Fundamental Rights

61. Which among the following actions would violate human rights? 1. State

Which among the following actions would violate human rights?
1. State forces disrupting peaceful protests.
2. State forces carrying out search warrants in insurgency affected areas.
3. State forces engaging with armed insurgents in civilian areas resulting in loss of civilian lives.
Select the correct answer using the code given below:

Subscribe on YouTube
1 and 3
1 and 2
3 only
None of the above
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CAPF – 2010
Download PDFAttempt Online
Statement 1 describes state forces disrupting *peaceful* protests. The right to peaceful assembly is a fundamental human right. Disrupting such protests, especially through excessive force, is a violation of human rights. Statement 3 describes state forces engaging armed insurgents in civilian areas resulting in civilian deaths. While engaging armed threats is legitimate, doing so in civilian areas requires utmost caution to protect civilians. The outcome of civilian deaths strongly suggests a failure to take adequate precautions or the use of disproportionate force, which constitutes a violation of human rights and potentially international humanitarian law principles like distinction and proportionality. Statement 2 describes state forces carrying out lawful search warrants, which is a legitimate function of law enforcement and does not inherently violate human rights if conducted according to legal procedures and with respect for dignity. Therefore, actions 1 and 3 would violate human rights.
Violating the right to peaceful assembly (1) and causing civilian casualties due to insufficient care or disproportionate force during engagements in civilian areas (3) are human rights violations. Lawful search warrants (2) are not.
International human rights law protects rights such as the right to peaceful assembly and the right to life. International humanitarian law, applicable during armed conflicts, provides rules for the conduct of hostilities, including the protection of civilians and principles like distinction between combatants and civilians, and proportionality in attack. State actions must adhere to these frameworks.

Join Our Telegram Channel

62. Which of the following statements with regard to Article 19(1) of the

Which of the following statements with regard to Article 19(1) of the Constitution of India is/are correct ?

Join Our Telegram Channel
  • 1. Freedoms under this Article are not absolute
  • 2. Reasonable restrictions can be imposed on the exercise of freedoms under this Article

Select the answer using the code given below :

1 only
2 only
Both 1 and 2
Neither 1 nor 2
This question was previously asked in
UPSC NDA-2 – 2024
Download PDFAttempt Online
Both 1 and 2 are correct.
Article 19(1) of the Constitution of India guarantees certain fundamental freedoms (like freedom of speech and expression, assembly, association, movement, residence, and profession). However, these freedoms are not absolute. Statement 1 is correct because the exercise of these freedoms is subject to limitations. Statement 2 is correct because Article 19(2) to 19(6) explicitly provide for the imposition of ‘reasonable restrictions’ on these freedoms on specific grounds mentioned in those clauses (e.g., public order, security of the state, defamation, etc.).
The concept of ‘reasonable restrictions’ implies that the limitations imposed must be just, fair, and not excessive, and their reasonableness can be challenged in a court of law. This balance between fundamental rights and necessary restrictions is a key feature of the Indian Constitution.

Subscribe on YouTube

63. Which one of the following is not a part of Fundamental Rights?

Which one of the following is not a part of Fundamental Rights?

Subscribe on YouTube
Right to education
Right to establish educational institutions by minorities
Right to be conferred with titles
Right against untouchability
This question was previously asked in
UPSC NDA-2 – 2021
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct option is C, Right to be conferred with titles.
Fundamental Rights are enshrined in Part III of the Indian Constitution.
A) Right to education (Article 21A) is a Fundamental Right.
B) Right to establish educational institutions by minorities (Article 30) is a Fundamental Right.
D) Right against untouchability (Article 17) is a Fundamental Right.
C) Article 18 of the Constitution abolishes titles, except military and academic distinctions. It prohibits the State from conferring titles on citizens and prohibits citizens from accepting titles from foreign states. It does not grant a “Right to be conferred with titles”. In fact, it restricts the use of titles.
Article 18 is part of the Right to Equality (Articles 14-18). Its purpose is to prevent the creation of a privileged class and promote social equality. The National Awards like Bharat Ratna, Padma Vibhushan, etc., are not considered ‘titles’ within the meaning of Article 18 as per the Supreme Court’s interpretation in the Balaji Raghavan v. Union of India case (1996).

Join Our Telegram Channel

64. Which one of the following is not a writ?

Which one of the following is not a writ?

