1. When was the Supreme Court inaugurated in India?
(a) 27 January, 1950
(b) 28 January, 1950
(c) 29 January, 1950
(d) 30 January, 1950
[M.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2013]
Ans. (b) 28 January, 1950
- The highest court in India started on January 28, 1950.
|
2. The sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court of India is–
(a) 24
(b) 20
(c) 18
(d) 9
[38th B.P.S.C. (Pre) 1992]
Ans. (*)
- The Supreme Court of India was set up based on the Constitution of India.
- It is the highest court and the final court for settling disputes.
- The Constitution of India states how the Supreme Court should be formed and what it should do.
- In the 1950s, the Supreme Court had only 8 members, including the Chief Justice.
- Over the years, the number increased to 34, including the Chief Justice.
- In 2019, a law was passed to increase the number of judges in the Supreme Court from 31 to 34.
- Right now, there are 34 members in the Supreme Court including the Chief Justice.
|
3. The Supreme Court consists of a Chief Justice and
(a) Seven Judges
(b) Nine Judges
(c) Eleven Judges
(d) Twenty-five Judges
[Uttarakhand U.D.A./L.D.A. (Pre) 2007]
Ans. (*)
- The Indian Constitution states that the Supreme Court should have a certain number of Judges, and this number can be increased by Parliament.
- In 1950, the Supreme Court started with a Chief Justice and 7 other Judges.
- As the workload of the court increased, Parliament gradually increased the number of Judges over the years, from 8 in 1950 to 34 (including the Chief Justice) in 2019.
|
4. The current sanctioned strength of Judges of the Supreme Court of India is –
(a) 20
(b) 25
(c) 30
(d) 31
[U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2015]
Ans. (*)
- The Constitution of India states that the Supreme Court must have a certain number of judges.
- In 1950, the original number was 8, but as the court got busier, the number of judges increased over time.
- Now, in 2019, the number of Supreme Court Judges has increased to 34 (including the Chief Justice).
|
5. According to a decision taken by the Cabinet in February 2008, the Government would increase the strength of Judges in the Supreme Court. Under this decision, apart from the Chief Justice of India, the Supreme Court would then have-
(a) 32 Judges
(b) 30 Judges
(c) 38 Judges
(d) 26 Judges
[U.P. Lower Sub. (Pre) 2004]
Ans. (*)
- The Constitution of India states that the Supreme Court must have a certain number of judges.
- In 1950, the number was set at 8, but since then it has been increased several times and now stands at 34, including the Chief Justice.
- This number has been increased by Parliament over the years due to the growing workload of the court.
|
6. The Supreme Court in India was established-
(a) By an Act of Parliament in 1950
(b) Under Indian Independence Act, 1947
(c) Under Indian Government Act, 1953
(d) By the Indian Constitution
[42th B.P.S.C. (Pre) 1997]
Ans. (d) By the Indian Constitution
- The Supreme Court of India opened on January 28, 1950. It replaced the Federal court of India which was set up under the Government of India Act of 1935.
|
7. Of the following statements, which one is not correct?
(a) The Supreme Court was constituted in 1950.
(b) The Supreme Court is the highest Court of appeal in the country.
(c) The Supreme Court can hear from any High Court/Tribunal except Court-martial.
(d) The Supreme Court can hear from any High Court/ Tribunals as well as from Court-martial.
[53rd to 55thB.P.S.C. (Pre) 2011]
Ans. (c) The Supreme Court can hear from any High Court/Tribunal except Court-martial.
- The Armed Forces Tribunal Act of 2007 states that you can appeal a Court Martial decision to the Supreme Court.
|
8. The power to increase the number of Judges in the Supreme Court of India is vested in –
(a) The President of India
(b) The Parliament
(c) The Chief Justice of India
(d) The Law Commission
[I.A.S. (Pre) 2014 44th B.P.S.C. (Pre) 2000]
Ans. (b) The Parliament
- The Constitution says that the Supreme Court must be formed.
