary to review its own judgments given earlier in similar or different cases.

Ans. (a)

Exp:

Judicial Review is the power of the Judiciary, especially the Supreme Court and High Courts, to examine whether laws and executive actions are in conformity with the Constitution of India.
Article 13 provides the foundation for judicial review in India:
Clause (1) declares that any law inconsistent with Fundamental Rights is void to the extent of inconsistency.
Clause (2) prevents the State from making laws that abridge Fundamental Rights, reinforcing that courts can strike down such laws.
“Law” under Article 13 includes statutes, rules, orders, notifications, customs, etc., giving courts the authority to review a wide range of legal instruments.
Article 372 ensures continuance of pre-constitutional laws, but even these laws are subject to adaptation to conform with the Constitution, and the courts can review their constitutionality.
Judicial review does not question the wisdom or policy of a law (option b) but only examines constitutionality.
It is post-enactment, not pre-assent (option c).
Reviewing its own judgments (option d) refers to review or curative powers, which are separate from judicial review.
Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer.

Q43. Judicial Review means that the Supreme Court – 39th B.P.S.C. (Pre) 1994

(a) Has final authority over all issues.

(b) Can charge allegations against President.

(d) Can declare illegal any law of the State.

Ans. (d)

Exp:

Judicial Review is the power of the Supreme Court of India to examine whether laws passed by Parliament or State Legislatures or executive actions are in accordance with the Constitution of India.
Under Article 13, any law inconsistent with the Fundamental Rights is void to the extent of inconsistency.
This means the Supreme Court can strike down state or central laws that are unconstitutional, i.e., it can declare illegal any law of the State.
Judicial review does not give the Court general authority over all issues (option a); it is specifically limited to constitutional compliance.
The Court cannot charge allegations against the President (option b); the President enjoys constitutional immunity under Article 361.
While the Supreme Court can hear appeals from High Courts (Articles 132–136), judicial review is not about merely reviewing High Court decisions (option c) but about ensuring constitutionality of laws and actions.
Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer.

Q44. Judicial Review implies the right of the Court to – U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 1994

(a) Declare any law or order invalid if it is in conflict with the Constitution.

(b) Review the order of the Lower Courts.

(d) Review the laws to see that they have been passed as per the procedure laid down.

Ans. (a)

Exp:

Judicial Review is the power of the Supreme Court and High Courts to examine whether a law, rule, or executive action is in conformity with the Constitution of India.
If a law or executive order violates the Constitution, especially Fundamental Rights, the Court can declare it null and void.
This power is rooted in Article 13, which states that any law inconsistent with Fundamental Rights is void to the extent of inconsistency.
Judicial review is not about reviewing decisions of lower courts (option b) or simply hearing appeals (option c); those are part of the appellate jurisdiction.
It is also not limited to procedural compliance of law-making (option d); the Court examines substantive constitutionality, not just the procedure.
Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer.

Q45. In India, the power of Judicial Review is enjoyed by? U.P. P.C.S. (Mains) 2017

(a) The Supreme Court alone

(b) The Supreme Court as well as High Courts

(d) None of the above

Ans. (b)

Exp:

Judicial Review is the power of courts to examine whether laws passed by the legislature or actions of the executive are in conformity with the Constitution of India, and to strike down those that are unconstitutional.
In India, this power is primarily exercised by the Supreme Court and the High Courts:
Supreme Court: Under Articles 32 and 131–136, it can enforce Fundamental Rights and review laws/actions inconsistent with the Constitution.
High Courts: Under Article 226, High Courts can issue writs (habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, certiorari) for enforcement of Fundamental Rights and for any other purpose. This gives them the power to exercise judicial review over state and central laws and executive actions.
Article 227 further empowers High Courts with superintendence over all subordinate courts and tribunals within their jurisdiction, allowing them to ensure legality and proper administration of justice.
Lower courts do not have the power of judicial review; they apply the law as it stands and cannot strike down statutes or executive actions.
Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer.

Q46. The system of Judicial Review, is prevalent in: U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2013

(a) India only

(b) U.K. only

(d) Both in India and U.S.A.

Ans. (d)

Exp:

Judicial Review is the power of a court to examine and invalidate laws or executive actions that conflict with the Constitution.
The doctrine originated in the U.S.A. and was first established in Marbury v. Madison (1803) by Chief Justice John Marshall.
In India, both the Supreme Court (Articles 32, 131–136) and High Courts (Article 226) exercise judicial review to ensure laws and executive actions conform to the Constitution.
Article 13 of the Indian Constitution provides the basis for judicial review, declaring any law inconsistent with Fundamental Rights void to the extent of inconsistency.
In the U.K., parliamentary sovereignty limits judicial review, as laws passed by Parliament cannot be struck down.
Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer.

Q47. In essence, what does 'Due Process of Law' mean? I.A.S. (Pre.) 2023

(a) The principle of natural justice

(b) The procedure established by law

(d) Equality before law

Ans. (a)

Exp:

Due Process of Law embodies rationality, fairness, and justice in the treatment of individuals under the law. It ensures that laws are not applied arbitrarily or in a biased manner.
Although the term is not explicitly defined in the Constitution of India, the Supreme Court has interpreted Article 21 (“procedure established by law”) as incorporating the principles of due process.
Originated in Magna Carta, England and later incorporated into the U.S. Constitution (4th and 5th Amendments).
Evolution in Indian case law:
A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950): Initially, Article 21 was interpreted narrowly; due process was not applied.
Rustom Cooper v. Union of India (1970): The Court held that a law affecting citizens’ rights must meet tests of multiple fundamental rights, allowing scrutiny of its fairness, not just procedure.
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): Expanded Article 21, rejecting arbitrary laws; law must be just, fair, and reasonable.
K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2019): Reinforced fairness and non-arbitrariness in interpreting procedure established by law.
Hence, Due process focuses on natural justice, fairness, and reasonableness rather than just technical compliance with procedure. The court examines both law and its implementation to protect life and liberty.
Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer.