Subscribe on YouTube
Mandamus
Habeas Corpus
Certiorari
Severability
This question was previously asked in
UPSC NDA-2 – 2021
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct option is D, Severability.
Writs are legal orders issued by superior courts (Supreme Court and High Courts in India) to command a person or entity to do or refrain from doing something. The Indian Constitution empowers the Supreme Court (Article 32) and High Courts (Article 226) to issue specific writs for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights and for other purposes. The five main types of writs are Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Certiorari, and Quo Warranto.
Mandamus (A), Habeas Corpus (B), and Certiorari (C) are all established writs. Mandamus means ‘we command’ and orders a public official to perform a duty. Habeas Corpus means ‘to have the body of’ and directs a person who has detained another to produce the body before the court. Certiorari means ‘to be certified’ or ‘to be informed’ and is issued by a higher court to quash an order of a lower court or tribunal. Severability (D), on the other hand, is a legal doctrine, specifically the Doctrine of Severability (or Separability), which states that if a part of a statute is held unconstitutional, the rest of the statute can remain valid and operative if the void part is severable from the rest. It is not a writ.

Join Our Telegram Channel

65. Which one among the following is not a Fundamental Right under the Con

Which one among the following is not a Fundamental Right under the Constitution of India?

Subscribe on YouTube
Right to equality
Right to freedom
Right to citizenship
Right against exploitation
This question was previously asked in
UPSC NDA-2 – 2018
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct answer is C) Right to citizenship.
The Constitution of India guarantees Fundamental Rights in Part III (Articles 12-35). Citizenship is dealt with separately in Part II (Articles 5-11). While citizenship is essential for enjoying certain fundamental rights, the status of citizenship itself is not listed as a Fundamental Right under Part III.
The six broad categories of Fundamental Rights recognized under the Constitution of India are:
1. Right to Equality (Articles 14-18)
2. Right to Freedom (Articles 19-22)
3. Right against Exploitation (Articles 23-24)
4. Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25-28)
5. Cultural and Educational Rights (Articles 29-30)
6. Right to Constitutional Remedies (Article 32)
The Right to Property was originally a Fundamental Right but was removed from Part III by the 44th Amendment Act, 1978, and made a legal right under Article 300A in Part XII.

Join Our Telegram Channel

66. Fundamental right guaranteed under which one of the following Articles

Fundamental right guaranteed under which one of the following Articles of the Constitution of India is available only to the citizens of India ?

Join Our Telegram Channel
Article 19
Article 20
Article 21
Article 22
This question was previously asked in
UPSC NDA-1 – 2019
Download PDFAttempt Online
The fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of India is available only to the citizens of India.
Article 19 guarantees six fundamental rights relating to the freedom of speech and expression, assembly, association, movement, residence, and profession. These rights are specifically limited to citizens of India.
Articles 20 (Protection in respect of conviction for offences), Article 21 (Protection of life and personal liberty), and Article 22 (Protection against arrest and detention) are available to both citizens and foreigners. Other fundamental rights available only to citizens include those under Articles 15, 16, 29, and 30.

Subscribe on YouTube

67. The citizens of India do not have which one of the following Fundament

The citizens of India do not have which one of the following Fundamental Rights ?

Subscribe on YouTube
Right to reside and settle in any part of India
Right to acquire, hold and dispose of property
Right to practice any profession
Right to form co-operative societies
This question was previously asked in
UPSC NDA-1 – 2016
Download PDFAttempt Online
The right to acquire, hold and dispose of property was removed from the list of Fundamental Rights by the 44th Amendment Act of 1978 and is now a legal right under Article 300A. Therefore, citizens of India do not have this right as a Fundamental Right.
– Article 19(1)(f) and Article 31 of the Constitution originally guaranteed the right to property as a Fundamental Right.
– Due to various legal and social issues, particularly related to land reforms and acquisition for public purposes, the government felt the need to remove it from the Fundamental Rights chapter.
– The 44th Amendment Act, 1978, repealed Article 19(1)(f) and Article 31.
– A new Article 300A was inserted in Part XII of the Constitution, stating that “No person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law.” This makes it a constitutional or legal right, meaning the state cannot deprive a person of property except by enacting a law, but it is not subject to the extensive protection and enforceability mechanisms available for Fundamental Rights.
The other rights listed are indeed Fundamental Rights available to citizens under Article 19:
– Right to reside and settle in any part of India (Article 19(1)(e)).
– Right to practice any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business (Article 19(1)(g)).
– Right to form associations or unions or co-operative societies (Article 19(1)(c) – cooperative societies added by 97th Amendment Act, 2011).