- The Parliament has the power to decide how many judges will be in the Supreme Court of India.
|
9. A Judge of the Supreme Court may resign his office by writing a letter to –
(a) The Chief Justice
(b) The President
(c) The Prime Minister
(d) The Law Minister
[U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2014]
Ans. (b) The President
- Article 124 (2) (a) of the Indian Constitution states that a Judge can resign their office by writing a letter addressed to the President.
- The President will appoint every Judge of the Supreme Court with a signed and sealed warrant.
- They will stay in office until they reach the age of 65.
|
10. Who appoints the Judges of the Supreme Court of India?
(a) The Prime Minister
(b) The President
(c) The Chief Justice of India
(d) The Ombudsman
(e) None of the above / more than one of the above
[63rd B. P.S.C. (Pre) 2017]
Ans. (b) The President
- The Indian Constitution states that a Judge can quit their job by writing a letter to the President.
- The President is the one who appoints a Judge to the Supreme Court, and they stay in office until they turn 65.
|
11. What is the retirement age of the Judges of the Supreme Court?
(a) 60 years
(b) 62 years
(c) 65 years
(d) 70 years
(e) None of the above / more than one of the above
[63rd B. P.S.C. (Pre) 2017]
Ans. (c) 65 Years
- The Indian Constitution states that a Judge may quit their job by writing a letter to the President.
- The President will appoint a Judge to the Supreme Court and they will stay in office until they turn 65 years old.
|
12. How can a Judge of the Supreme Court be removed?
(a) By the will of the Chief Justice
(b) By the President
(c) By the President on the recommendation of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
(d) By the President on the recommendation of the Parliament
[M.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 1993]
Ans. (d) By the President on the recommendation of the Parliament
- According to Article 124(4), a Judge of the Supreme Court can only be removed from their position by the President.
- This requires an address from both Houses of Parliament with a majority vote from the total membership of each House and two-thirds of those present and voting.
- Additionally, a person who was previously a Judge of the Supreme Court cannot practice law in any court or other authority in India.
- Note: Impeachment is only used to remove the President and not judges from the Supreme Court or High Court. The constitution uses the term ‘Remove’ to get rid of them.
|
13. A Judge of the Supreme Court can be removed by the President of India after–
(a) An inquiry by C.B.I.
(b) An inquiry by the Chief Justice of India
(c) A report by the Bar Council of India
(d) An impeachment by the Parliament
[Chhattisgarh P.C.S. (Pre) 2003]
Ans. (d) An impeachment by the Parliament
- According to Article 124(4), a Judge of the Supreme Court cannot be removed from their position unless the President agrees to it after a majority of the members in both Houses of Parliament (at least two-thirds of the members present) agree and vote for it in the same session.
- Furthermore, this can only happen if the Judge has proven to have misbehaved or is incapable.
- Additionally, a person who used to be a Judge of the Supreme Court is not allowed to practice Law in any court or before any other authority in India.
|
14. Consider the following statements :
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 proven 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
(c) 3 and 4 only
(d) 1, 3 and 4
[I.A.S. (Pre) 2019]
Ans. (c) 3 and 4 only
- The Speaker of the Lok Sabha can turn down a proposal to get rid of a judge of the Supreme Court of India according to the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.
- The Act lays out the steps that need to be taken to remove a Supreme Court judge.
- The Constitution states that a Supreme Court judge can only be removed from their office if the President approves an address from both houses of parliament, with more than two-thirds of the members present and voting, in the same session.
- This address must state that the judge has been proven to have either misbehaved or been unable to do their job.