Q48. A Constitution (Amendment) Act may be declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of India if it – I.A.S. (Pre) 2009

(a) Establishes three-tier federal set up in place of the existing two tier-set up.

(b) Removes Right of Equality before the law from Part III and places it elsewhere in the Constitution.

(d) Establishes a Federal Court of Appeal to lighten the burden of the Supreme Court.

Ans. (b)

Exp:

Article 13 declares that any law inconsistent with the Fundamental Rights is void to the extent of inconsistency.
The Supreme Court has held through the Basic Structure Doctrine that Fundamental Rights cannot be abrogated or removed by a constitutional amendment.
Removing the Right to Equality (Article 14) from Part III would violate the basic structure of the Constitution and thus make the amendment unconstitutional.
Other changes, like restructuring federal setup (option a), changing executive system (option c), or creating a Federal Court of Appeal (option d), do not violate the basic structure and are within the powers of Parliament.
Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer.

Q49. The Supreme Court is a 67th B.P.S.C. (Pre) (Re- Exam), 2022

(a) federal court

(b) protector of human rights

(d) civil court

(e) None of the above/More than one of the above

Ans. (e)

Exp:

The Supreme Court of India performs multiple roles, so no single option fully describes it.
It acts as the guardian of the Constitution in disputes between the Union and States (original jurisdiction, Article 131), but India’s Supreme Court is not purely a federal court like in the U.S.A.
Through Fundamental Rights (Articles 32), it protects individual rights, but this is one of its many functions.
It has the ultimate authority on constitutional matters, but it also exercises judicial review, appellate jurisdiction, and advisory jurisdiction.
Therefore, option (e) is the correct answer.

Q50. Which of the following is the custodian of the Constitution of India? I.A.S. (Pre) 2015

(a) The President of India

(b) The Prime Minister of India

(d) The Supreme Court of India

Ans. (d)

Exp:

The Supreme Court of India is the guardian and custodian of the Constitution, ensuring that all laws and actions of the Legislature and Executive conform to constitutional provisions.
It exercises this role through:
Judicial Review (Articles 13, 32): Striking down laws or executive actions that violate Fundamental Rights or the Constitution.
Interpretation of the Constitution (Articles 131–136): Acting as the final authority on constitutional matters.
Protection of Fundamental Rights: Enforcing citizens’ rights through writs and judicial remedies.
Other authorities like the President, Prime Minister, or Lok Sabha Secretariat execute governmental or parliamentary functions but do not have the authority to interpret or enforce the Constitution.
Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer.

Q51. The Guardianship of Indian Constitution is vested in: U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2015

(a) President

(b) Lok Sabha

(d) Council of Ministers

Ans. (c)

Exp:

The Supreme Court of India is the guardian and custodian of the Constitution, ensuring that all laws and actions of the Legislature and Executive conform to constitutional provisions.
It exercises this role through:
Judicial Review (Articles 13, 32): Striking down laws or executive actions that violate Fundamental Rights or the Constitution.
Interpretation of the Constitution (Articles 131–136): Acting as the final authority on constitutional matters.
Protection of Fundamental Rights: Enforcing citizens’ rights through writs and judicial remedies.
Other authorities like the President, Prime Minister, or Lok Sabha Secretariat execute governmental or parliamentary functions but do not have the authority to interpret or enforce the Constitution.
Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.

Q52. Given below are two statements, one is labelled as Assertion (A) and the other as Reason (R). U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2019

Assertion (A) : The Supreme Court of India has exclusive jurisdiction regarding Constitutional Validity of Central laws.

Reason (R) : The Supreme court is the Guardian of the India Constitution.

Select the correct answer from the codes given below:

Codes :

(a) Both (A) and (R) are true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A).

(b) Both (A) and (R) are true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).

(d) (A) is false, but (R) is true.

Ans. (d)

Exp:

The Supreme Court of India performs multiple roles, so no single statement fully describes its powers.
It acts as the guardian of the Constitution, ensuring all laws and actions of the Legislature and Executive conform to constitutional provisions, but it does not have exclusive jurisdiction over the constitutional validity of all central laws.
Through Fundamental Rights (Article 32), it protects individual rights by issuing writs like habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, and certiorari, but this is only one of its many functions.
It has ultimate authority on constitutional interpretation, exercises judicial review, appellate jurisdiction, and advisory jurisdiction, but High Courts under Article 226 also have powers to issue writs and enforce rights in their territories.
Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer.

Q53. Which of the following cases comes under the Jurisdiction of High Court and Supreme Court? U.P. Lower Sub. (Pre) 2004 U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2006 I.A.S. (Pre) 1993 71st B.P.S.C. (Pre) 2025

(a) Dispute between the Centre and States.

(b) Dispute between States.

(d) Protection from violation of the Constitution.

Ans. (c)

Exp:

High Courts (Article 226): Have the power to issue writs such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, and certiorari to any person, authority, or government for enforcement of Fundamental Rights and other purposes within their territory.
High Courts can also exercise this power even if the government or person is outside their state, provided the cause of action arises in their territory.
Supreme Court (Article 32): Guarantees the right of individuals to move it directly for enforcement of Fundamental Rights.
The Supreme Court can issue directions, orders, or writs for protecting Fundamental Rights and has ultimate authority over High Court orders.
Therefore, both the High Court and Supreme Court have jurisdiction in cases related to enforcement of Fundamental Rights.
Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.