Join Our Telegram Channel

68. Which of the following is/are not fundamental right(s) under the Const

Which of the following is/are not fundamental right(s) under the Constitution of India ?

Select the correct answer using the code given below :

Join Our Telegram Channel
  • 1. Right to education.
  • 2. Right to work.
  • 3. Right to form associations.
  • 4. Right to practise any profession.
1 and 2
2 and 4
2 only
1 and 3
This question was previously asked in
UPSC NDA-1 – 2015
Download PDFAttempt Online
The question asks to identify which of the listed rights are *not* fundamental rights under the Constitution of India.
1. Right to education is a fundamental right under Article 21A, inserted by the 86th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2002.
2. Right to work is not a fundamental right. It is mentioned as a Directive Principle of State Policy under Article 41, which directs the state to make effective provision for securing the right to work, to education and to public assistance in cases of unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement, and in other cases of undeserved want.
3. Right to form associations is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(c), which is part of the Right to Freedom.
4. Right to practise any profession is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g), which is part of the Right to Freedom.
Only statement 2 is not a fundamental right. Therefore, the correct option is C, which indicates “2 only”.
Fundamental Rights (Part III) are justiciable, meaning individuals can approach courts for their enforcement. Directive Principles of State Policy (Part IV), like the right to work, are non-justiciable guidelines for the government.
While the right to work is not a fundamental right, the right to livelihood has been interpreted by the Supreme Court as part of the fundamental right to life under Article 21.

Subscribe on YouTube

69. Article 21 of the Constitution of India includes 1. Rights of transg

Article 21 of the Constitution of India includes

  • 1. Rights of transgenders
  • 2. Rights of craniopagus twins
  • 3. Rights of mentally retarded women to bear a child

Select the correct answer using the code given below.

Subscribe on YouTube
1 only
1 and 2 only
2 and 3 only
1, 2 and 3
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CDS-2 – 2017
Download PDFAttempt Online
Statements 1, 2 and 3 are included within the scope of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
– Article 21 guarantees the Right to Life and Personal Liberty. The Supreme Court has given a very broad and expansive interpretation to this right.
– Statement 1: The Supreme Court in NALSA v. Union of India (2014) held that the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 includes the right to gender identity and personal dignity for transgender persons.
– Statement 2: The right to life under Article 21 includes the right to a dignified life, physical integrity, and access to necessary medical care. Complex medical situations, such as those involving conjoined twins, clearly involve fundamental questions about the right to life and bodily autonomy protected under Article 21.
– Statement 3: The right to personal liberty under Article 21 includes reproductive autonomy and the right to make decisions about one’s body, including the right to bear children. While complex considerations exist for individuals with mental disabilities, their fundamental rights under Article 21, including aspects of reproductive rights, are protected and cannot be arbitrarily denied.
The interpretation of Article 21 by the judiciary has expanded its scope significantly to include various rights considered essential for a dignified human existence, such as the right to health, environment, privacy, education, etc., beyond merely the right to physical existence. The statements reflect this broad judicial interpretation.

Join Our Telegram Channel

70. Given below are four legal terms/maxims. Which one of them means ‘no m

Given below are four legal terms/maxims. Which one of them means ‘no man (person) shall be condemned unheard’?

Subscribe on YouTube
Autrefois convict
Non bis in idem
Habeas Corpus
Audi Alteram Partem
This question was previously asked in
UPSC Geoscientist – 2024
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct option is D.
The legal maxim “Audi Alteram Partem” is a fundamental principle of natural justice which translates to “hear the other side” or “let the other party be heard”. It ensures that no person is condemned or punished without being given a fair opportunity to present their case.
A) Autrefois convict: A legal plea meaning the defendant has already been tried and convicted for the same offense. It is a facet of the rule against double jeopardy.
B) Non bis in idem: A Latin phrase meaning “not twice in the same (matter)”. It is the principle of double jeopardy, preventing a person from being tried or punished multiple times for the same crime.
C) Habeas Corpus: A legal writ, meaning “you shall have the body”. It is a procedural tool used to challenge unlawful detention, requiring the detaining authority to bring the person before a court to justify the detention.
D) Audi Alteram Partem: A principle of natural justice requiring that both sides in a dispute be given an opportunity to be heard. It directly means “hear the other side” and encapsulates the idea that no one should be condemned without a hearing. This matches the phrase “no man (person) shall be condemned unheard”.

Join Our Telegram Channel
Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5