- The Constitution does not explain what is meant by misbehavior or incapacity.
|
15. The age of retirement in the Supreme Court is-
(a) 62 years
(b) 63 Years
(c) 64 years
(d) 65 Years
[U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 1990]
Ans. (d) 65 Years
- Supreme Court Judges must retire at 65, while High Court Judges must retire at 62.
|
16. “The age of a Judge of the Supreme Court of India shall be determined by such authority and in a manner as Parliament may by-laws provide” inserted by
(a) 15th Constitution Amendment
(b) 16th Constitution Amendment
(c) 17th Constitution Amendment
(d) 18th Constitution Amendment
[R.A.S/R.T.S (Pre) 2018]
Ans. (a) 15th Constitution Amendment
- The 15th Amendment from 1963 states that the age of Supreme Court judges will be set by a law made by Parliament.
- The 16th Amendment from 1963, informally known as the ‘Anti-secession Bill’, was made to stop any local political leaders from using the election process to try and break away from India.
- The 17th Amendment from 1964 was to change Article 31-A and the 18th Amendment from 1966 was to make it clearer what is meant by the term ‘State’ in Article 3.
|
17. Salaries of the Judges of the Supreme Court are determined by –
(a) Pay Commission appointed by the President.
(b) Law Commission
(c) Parliament
(d) Council of Ministers
[U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2008]
Ans. (c) Parliament
- The Constitution states that the Supreme Court Judges will be paid a salary that is chosen by Parliament by law.
- Until a law is made, the salary will be what is listed in the Second Schedule.
|
18. What is the provision to safeguard the autonomy of the Supreme Court of India?
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 staff s 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
(c) Only 4
(d) 1, 2, 3 and 4
[I.A.S. (Pre) 2012]
Ans. (a) 1 and 3 only
- The Supreme Court is the protector of the Constitution.
- The President can remove the Supreme Court Judges, but this must be approved by both Houses of Parliament and not by the Chief Justice of India.
- The President of India has to talk to the Chief Justice of India when appointing Judges so that the Supreme Court is independent and decisions are not based on political or other reasons.
- The Judges’ salaries come from the Consolidated Fund of India, so statements 1 and 3 are true.
- The Chief Justice of India can choose workers for the Supreme Court without the Executive interfering and can decide their conditions of service.
|
19. The Judges of the Supreme Court, after retirement, are permitted to carry on practice before –
(a) Supreme Court only
(b) High Courts only
(c) Both the Supreme Court and High Court
(d) None of the Courts
[U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 1997]
Ans. (d) None of the Courts
- The Constitution states that no person who has been a Judge of the Supreme Court is allowed to speak or act in any court or to any other authority in India.
- Also, no person who has been a permanent Judge of a High Court after the start of the Constitution can speak or act in any court or to any other authority in India, except for the Supreme Court and other High Courts.
|
20. The Acting Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India is appointed by
(a) Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
(b) Prime Minister
(c) President
(d) Law Minister
[U.P.U.D.A./L.D.A. (Pre) 2001]
Ans. (c) President
- The Indian Constitution states that the President of India must appoint an Acting Chief Justice when the position of Chief Justice is empty or if the Chief Justice is unable to do his job.
- There is no rule about additional judges in the Supreme Court of India.
|
21. Which of the following types of judges/Judges can be appointed in the Supreme Court of India?
(i) ad hoc Judge
(ii) Additional Judge
Codes:
(a) (i) is true and (ii) is false
(b) (i) is false and (ii) is true
(c) Both (i) and (ii) are true
(d) Both (i) and (ii) are false
[M.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2020]
Ans. (a) (i) is true and (ii) is false
- The President of India appoints an Acting Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as stated in Article 126 of the Indian Constitution.
- This is done when the role of Chief Justice is not filled or they are unable to do their job.
- There is no extra judge in the Supreme Court of India.
|
22. With reference to the Indian judiciary, consider the following statements :
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 judgment as the Supreme Court does.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
[I.A.S. (Pre) 2021]
Ans. (c) Both 1 and 2
- According to Article 128, the Chief Justice of India can, with the President’s approval, ask any person who has been a judge of the Supreme Court or the Federal Court, or who was previously a judge of a High Court and is suitable to become a judge of the Supreme Court, to serve in the Supreme Court.