Q54. The power to enlarge the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India with respect to any matter included in the Union List of Legislative Powers rests with – I.A.S. (Pre) 2003

(a) The President of India

(b) The Chief Justice of India

(d) The Union Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs

Ans. (c)

Exp:

Article 138 of the Constitution provides for the enlargement of the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction.
Clause (1) states that the Supreme Court shall have such further jurisdiction and powers over any matters in the Union List as Parliament may confer by law.
Clause (2) allows the Supreme Court to have additional powers with respect to any matter by special agreement between the Government of India and any State, provided Parliament authorizes it by law.
This means that the ultimate authority to expand the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction lies with Parliament, not with the President, Chief Justice, or the Ministry.
Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.

Q55. Who has the right to seek advisory opinion of the Supreme Court on any question of law – U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2012

(a) Prime Minister

(b) President

(d) All of the above

Ans. (b)

Exp:

Article 143 of the Constitution empowers the President of India to refer any question of law or fact of public importance to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court may hear the matter and report its opinion to the President.
This includes disputes mentioned in Article 131 (between Centre and States or between States) if the President deems it necessary.
Other authorities, like the Prime Minister or High Courts, do not have this right.
Hence, the President alone can seek advisory opinions from the Supreme Court.
Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer.

Q56. Which of the following statements regarding the Advisory Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is correct? I.A.S. (Pre) 1994

(1) It is binding on the Supreme Court to give its opinion on any matter referred to it by the President.

(2) The full bench of the Supreme Court hears any reference made to it under its power of Advisory Jurisdiction.

(3) The opinion given by the Supreme Court on a reference under Advisory Jurisdiction is not binding on the government.

(4) Not more than one reference at a time can be made to the Supreme Court under its power of Advisory Jurisdiction.

Select the answer from the codes given below-

(a) 1 and 2

(b) 1 and 3

(d) 2 and 4

Ans: (c)

Exp:

Article 143 of the Constitution empowers the President of India to refer questions of law or fact to the Supreme Court for its opinion.
There are two types of references under Article 143:
Questions of law or fact of public importance – the Supreme Court may give its opinion; it is not bound to answer.
Questions arising from former treaties, agreements, covenants, engagements, or similar instruments – the Supreme Court must give its opinion.
References under advisory jurisdiction are heard by a full bench of the Supreme Court (typically 5 members).
The opinion given by the Supreme Court is advisory only and is not binding on the government.
There is no constitutional limit on the number of references that can be made at a time.
Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.

Q57. The advisory powers of the Supreme Court of India imply that it may U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2016

(a) Advise to the President on the issues of law or fact which are of public importance.

(b) Advise to the government of India on all Constitution matters.

(d) Advise to all the above persons.

Ans: (a)

Exp:

Article 143 of the Constitution empowers the President of India to seek the advisory opinion of the Supreme Court on:
Any question of law or fact that has arisen or is likely to arise, which is of public importance.
Disputes related to former treaties, agreements, or similar instruments, where the Court must give its opinion.
The Supreme Court’s advisory role is limited to the President; it cannot advise the Prime Minister, the Government, or any other authority directly.
The advice given by the Supreme Court is advisory only and is not binding on the government.
Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer.

Q58. The Supreme Court of India tenders advice to the President on a matter of law or fact: I.A.S. (Pre) 2001

(a) On its initiative

(b) Only if he seeks such advice

(d) Only if the issue poses a threat to the unity and integrity of the country

Ans. (b)

Exp:

Article 143 of the Constitution empowers the President of India to seek the advisory opinion of the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court cannot act on its own initiative; it provides advice only when the President refers a question of law or fact to it.
The matter may relate to:
Questions of law or fact of public importance
Disputes arising from former treaties, agreements, or similar instruments
The advisory opinion is not binding on the government and is limited to the President.
Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer.

Q59. Consider the following statements: I.A.S. (Pre) 2010

The Supreme Court of India tenders advice to the President of India on matters of law or fact.

1. On its initiative (on any matter of larger public interest ).

2. If he seeks such advice.

3. Only if the matters is related to the Fundamental Rights of the citizens.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 only

(d) 1 and 2

Ans. (b)

Exp:

Article 143 of the Constitution empowers the President of India to seek the advisory opinion of the Supreme Court on matters of law or fact.
The Supreme Court cannot act on its own initiative; it provides advice only when the President refers a question to it.
The matter referred need not be limited to Fundamental Rights; it may relate to any question of law or fact of public importance or disputes involving former treaties/agreements.
Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer.

Q60. Under which Article of the Indian Constitution did the President make a reference to the Supreme Court to seek the Court’s opinion on the Constitutional validity of the Election Commission’s decision on deferring the Gujarat Assembly Elections (in the year 2002)? I.A.S. (Pre) 2003

(a) Article 142

(b) Article 143

(d) Article 145

Ans. (b)

Exp:

Article 143 empowers the President of India to seek the advisory opinion of the Supreme Court on any question of law or fact of public importance or on disputes involving treaties/agreements.
In 2002, the President referred the matter of the Election Commission’s decision to defer Gujarat Assembly Elections to the Supreme Court under Article 143 to examine its Constitutional validity.
The Supreme Court then provided an advisory opinion, which is not binding on the government but serves as guidance.
Other Articles:
Article 142 – Enforcement of decrees and orders of the Supreme Court.
Article 144 – Duty of all authorities to aid the Supreme Court.
Article 145 – Rules of procedure for the Supreme Court.
Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer.

