Fundamental Rights

1. Which one of the following statements is *not* correct ?

Which one of the following statements is *not* correct ?

Subscribe on YouTube
The freedom of speech and expression includes freedom of press.
The freedoms under Article 19 of the Constitution of India can be claimed *only* by citizens.
The right to equality under Article 14 can be claimed only by a citizen.
The right to life and personal liberty can be claimed by any person.
This question was previously asked in
UPSC SO-Steno – 2018
Download PDFAttempt Online
Option C is not correct. The right to equality under Article 14 (“The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India”) is available to *any person*, which includes both citizens and non-citizens.
Not all fundamental rights are available to all persons. Some rights are available only to citizens, while others are available to any person (citizens and foreigners).
Option A is correct; the Supreme Court has held that the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) includes the freedom of the press. Option B is correct; the six freedoms listed in Article 19(1) (speech & expression, assembly, association, movement, residence, profession) are guaranteed only to citizens. Option D is correct; the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 is available to any person within the territory of India, regardless of citizenship.

Join Our Telegram Channel

2. Which of the following statements relating to Fundamental Rights is no

Which of the following statements relating to Fundamental Rights is not correct ?

Join Our Telegram Channel
The Fundamental Rights are guaranteed by the Constitution not only against the actions of Executive but also against that of the Legislature.
The Supreme Court strikes at the arbitrary action of the State.
The Supreme Court has the jurisdiction to enforce fundamental rights against private bodies and individuals.
The Supreme Court cannot exercise its jurisdiction suo motu or on the basis of PIL.
This question was previously asked in
UPSC SO-Steno – 2017
Download PDFAttempt Online
Statement D is not correct. The Supreme Court, as the guardian of fundamental rights, can indeed exercise its jurisdiction suo motu (on its own initiative) or on the basis of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) to enforce fundamental rights. This pro-active stance is a well-established part of Indian judicial practice, particularly in matters concerning fundamental rights.
The Supreme Court has wide powers under Article 32 to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights. This power extends to taking up matters suo motu or based on PILs filed by concerned citizens or groups, expanding access to justice for the protection of fundamental rights.
Statement A is correct because Fundamental Rights are limitations on the power of both the Executive and the Legislature (Article 13). Statement B is correct as the Supreme Court uses judicial review under Article 32 to strike down arbitrary actions of the state that violate fundamental rights. Statement C is correct as the Supreme Court has held that certain fundamental rights (like those against untouchability or bonded labour) can be enforced even against private individuals, and in some cases, private bodies performing public functions can fall within the definition of ‘State’ under Article 12.

Subscribe on YouTube

3. Which of the following statements with regard to preventive detention

Which of the following statements with regard to preventive detention is/are correct ?

  • 1. The detenu has no rights other than those mentioned in clauses (4) and (5) of Article 22 of the Constitution of India.
  • 2. The detenu can get bail on the ground that he had been in prison beyond twenty-four hours without an order of the magistrate.

Select the correct answer using the code given below :

Join Our Telegram Channel
1 only
2 only
Both 1 and 2
Neither 1 nor 2
This question was previously asked in
UPSC SO-Steno – 2017
Download PDFAttempt Online
Statement 1 is correct. Article 22 of the Constitution deals with protection against arrest and detention. Clauses (1) and (2) provide rights to persons arrested under ordinary law (right to be informed of grounds, right to consult a lawyer, and production before a magistrate within 24 hours). However, Article 22(3)(b) explicitly states that clauses (1) and (2) do not apply to persons arrested or detained under any law providing for preventive detention. The rights specifically granted to a person under preventive detention are contained in Article 22(4) and (5), which relate to the maximum period of detention without reference to an Advisory Board and the right to be informed of the grounds of detention and make a representation. Within the framework of Article 22 concerning detention rights, these are the only rights available to a detenu.
Statement 2 is incorrect. The requirement to produce an arrested person before a magistrate within 24 hours is under Article 22(2), which, as per Article 22(3)(b), does not apply to a person detained under preventive detention law. Therefore, failure to produce within 24 hours is not a valid ground for bail or release for a preventive detenu under this constitutional provision.
Article 22 distinguishes between rights related to ordinary arrest/detention and preventive detention; specific safeguards for preventive detention are outlined in clauses (4) and (5), excluding those in (1) and (2).
While Article 22(1) and (2) do not apply, a detenu still has other fundamental rights, but their enforcement can be limited by the preventive detention law itself, provided it is constitutional and follows procedures like Advisory Board review. The Supreme Court has also held that the detenu has a right to effectively represent against the detention order.

Subscribe on YouTube

4. The right to religious freedom under the Constitution of India does no

The right to religious freedom under the Constitution of India does not mean

Subscribe on YouTube
freedom to practice and profess a religion of one's own choice
carrying of Kirpan by a person professing Sikh religion
preventing the State from making any law regulating economic activity associated with any religion
freedom to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes
This question was previously asked in
UPSC SO-Steno – 2017
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct answer is C. The right to religious freedom under the Constitution of India does not mean preventing the State from making any law regulating economic activity associated with any religion.
Article 25(1) guarantees the freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion, subject to public order, morality, health, and other provisions of Part III. Article 25(2) explicitly states that this right does not prevent the State from making any law “regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice” or for social welfare and reform. Therefore, the State *can* regulate economic activities associated with religion, and the right to religious freedom does *not* provide immunity from such regulation.
Options A, B, and D describe aspects that are generally protected under the right to religious freedom (A under Article 25(1), B under Explanation I to Article 25(1), and D under Article 26(a) regarding religious denominations). Option C describes a limitation on the right, meaning the right does not extend to absolute freedom from state regulation of secular activities connected to religion.