- Article 215 states that all High Courts are legally recorded courts and have the right to punish people for disobeying the court.
|
23. The Judges of the Supreme Court of India are appointed by the President –
(a) After recommendation by Rajya Sabha
(b) On the advice of Lok Sabha
(c) On the advice of Prime Minister
(d) In consultation with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
[Uttarakhand U.D.A./L.D.A. (Mains) 2006, 2007]
Ans. (d) In consultation with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
- According to Article 124(2) of the Indian Constitution, the President must consult some Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts in the States before appointing a Judge of the Supreme Court.
- In 1993 it became mandatory for the President to consult the Chief Justice of India before making the appointment.
- In 1998, the Supreme Court ruled that the consultation of the Chief Justice of India should include the collegium (Chief Justice of India and four other senior Judges).
|
24. Ad hoc Judges are appointed in the Supreme Court when–
(a) Some Judges go on long leave.
(b) No one is available for permanent appointment.
(c) There is an abnormal increase in cases pending before the Court.
(d) There is no quorum of the Judges available to hold.
[I.A.S. (Pre) 2000]
Ans. (d) There is no quorum of the Judges available to hold.
- The Indian Constitution (Article 127) states that if the Supreme Court does not have enough Judges to continue a session, the Chief Justice of India can request a High Court Judge (who is eligible to be a Supreme Court Judge) to join them for as long as needed.
- This request must be made with the President’s approval and after consulting with the Chief Justice of the High Court.
|
25. The Indian Constitution provides for the appointment of “Ad hoc Judges” in–
(a) Supreme Court
(b) High Courts
(c) District and Session Courts
(d) All the above
[U.P.P.S.C. (GIC) 2010, U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2004]
Ans. (a) Supreme Court
- According to the Constitution, if there are not enough judges of the Supreme Court to have a meeting, the Chief Justice of India can ask the President for their approval and consult with the Chief Justice of the High Court.
- The Chief Justice of India can then pick a qualified judge from the High Court to join the Supreme Court meeting for a certain amount of time.
|
26. In which year was the Collegium System for the appointment of Judges adopted by the Supreme Court of India?
(a) 1993
(b) 1996
(c) 2000
(d) 2004
[Uttarakhand P.C.S. (Pre) 2016]
Ans. (a) 1993
- In 1993, the Supreme Court adopted the Collegium System for appointing Judges.
- This system started with three Supreme Court decisions known as the Three Judges Cases.
|
27. The Supreme Court’s Collegium comprises the Chief Justice of India and a few Senior Judges for recommending appointees to the Supreme Court. The number of such Senior Judges, who are part of this body, is
(a) 3
(b) 4
(c) 5
(d) 6
[U.P.P.S.C. (GIC) 2010]
Ans. (b) 4
- The Supreme Court’s Collegium is made up of the Chief Justice of India and four other judges who decide who should be appointed to the Supreme Court.
|
28. The minimum number of Judges of the Supreme Court required for hearing any case involving interpretation of the Constitution is –
(a) Ten
(b) Nine
(c) Seven
(d) Five
[U.P.P.C.S.(Pre) 2012]
Ans. (d) Five
- At least five Supreme Court Judges must be present to listen to any case that involves interpreting the Constitution.
- This is known as a Constitutional Bench.
|
29. The power of the Supreme Court of India to decide disputes between the Centre and the State falls under its–
(a) Advisory jurisdiction
(b) Appellate jurisdiction
(c) Original jurisdiction
(d) Constitutional jurisdiction
[I.A.S. (Pre) 1996, 2014]
Ans. (c) Original jurisdiction
- Article 131 of the Indian Constitution outlines the Supreme Court’s original legal authority.
- This means that the Supreme Court is the only court that can hear cases about any disagreement.
- The Indian Government and one or more States, or the Indian Government and one or more States on one side and one or more States on the other side, can have disputes between them that involve legal rights.