Q61. “I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India.....uphold the Sovereignty and Integrity of India..... Perform the duties of my office... uphold the Constitution and Law.” it is the form of Oath taken by – U.P.P.C.S. (Spl) (Mains) 2004

(a) The President of India

(b) The Chief Justice of India

(d) The Governor

Ans. (b)

Exp:

The Third Schedule of the Constitution of India contains the forms of oaths and affirmations for:
Union and State Ministers
Members of Parliament
Members of State Legislatures
Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts
Comptroller and Auditor-General of India
There are 10 forms of oaths or affirmations in total.
The given oath is specifically prescribed for the Chief Justice of India and the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India.
It emphasizes:
Faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India
Upholding sovereignty and integrity
Performing the duties of office faithfully
Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer.

Q62. Supreme Court's judgement of Indra Sawhney Vs Union of India Case is related to which issue ? 66th B.P.S.C. (Pre) (Re- Exam), 2020

(a) Regarding the issue of OBC reservation in Government employment

(b) Basic Structure Theory

(d) Extended reservation for ST

(e) None of the above / More than one of the above

Ans. (a)

Exp:

In Indra Sawhney vs Union of India (1992), the Supreme Court addressed the issue of reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in government employment under Articles 15(4) and 16(4).
Key rulings of the case:
Reservation limit: The Court held that total reservation should not exceed 50%, except in exceptional circumstances.
Criteria for OBCs: Reservation applies to groups that are socially and educationally backward.
Efficiency safeguard: The 50% ceiling was justified to maintain administrative efficiency.
This case set a landmark precedent on OBC reservation, reaffirming and consolidating earlier rulings like M R Balaji v State of Mysore (1963) and Devadasan v Union of India (1964).
The 50% limit is still widely cited, though sometimes criticized as arbitrary.
Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer.

Q63. Under which article, Supreme Court recently declared Migrants (Determination by Tribunal) Act, 1983 as unconstitutional for violation of the sacred duty of centre? U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2002

(a) Article - 355

(b) Article - 356

(d) Article - 257

Ans: (a)

Exp:

On 13 July 2005, the Supreme Court of India struck down the Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act, 1983 as unconstitutional.
The Court observed that the large presence of illegal migrants from Bangladesh in Assam was effectively an aggression on the State and caused serious internal disturbance.
The Act was found to violate the sacred duty of the Union Government to protect states from internal disturbances.
Article 355 of the Constitution states:
It is the duty of the Union to protect every State against external aggression and internal disturbance.
The Union must also ensure that the Government of every State is carried on according to the Constitution.
Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer.

Q64. TDSAT judgments can be challenged in the: U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2003

(a) TRAI, High Court, Supreme Court

(b) TRAI and Supreme Court

(d) Supreme Court only

Ans. (c)

Exp:

The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) was established under the TRAI Act, 1997 (amended in 2000) to adjudicate disputes and dispose of appeals in the telecommunication sector.
Appeal mechanism:
For telecom, broadcasting, and airport tariff matters, TDSAT orders can be appealed to the Supreme Court, but only on substantial questions of law.
For cyber-related matters, TDSAT orders can be challenged in the High Court.
The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) does not hear appeals against TDSAT judgments.
Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.

Q65. Fathima Beevi died recently. Consider the following statements regarding her : U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2024

1. She was the first woman judge of the Supreme Court of India.

2. She served as the Governor of Kerala from 1997- 2001.

3. She was the first Muslim woman to enter into higher judiciary.

Select the correct answer from the codes given below:

(a) 1 and 2

(b) 1 and 3

(d) 1, 2 and 3

Ans. (b)

Exp:

Justice M. Fathima Beevi passed away on 23 November 2023.
She became the first woman judge of the Supreme Court of India in 1989.
She was also the first Muslim woman to enter the higher judiciary.
After retirement in 1992, she served as a member of the National Human Rights Commission from 1993 to 1997.
She became the Governor of Tamil Nadu from 1997 to 2001, not Kerala.
Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer.

Q66. Consider the following statements: I.A.S. (Pre) 2008

1. Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer was the Chief Justice of India.

2. Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer is considered as one of the progenitors of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Indian Judicial System.

Which of the statement(s) given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 only

(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Ans: (b)

Exp:

Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer was never the Chief Justice of India; he served as a Supreme Court judge from 1973 to 1980, so Statement 1 is incorrect.
He, along with Justice P. N. Bhagwati, is considered a pioneer of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in India, so Statement 2 is correct.
PIL originated in the USA in the 1960s to provide legal aid to underrepresented groups such as the poor, minorities, and environmentalists, and was introduced in India in the early 1980s as part of judicial activism.
The seeds of PIL in India were sown by Justice Krishna Iyer in Mumbai Kamgar Sabha vs. Abdul Thai (1976). The first reported PIL case was Hussainara Khatoon vs. State of Bihar (1979), which addressed inhuman conditions of prisons and the rights of undertrial prisoners, establishing the right to speedy justice as a fundamental right.
Justice P. N. Bhagwati further developed PIL in S. P. Gupta vs. Union of India, where it was held that any member of the public or social action group acting bonafide can invoke writ jurisdiction under Articles 32 and 226 on behalf of disadvantaged groups, making PIL a tool to enforce public duties and redress public injury.
PIL allows public-spirited individuals or organizations to approach the court on behalf of disadvantaged groups who cannot seek justice themselves, relaxing the traditional locus standi rule, and courts may even treat private interest cases as public interest cases (as in Indian Banks’ Association vs. Devkala Consultancy).
Landmark PILs also include M. C. Mehta vs. Union of India, addressing Ganga water pollution, where the Supreme Court allowed a petitioner to move the court despite not being a riparian owner, and Vishaka vs. State of Rajasthan, which recognized sexual harassment at the workplace as a violation of Articles 14, 15, and 21, leading to guidelines that paved the way for the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013.
The purpose of PIL is to uphold the rule of law, protect fundamental rights, and provide access to justice to weaker sections, while being non-adversarial and focused on public interest rather than individual disputes.
Therefore option (b) is correct.