Join Our Telegram Channel

5. The right to move freely throughout the territory of India comes under

The right to move freely throughout the territory of India comes under which one of the following Articles of the Constitution of India ?

Join Our Telegram Channel
Article 11
Article 13
Article 19
Article 22
This question was previously asked in
UPSC Combined Section Officer – 2024
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct answer is C) Article 19.
Article 19 of the Constitution of India guarantees certain fundamental rights regarding freedom. Specifically, Article 19(1)(d) provides the right “to move freely throughout the territory of India.”
Article 19 guarantees six freedoms: freedom of speech and expression, assembly, association, movement, residence, and profession. These rights are available only to citizens and are subject to reasonable restrictions imposed by the state on specified grounds. The right to move freely throughout the territory of India allows citizens to travel from one part of the country to another without hindrance, subject to restrictions for the protection of scheduled tribes or the general public interest.

Subscribe on YouTube

6. Which fundamental right is not guaranteed under the Constitution of

Which fundamental right is not guaranteed under the Constitution of India to the majority, but is guaranteed to the minorities ?

Join Our Telegram Channel
Right under Article 15
Right under Article 19
Right under Article 25
Right under Article 30
This question was previously asked in
UPSC Combined Section Officer – 2021-22
Download PDFAttempt Online
Among the options provided, Article 30 is a fundamental right specifically guaranteed to minorities.
Article 30(1) states that “All minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.” This right is uniquely available to minorities to preserve their culture and identity through educational institutions.
Article 15 (Prohibition of discrimination), Article 19 (Protection of certain rights regarding freedom, etc.), and Article 25 (Freedom of religion) are fundamental rights available to all citizens or persons, not exclusively to minorities. While these rights also protect minorities, they are not rights that the majority *does not* possess. Article 30, however, is a right conferred specifically on minorities, not the majority community.

Subscribe on YouTube

7. No fundamental rights can be claimed against

No fundamental rights can be claimed against

Join Our Telegram Channel
a Government company
a Municipal corporation
a Court
a Statutory corporation
This question was previously asked in
UPSC Combined Section Officer – 2021-22
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct answer is C) a Court.
Fundamental rights are primarily enforceable against the ‘State’ as defined in Article 12 of the Constitution. This definition has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to include the Central and State governments, Parliament and State Legislatures, local authorities (like municipal corporations), and other statutory or non-statutory authorities performing state-like functions or under government control (like government companies and statutory corporations). Courts, when acting judicially, are considered part of the judiciary and generally not included in the definition of ‘State’ against whom fundamental rights can be claimed in their judicial capacity. Fundamental rights are a check on the executive and legislative power. A court’s administrative actions might be challengeable, but its judicial decisions are subject to appeal procedures, not direct challenge under fundamental rights as actions of the ‘State’.
Government companies, Municipal corporations, and Statutory corporations have all been held by the Supreme Court to fall within the definition of ‘State’ under Article 12 in certain circumstances, making them amenable to fundamental rights claims.

Subscribe on YouTube

8. In context of the Constitution of India, what is the significance of “

In context of the Constitution of India, what is the significance of “Writ of Mandamus”?

Subscribe on YouTube
It orders a public official to perform his/her duty correctly
It is a writ against unlawful detention
It is a writ for the enforcement of non-fundamental rights
It is a writ for acquiring lands and properties
This question was previously asked in
UPSC Combined Section Officer – 2021-22
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct answer is A) It orders a public official to perform his/her duty correctly.
The writ of Mandamus (meaning ‘we command’) is a judicial remedy in the form of an order from a superior court, to any government, subordinate court, corporation, or public authority, to do some specific act which that body is obliged under law to do. It is issued to compel the performance of a public duty by a public official or body that has failed or refused to perform it.
Option B describes Habeas Corpus. Option C relates to the scope of writs under Article 226 but not the specific function of Mandamus. Option D is unrelated to the function of a writ.

Join Our Telegram Channel

9. Which writ can be issued in case of illegal arrest ?

Which writ can be issued in case of illegal arrest ?

Subscribe on YouTube
Mandamus
Habeas corpus
Quo warranto
Prohibition
This question was previously asked in
UPSC Combined Section Officer – 2021-22
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct answer is B) Habeas corpus.
The writ of Habeas Corpus (meaning ‘to have the body of’) is issued by a court to a person or authority who has detained another person, directing them to produce the body of the detained person before the court. The court then examines the legality of the detention and, if found to be illegal, orders the release of the person. This writ is a crucial safeguard against arbitrary arrest and detention.
Mandamus is a command to perform a public duty. Quo Warranto challenges the authority by which a person holds a public office. Prohibition is issued by a higher court to a lower court or tribunal to prevent it from exceeding its jurisdiction.

Join Our Telegram Channel

10. In the context of the Constitution of India, “Double Jeopardy” means

In the context of the Constitution of India, “Double Jeopardy” means

Join Our Telegram Channel
a person cannot be tried twice for the same offence
a person cannot be arrested without a warrant
a person cannot be deprived of his property without compensation
a person cannot be forced to be a witness against himself
This question was previously asked in
UPSC Combined Section Officer – 2021-22
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct answer is A) a person cannot be tried twice for the same offence.
“Double Jeopardy” is a legal principle enshrined in Article 20(2) of the Constitution of India. It provides that “No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once.” This protection is available against proceedings before a court of law or a judicial tribunal.
– Option B relates to procedural requirements for arrest, which are primarily covered under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
– Option C relates to the right to property, which is no longer a fundamental right but a legal right under Article 300A.
– Option D refers to the protection against self-incrimination, which is guaranteed under Article 20(3) of the Constitution (“No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself”).

Subscribe on YouTube
Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5