- However, this does not apply to disputes that arise from treaties, agreements, and other instruments made before the Constitution began and that are still in effect.
|
30. Which of the following are included in the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court?
1. A dispute between the Government of India and One or more States.
2. A dispute regarding elections to either the House of the Parliament or that of the 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
(c) 1 and 4
(d) 3 and 4
[I.A.S. (Pre) 2012]
Ans. (c) 1 and 4
- Article 131 of the Indian Constitution states that the Supreme Court is the only court that will have the power to make decisions about any arguments or disputes.
- The Government of India can settle disputes between itself and one or more States, between itself and a State or States on one side and one or more States on the other, or between two or more States if the dispute involves a question of law or fact that affects a legal right.
- This does not include disputes arising from any treaty, agreement, covenant, engagement, or other similar instrument that was in place before the Constitution was in effect and continues to be in operation.
|
31. The second largest bench Constituted by the Supreme Court till date was in the –
(a) Golaknath Case
(b) Minerva Mills Case
(c) Bank Nationalisation Case
(d) T.M.A. Pai Foundation Case
[U.P.P.C.S. (Spl) (Mains) 2004]
Ans. (a) Golaknath Case
- The Supreme Court has had two very big benches in its history.
- The biggest one was made up of 13 judges and was for the Keshavananda Bharati case in 1973.
- The second biggest was made up of 11 judges and was for the Golaknath vs. State of Punjab case in 1967.
|
32. In which of the following cases, the Supreme Court of India enunciated the ‘Doctrine of Basic Structure’?
(a) Golaknath
(b) A.K. Gopalan
(c) Keshvanand Bharti
(d) Menka Gandhi
[U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2012]
Ans. (c) Keshvanand Bharti
- In the 1973 case of Keshavananda Bharti vs. State of Kerala, the Indian Supreme Court had 13 judges, and 7 of them agreed that the Parliament could only change the Constitution if it did not ruin the main parts of it.
- This means the Court can make sure the Parliament is not changing the Constitution too much.
|
33. Which one of the following cases propounded the concept of the ‘Basic structure’ of the Indian Constitution?
(a) Indira Sahni Case
(b) Shankari Prasad’s Case
(c) Rudal Shah’s Case
(d) None of the above
[U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2014, U.P. Lower Sub. (Mains) 2013]
Ans. (d) None of the above
- In the Keshavananda Bharti vs. State of Kerala case (1973), the Supreme Court of India had thirteen judges review it.
- Seven of them agreed that the Parliament can only change the Constitution in a way that won’t “hurt or ruin the main parts of the Constitution” (under Article 368).
- Constitutional changes can be checked by the court and the Court put a limit on the Parliament’s power to change the Constitution.
|
34. 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 –
(a) Five
(b) Seven
(c) Eleven
(d) Thirteen
[U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2012]
Ans. (a) Five
- In a court case that involves a big question of law related to the Constitution, there should be at least 5 judges hearing the case.
- Usually, the judges are in odd numbers like 3, 5, 7, 9, or 11 to prevent different votes and opinions.
|
35. In which of the following cases, did the Supreme Court hold that? “Fundamental Rights enable a man to chalk out his life in the manner he likes best “?
(a) Indira Gandhi Vs. Raj Narain
(b) Golaknath Vs. The State of Punjab
(c) Bank Nationalization Case
(d) Azhar Vs. Municipal Corporation
[U.P.P.C.S.(Pre) 2012]
Ans. (b) Golaknath Vs. The State of Punjab
- The Supreme Court decided that the idea was true in the Golaknath Vs. the State of Punjab case.
|
36. Identify the incorrect pair of Cases and Ruling in that case by the Supreme Court:
(a) Indira Sawhney Case- Creamy Layer for Other Backward Classes.
(b) Vishakaha Case – Protection of working women against sexual harassment at their place of work.
(c) Maneka Gandhi Case – Articles 14, 19, and 21 are not mutually exclusive.
(d) Bella Banerjee Case – The right to travel abroad is a part of personal liberty.
[R.A.S./R.T.S. (Pre) 2013]
Ans. (d) Bella Banerjee Case – The right to travel abroad is a part of personal liberty.