Q67. Given below are two statements, one is labelled as Assertion (A) and the other as Reason (R). U.P. P.C.S (Pre) 2025

Assertion (A): Public Interest Litigation in India is essential for the rule of law.

Reason (R): Public Interest Litigation provides effective access of Justice to socially and economically weaker sections.

Select the correct answer from the code given below:

Code :

(a) Both (A) and (R) are true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).

(b) (A) is false, but (R) is true.

(d) Both (A) and (R) are true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A).

Ans. (b)

Exp:

Assertion (A): Public Interest Litigation in India is essential for the rule of law. This is true in principle, as PIL strengthens enforcement of constitutional rights, but the rule of law is broader and exists independently of PIL. Therefore, PIL is not the sole requirement for the rule of law.
Reason (R): Public Interest Litigation provides effective access of justice to socially and economically weaker sections. This is true, because PIL allows public-spirited individuals or organizations to approach the courts on behalf of disadvantaged groups who cannot access justice themselves, relaxing the traditional locus standi rule.
Therefore option (b) is correct.

Q68. Supreme Court judgement regarding homosexuality is related to which of the following? U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2018

(a) Section 377 of IPC

(b) Article 377 of the Indian Constitution

(d) None of the Above

Ans. (a)

Exp:

Section 377 of the IPC criminalized “unnatural offences,” punishing anyone who voluntarily had carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman, or animal with imprisonment or fine.
It was part of colonial-era law, tracing back to the Buggery Act of 1533 and incorporated into the IPC in 1860.
Over time, Section 377 was widely criticized for being discriminatory against LGBTQ individuals, allowing harassment of gay couples.
In Navtej Singh Johar vs. Union of India (2018), the SC decriminalized consensual sex between adults, declaring the relevant part of Section 377 “irrational, indefensible, and manifestly arbitrary”.
The Court emphasized constitutional rights of equality, privacy, and dignity while clarifying that non-consensual acts, sexual activity with minors, and bestiality remain punishable.
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023, which came into effect on 1 July 2026, does not retain a provision equivalent to Section 377. While this does not affect consensual adult same-sex relations, it removes a legal recourse for adult male victims of sexual assault, which had been available under the IPC.
Even though a Parliamentary Committee recommended retaining such provisions in 2023, they were excluded in the BNS, leaving some gaps in protection for male victims.
Therefore option (a) is the correct answer.

Q69. Under which law is it prescribed that all proceedings in the Supreme Court of India shall be in English language? U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2013

(a) The Supreme Court rules, 1966

(b) Article 145 of the Constitution of India.

(d) Article 348 of the Constitution of India.

Ans: (d)

Exp:

Article 348(1)(a) states that all proceedings in the Supreme Court and in every High Court shall be in English language.
Article 348(2) allows that with the Governor’s request and prior consent of the President, a High Court may permit the use of Hindi or any official language of the State in its proceedings.
As per the Cabinet Committee decision (21.05.1965), any proposal to use a language other than English in a High Court must also obtain the consent of the Chief Justice of India.
Use of local languages in lower courts: Under Article 235, administrative control over district and subordinate courts rests with the concerned High Court, and the High Court and State Government decide jointly on the use of Hindi or regional languages in such courts.
Therefore the correct answer is (d).

Q70. The authority to determine the number of Judges in a High Court rests with which of the following entities? 69th B.P.S.C. (Pre) 2023

(a) The President

(b) The Chief Minister of the State

(d) The Parliament

Ans. (a)

Article 216 of the Constitution of India provides that every High Court shall consist of a Chief Justice and such other Judges as the President may from time to time deem it necessary to appoint.
The President’s power to determine the strength of the High Court Judges is exercised after consultation with the Chief Justice of India and the Governor of the State.
This ensures that the composition of the High Court is flexible and can be adjusted according to the workload and requirements of the judiciary in each State.
Therefore the correct answer is (a).

Q71. Which among the following is not correct about a High Court in India? U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2016

(a) The second appeal to the High Court is within its appellate jurisdiction. .

(b) Every judge of a High Court is appointed by the President.

(d) High Courts may accept a petition related to ‘Public interest litigation’.

Ans: (c)

Exp:

Every Judge of a High Court is appointed by the President under Article 217 of the Constitution, by warrant under the President’s hand and seal.
Judges hold office until the age of 62, unless they resign, are removed as per constitutional provisions, are transferred, or appointed to the Supreme Court.
A person is eligible for appointment as a High Court judge if they are an Indian citizen and have either:
Held a judicial office for at least 10 years, or
Been an advocate of a High Court (or two or more High Courts in succession) for at least 10 years.
Questions regarding the age of a High Court judge are decided by the President in consultation with the Chief Justice of India, and the decision is final.
The High Court exercises appellate jurisdiction, including second appeals.
High Courts may entertain Public Interest Litigation (PIL) to protect fundamental rights and public interest.
Therefore the correct answer is (c).

Q72. Consider the following statements: I.A.S. (Pre) 2002

1. There are 25 High Courts in India.

2. Punjab, Haryana and the Union Territory of Chandigarh have a common High Court.

3. National Capital Territory of Delhi has a High Court of its own.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct ?

(a) 2 and 3

(b) 1 and 2

(d) 3 only

Ans: (c)

Exp:

Article 214 of the Constitution states that there shall be a High Court for each State, which stands at the head of the State’s judicial administration.
Currently, India has 25 High Courts, of which three have jurisdiction over more than one State: for example, Punjab, Haryana, and the Union Territory of Chandigarh share a common High Court.
Among Union Territories, Delhi, Jammu & Kashmir, and Ladakh have their own High Courts, while other Union Territories come under the jurisdiction of different State High Courts.
Each High Court consists of a Chief Justice and other Judges appointed by the President. The Chief Justice is appointed in consultation with the Chief Justice of India and the Governor of the State, and puisne Judges are appointed in consultation with the Chief Justice of India and the High Court Chief Justice.
Judges hold office until 62 years of age and are removable in the same manner as Supreme Court judges. Eligibility requires Indian citizenship and at least 10 years as a judicial officer or advocate of a High Court.
Therefore the correct answer is (c).

Q73. . Which one of the following is not the main jurisdiction of the High Court of a State? U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2007

(a) Advisory jurisdiction

(b) Original jurisdiction

(d) Appellate jurisdiction

Ans. (a)

Exp:

High Courts do not have advisory jurisdiction; only the Supreme Court can give advisory opinions to the President under Article 143.
High Courts of States primarily exercise original jurisdiction, appellate jurisdiction, and supervisory jurisdiction over subordinate courts within the State.
Original jurisdiction allows the High Court to hear cases directly filed before it, especially concerning fundamental rights or civil and criminal matters specified by law.
Appellate jurisdiction allows the High Court to hear appeals from lower courts and tribunals within its territorial jurisdiction.
Supervisory jurisdiction allows the High Court to control and oversee subordinate courts, ensuring proper administration of justice and adherence to legal procedures.
Advisory jurisdiction, on the other hand, is exclusively exercised by the Supreme Court under Article 143, where the President may seek the Court’s opinion on questions of law or fact of public importance.
Article 225 ensures that existing High Courts retain their original, appellate, and supervisory powers under the Constitution, except where explicitly restricted, but does not grant them advisory powers.
Therefore the correct answer is (a).

Q74. A Writ of Prohibition is an order issued by the Supreme Court or High Courts to : I.A.S. (Pre) 2024

(a) a government officer prohibiting him from taking a particular action.

(b) the Parliament / Legislative Assembly to pass a law on Prohibition.

(d) the Government prohibiting it from following an unconstitutional policy.

Ans. (c)

Exp:

Writs in India are remedies available under Articles 32 (Supreme Court) and 226 (High Courts), which include habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and quo warranto.
Prohibition literally means “to forbid” and is issued by a higher court to a lower court or tribunal to prevent it from exceeding its jurisdiction or acting without jurisdiction.
Unlike mandamus, which directs a public authority to perform a duty, the writ of prohibition directs inaction and can be issued only against judicial or quasi-judicial authorities, not administrative authorities.
Key distinction with Certiorari: Prohibition is issued before the lower court passes a final order to stop proceedings, while certiorari is issued after the final order to quash it.
Other writs:
Habeas Corpus – protects individual liberty against unlawful detention.
Mandamus – commands public officials to perform statutory duties.
Quo-Warranto – challenges a person’s claim to public office.
Therefore, the correct answer is (c).

Q75. Given below are two statements, one labelled as Assertion (A) and the other labelled as Reason (R). I.A.S. (Pre) 1997

Assertion (A) : Willful disobedience or non-compliance of Court orders and use of derogatory language about Judicial behaviour amount to Contempt of Court.

Reason (R) : Judicial activism cannot be practiced without arming the Judiciary with punitive powers to punish contemptuous behavior.

In the context of the above two statements which one of the following is correct?

(a) Both (A) and (R) are true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A).

(b) Both (A) and (R) are true but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).

(d) (A) is false but (R) is true.

Ans. (b)

Exp:

While both statements are true individually, (R) is not the direct explanation of (A). Contempt of court arises from maintaining the authority of the judiciary, not from judicial activism per se.
Constitutional basis of contempt power:
Article 129 – Makes the Supreme Court a court of record and grants it the power to punish for contempt of itself, which is the primary source of contempt power.
Article 142 – Allows the Supreme Court to pass orders for enforcement of decrees, including punishment for contempt, but is qualified by any law made by Parliament.
Legal framework:
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – Governs the procedure and classification of contempt.
Rules to Regulate Proceedings for Contempt of the Supreme Court, 1975 – Require procedural safeguards, including consent of the Attorney-General or Solicitor-General for initiating criminal contempt.
Key case reference: In Re Prashant Bhushan, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that its inherent power to punish contempt is derived primarily from Article 129, while the Act and Rules provide procedural guidance.
Therefore, the correct answer is (b) Both (A) and (R) are true but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).

Q76. With reference to the writs issued by the Courts in India, consider the following statements: I.A.S. (Pre) 2022

1. Mandamus will not lie against a private organisation unless it is entrusted with a public duty.

2. Mandamus will not lie against a Company even though it may be a Government Company.

3. Any public minded person can be a petitioner to move the Court to obtain the writ of Quo Warranto.

Which of the statements given above are correct?