- The Bella Banerjee Case involves the West Bengal Land Development and Planning Act from 1948.
- The Maneka Gandhi case in 1978 involved the idea that people have the right to travel outside of their country.
- Answer option (d) is incorrect.
|
37. Which Article of the Constitution of India deals with the Appellate Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in connection with Constitutional Cases?
(a) Article 131
(b) Article 132
(c) Article 132 read with Article 134 A
(d) Article 133 read with Article 134 A
[U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2004, U.P.U.D.A./L.D.A. (Pre) 2002, U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2001]
Ans. (c) Article 132 read with Article 134 A
- The Constitution of India’s Article 131 deals with the Supreme Court’s Original Jurisdiction.
- Article 132 is about the Supreme Court’s Appellate Jurisdiction, where it hears appeals from High Court decisions in India in civil, criminal and other proceedings.
- Article 133 is about the Supreme Court’s Appellate Jurisdiction in civil cases from High Courts.
- Article 134A is a certificate for appeals to the Supreme Court.
- Together, these Articles create the Supreme Court’s Appellate Jurisdiction in constitutional disputes.
|
38. All the cases regarding interpretation of the Constitution can be brought to the Supreme Court under its–
(a) Original Jurisdiction
(b) Appellate Jurisdiction
(c) Advisory Jurisdiction
(d) None of the above
[U.P. Lower Sub. (Mains) 2013]
Ans. (b) Appellate Jurisdiction
- Any disputes about how the Constitution should be understood can be taken to the Supreme Court, which has the power to rule on these cases. This power is divided into different areas.
- The Supreme Court has the power to hear appeals from High Courts on legal matters from anywhere in India, including civil, criminal, or other cases, which involve questions of law or interpreting the Constitution (Article 132).
- The Supreme Court has the right to hear appeals about civil cases from the High Courts, including any cases that involve questions about the Constitution (Article 133).
- The Supreme Court has the power to look at criminal cases (which may or may not involve constitutional questions) according to Article 134.
|
39. Consider the following statements and state which one of them is correct.
(a) The Supreme Court of India has only Original Jurisdiction.
(b) It has only Original and Appellate Jurisdiction.
(c) It has only Advisory and Appellate Jurisdiction.
(d) It has Original, Appellate as well as Advisory Jurisdiction
[U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2010, 2013]
Ans. (d) It has Original, Appellate as well as Advisory Jurisdiction
- Article 131 of India’s Constitution outlines the Supreme Court’s Original Jurisdiction, Articles 132-136 are concerned with its Appellate Jurisdiction, and Article 143 is about the Supreme Court’s Advisory Jurisdiction.
|
40. Curative Petition in India can be filed in the Supreme Court under Article –
(a) 138
(b) 140
(c) 142
(d) 146
[U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2014]
Ans. (c) 142
- The Supreme Court of India came up with the idea of a Curative Petition in the Rupa Ashok Hurra Vs. Ashok Hurra case in 2002.
- This type of petition can be taken to the Supreme Court through Article 142 of the Constitution.
|
41. Which Article of the Constitution permits the Supreme Court to review its judgment or order?
(a) Article 137
(b) Article 130
(c) Article 139
(d) Article 138
[U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2009]
Ans. (a) Article 137
- Under Article 137, the Supreme Court has the right to look back at its decisions, as long as it follows any laws and rules made by Parliament or the Indian Constitution.
|
42. 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?
(a) The President of India has the power to review such judgment or order.
(b) The Supreme Court has the power to review its judgment or order.
(c) The Cabinet has the power to review such judgment or order with the permission of the President of India.
(d) The Supreme Court does not have the power to review its judgment or order.
[U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2011]
Ans. (b) The Supreme Court has the power to review its judgment or order.
- According to Article 137, the Supreme Court has the ability to look back on its decisions, as long as it follows any law or rule made by Parliament or the Indian Constitution.
|
43. In India, Judicial Review implies
(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.