(a) 1 and 2 only

(b) 2 and 3 only

(d) 1, 2 and 3

Ans. (c)

Exp:

Under Article 32(1), the right to move the Supreme Court for enforcement of Fundamental Rights (Part III) is itself a guaranteed fundamental right, and under Article 32(2), the Supreme Court can issue writs including habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, and certiorari for enforcement of these rights.
Under Article 226(1), High Courts have wider writ jurisdiction as they can issue writs not only for enforcement of Fundamental Rights but also “for any other purpose”, and such writs can be issued against any person or authority, including Government within their territorial jurisdiction.
Statement 1 is correct because a writ of mandamus cannot be issued against a purely private body, unless that body is entrusted with a public duty, since mandamus is used to enforce performance of statutory or public obligations.
Statement 2 is incorrect because mandamus can be issued against a Government Company if it is performing public functions or statutory duties, as such bodies are treated as “other authorities” under Article 12 jurisprudence in many cases.
Statement 3 is correct because a writ of quo warranto can be sought by any public-spirited person, as it is not necessary for the petitioner to be personally aggrieved; it is issued to test the legality of a person holding a public office.
Therefore, the correct answer is (c).

Q77. The power of High Court to issue writ covers: U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 1997

(a) Constitutional Rights

(b) Statutory Rights

(d) All of above

Ans. (d)

Exp:

Under Article 226 of the Constitution, every High Court has the power to issue writs such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, and certiorari for enforcement of rights.
The jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 is wider than that of the Supreme Court under Article 32, as it extends not only to Fundamental Rights (Part III) but also to “any other purpose”, which includes statutory and legal rights.
Fundamental Rights: High Courts can issue writs for enforcement of rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution.
Statutory Rights: High Courts can also issue writs to enforce rights created under ordinary laws (statutes) passed by Parliament or State Legislatures.
Constitutional Rights (other than Fundamental Rights): Article 226 allows High Courts to intervene where rights arise from the Constitutional framework and legal obligations of authorities, even beyond Part III.
Therefore, the correct answer is (d).

Q78. Consider the following statements: I.A.S. (Pre) 2007

1. The mode of removal of a Judge of a High Court in India is same as that of removal of a Judge of the Supreme Court.

2. After retirement from the office, a permanent Judge of a High Court can not plead or act in any Court or before any authority in India.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 only

(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Ans. (a)

Exp:

Statement 1 is correct because under Article 217(1)(b), a Judge of a High Court may be removed from office by the President in the same manner as a Judge of the Supreme Court under Article 124(4). Both require an impeachment process involving Parliament, making the mode of removal of High Court and Supreme Court judges substantially the same, i.e., through a special parliamentary procedure on grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity.
Statement 2 is incorrect because under Article 220, a permanent Judge of a High Court is only restricted from pleading or acting in any court or before any authority in India except the Supreme Court and other High Courts. This means after retirement, a High Court judge can still practice in the Supreme Court or other High Courts, so there is no complete bar on post-retirement practice.
In contrast, under Article 124(7), a retired Supreme Court judge cannot plead or act in any court or authority in India, showing a stricter restriction at the Supreme Court level.
Therefore, the correct answer is (a).

Q79. A High Court Judge addresses his letter of resignation to– 48th to 52nd B.P.S.C. (Pre) 2008

(a) The President

(b) The Chief Justice of India

(d) The Governor of the State

Ans. (a)

Exp:

Under Article 217(1)(a) of the Constitution, a Judge of a High Court may resign his office by writing under his hand addressed to the President, so the resignation authority is constitutionally fixed.
This reflects the fact that High Court Judges are appointed by the President under Article 217(1) and therefore their resignation and service conditions are also linked to the President as the appointing authority.
Key related point (exam relevance): A High Court Judge holds office until the age of 62 years, unless he resigns, is removed through the impeachment process similar to Article 124(4), is transferred to another High Court, or is elevated to the Supreme Court.
The removal process of a High Court Judge is also aligned with that of a Supreme Court Judge, as it requires an order of the President after a parliamentary address on proved misbehaviour or incapacity.
Therefore, the correct answer is (a).

Q80. According to the Constitution of India the term ‘district judge’ shall not include: I.A.S. (Pre) 1996

(a) Chief presidency magistrate

(b) Sessions judges

(d) Chief judge of a small cause court

Ans. (c)

Exp:

Under Article 236(a) of the Constitution, the expression “district judge” is an inclusive term and covers a wide range of senior judicial posts in the State judiciary.
It includes judge of a city civil court, additional district judge, joint district judge, assistant district judge, chief judge of a small cause court, chief presidency magistrate, additional chief presidency magistrate, sessions judge, additional sessions judge, and assistant sessions judge, so Statements (a), (b), and (d) fall within its scope.
However, a “tribunal judge” is not included within Article 236, as tribunals are separate quasi-judicial bodies created by statutes and not part of the regular civil judicial hierarchy, so Statement (c) is correct as the exception.
Article 233 deals with the appointment of district judges by the Governor in consultation with the High Court, ensuring control of the higher judiciary over the subordinate judiciary.
Therefore, the correct answer is (c).

Q81. With reference to India, consider the following statements: I.A.S. (Pre) 2022

1. Government law officers and legal firms are recognised as advocates, but corporate lawyers and patent attorneys are excluded from recognition as advocates.

2. Bar Councils have the power to lay down the rules relating to legal education and recognition of law colleges.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 only

(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Ans. (b)

Exp:

Statement 1 is incorrect because under the Advocates Act, 1961, recognition as an “advocate” depends on enrolment with a State Bar Council, not on professional labels like government law officers or legal firms.
Corporate lawyers and patent agents may also be enrolled advocates if they meet statutory requirements; therefore, it is incorrect to say they are excluded as a class from recognition as advocates.
Statement 2 is correct because the Bar Council of India (BCI) is empowered under the Advocates Act, 1961 to lay down standards of legal education and to recognise law degrees and law colleges for the purpose of enrolment as advocates.
The Bar Councils (both State Bar Councils and BCI) regulate the legal profession, including enrolment, professional conduct, and standards of legal education.
Therefore, the correct answer is (b).

Q82. Consider the following statements : I.A.S. (Pre.) 2023

Statement-I : In India, prisons are managed by State Governments with their own rules and regulations for the dayto-day administration of prisons.

Statement-II : In India, prisons are governed by the Prisons Act, 1894 which expressly kept the subject of prisons in the control of Provincial Governments.

Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?

(a) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II is the correct explanation for Statement-I

(b) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II is not the correct explanation for Statement-I

(d) Statement-I is incorrect but Statement-II is correct

Ans. (a)

Exp:

Statement-I is correct because in India, prisons are administered by State Governments, which handle their day-to-day management, security, and prison rules and regulations within their respective jurisdictions.
Statement-II is also correct because under the Constitution (State List, Entry 4 of List II), “prisons” fall within the exclusive legislative and administrative domain of States, and the Prisons Act, 1894 originally vested control of prisons in the then Provincial Governments (now State Governments).
The Prisons Act, 1894 forms the historical legal basis for prison administration, under which States were empowered to frame rules regarding prison management and prisoner administration.
Justification link: Since prisons are a State List subject and governed through a framework originally established by the Prisons Act, 1894, State Governments retain full authority over prison management, making Statement-II the correct explanation of Statement-I.
Recent policy development: The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) issued the Model Prisons and Correctional Services Act, 2023, recommending a modern and uniform framework for prison reforms. However, no State has formally confirmed adoption yet, meaning implementation remains advisory in nature.
Additionally, the earlier Model Prison Manual, 2016—aimed at standardising prison administration and correctional practices—has been adopted by 21 States and all 8 Union Territories, though its implementation varies across jurisdictions.
Therefore, the correct answer is (a).

Q83. With reference to India, consider the following statements : I.A.S. (Pre) 2021

1. Judicial custody means an accused is in the custody of the concerned magistrate and such accused is locked up in police station, not in jail.

2. During judicial custody, the police officer in charge of the case is not allowed to interrogate the suspect without the approval of the court.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 only

(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Ans. (b)

Exp:

Statement 1 is incorrect because under Section 167 of CrPC / Section 187 of BNSS, judicial custody means the accused is sent to jail under the custody of the Magistrate, not kept in a police station lock-up. Police station detention is associated with police custody, not judicial custody.
Statement 2 is correct because during judicial custody, the accused is under the supervision of the court, and the investigating police officer cannot interrogate the accused freely without permission of the court, ensuring judicial control over liberty under Article 21.
Police custody: Accused is in police control for interrogation, subject to strict time limits under Section 167 CrPC / Section 187 BNSS, with safeguards to prevent custodial abuse.
Judicial custody: Accused is lodged in jail under court authority, and interrogation is restricted and allowed only with judicial approval.
Recent legal development: Under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), Section 187 continues the framework of Section 167 CrPC but allows flexibility in police custody “in whole or in part” within the 40/60-day investigation window, raising concerns about possible extension of custodial control and its impact on personal liberty.
Judicial safeguard principle: The Supreme Court has consistently emphasized in cases like D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) and Prem Prakash v. Union of India (2024) that personal liberty under Article 21 is paramount, and custody powers must be exercised under strict judicial supervision.
Therefore, the correct answer is (b).

Q84. With reference to Lok Adalats, which of the following statements is correct? I.A.S. (Pre) 2010

(a) Lok Adalat have the jurisdiction to settle the matters at the pre-litigation stage and not those matters pending before any court.

(b) Lok Adalats can deal with matters which are civil and not criminal in nature.

(d) None of the statements given above is correct.

Ans. (d)

Exp:

Lok Adalat is a statutory mechanism under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, and it functions as an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) forum for settlement of cases through compromise or mutual agreement.
Lok Adalats have jurisdiction over both pre-litigation disputes and cases pending before courts, so Statement 1 is incorrect because it wrongly limits Lok Adalats only to pre-litigation matters.
Lok Adalats can deal with both civil and compoundable criminal cases, so Statement 2 is incorrect because it wrongly excludes criminal matters.
The composition of Lok Adalats is not limited only to serving or retired judicial officers, so Statement 3 is incorrect; it includes judicial officers, legal professionals, and social workers/para-legal volunteers, depending on the level (State, District, Taluk, etc.).
The award of Lok Adalat is deemed to be a decree of a civil court, and it is final and binding with no appeal allowed, ensuring quick dispute resolution, though parties may still approach a competent court in limited situations.
Lok Adalats operate on the principle of voluntary compromise, where members act as conciliators and not adjudicators, and they cannot impose decisions on parties.
Therefore, the correct answer is (d).

Q85. With reference to the ‘Gram Nyayalaya Act,’ which of the following statements is/are correct? I.A.S. (Pre) 2016

1. As per the Act, Gram Nyayalaya can hear only civil cases and no criminal cases.

2. The Act allows local social activists as mediators/ reconciliators.

Select the correct answer using the code given below:

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 only

(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Ans. (b)

Exp:

Statement 1 is incorrect because under the Gram Nyayalaya Act, 2008, Gram Nyayalayas are empowered to deal with both civil and criminal cases, aiming to provide speedy and accessible justice at the grassroots level, so it is not limited only to civil cases.
Statement 2 is correct because the Act provides for conciliation and settlement mechanisms, and allows the involvement of local social activists and persons of repute as mediators or conciliators to facilitate amicable resolution of disputes.
Key objective of the Act: The Gram Nyayalaya system was introduced to ensure affordable, speedy, and accessible justice in rural areas, reducing the burden on regular courts.
Gram Nyayalayas can conduct mobile courts, hold hearings at village level, and follow summary procedures to simplify justice delivery.
Therefore, the correct answer is (b).