(c) the power of the Judiciary to review all the legislative enactments before they are assented to by the President
(d) the power of the Judiciary to review its own judgments given earlier in similar or different cases.
[I.A.S. (Pre) 2017]
Ans. (a) the power of the Judiciary to pronounce upon the constitutionality of laws and executive orders.
- The Judicial Review is when the court system checks to make sure that laws passed by the Legislature and Executive do not violate the Constitution of India.
- If they do, the court can declare them void.
|
44. Judicial Review means that the Supreme Court –
(a) Has final authority over all issues.
(b) Can charge allegations against the President.
(c) Can review the issues decided by High Courts.
(d) Can declare illegal any law of the State.
[39th B.P.S.C. (Pre) 1994]
Ans. (d) Can declare illegal any law of the State.
- The Judicial Review is when the courts review laws to decide if they go against the Constitution of India.
- If they do, the courts can declare the law or order to be invalid.
|
45. Judicial Review implies the right of the Court to –
(a) Declare any law or order invalid if it is in conflict with the Constitution.
(b) Review the order of the Lower Courts.
(c) Hear appeals against the decision of the Lower Courts.
(d) Review the laws to see that they have been passed as per the procedure laid down.
[U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 1994]
Ans. (a) Declare any law or order invalid if it is in conflict with the Constitution.
- The Judicial Review is when the Judiciary (court system) examines the Constitution of India and decides if any law or order passed by the Legislature or Executive is against it.
- If it is, the law or order is declared invalid.
|
46. Consider the following statements :
1. The Constitution of India defines its ‘basic structure’ in terms of federalism, secularism, fundamental rights, and democracy.
2. The Constitution of India provides for ‘judicial review’ to safeguard the citizens’ liberties and to preserve the ideals on which the Constitution is based.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
[I.A.S. (Pre) 2020]
Ans. (b) 2 only
- The phrase ‘Basic Structure’ is not written in the Constitution.
- It was first introduced by the Supreme Court in the Keshwanand Bharti Case in 1973.
- Therefore, statement 1 is wrong.
- According to Article 13, laws that are not in line with the Constitution will be invalid.
- Also, the State cannot make a law that takes away or reduces the rights given in the Constitution. So, statement 2 is correct.
|
47. The system of Judicial Review, is prevalent in
(a) India only
(b) U.K. only
(c) U.S.A. only
(d) Both in India and the U.S.A.
[U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2013]
Ans. (d) Both in India and the U.S.A.
- In India, the Judicial system has the power to check the actions of the Legislative and Executive branches.
- This is known as Judicial review and is stated in Article 13 of the Constitution of India.
- In the United Kingdom, however, the Parliament is the highest authority, and laws it makes cannot be challenged in Court.
|
48. Under which Article of the Constitution the Courts have been prohibited from inquiring the proceedings of the Parliament?
(a) Article 127
(b) Article 122
(c) Article 126
(d) Article 139
[U.P.U.D.A./L.D.A. (Spl) (Mains) 2010]
Ans. (b) Article 122
- The Constitution says that the Courts are not allowed to ask questions about what happens in Parliament.
|
49. A Constitution (Amendment) Act may be declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of India if it –
(a) Establishes a three-tier federal setup in place of the existing two set.
(b) Removes the Right of Equality before the law from Part III and places it elsewhere in the Constitution.
(c) Replace the Parliamentary System of Executive with the Presidential one.
(d) Establishes a Federal Court of Appeal to lighten the burden of the Supreme Court.
[I.A.S. (Pre) 2009]
Ans. (b) Removes the Right of Equality before the law from Part III and places it elsewhere in the Constitution.
- The Supreme Court of India can decide that a Constitution (Amendment) Act is not valid if it moves the Right of Equality before the law away from Part III of the Constitution.
- This is because Article 13(2) says that the government should not make any laws that remove or reduce the rights in Part III, and any laws that do this are invalid.
|
50. With reference to the constitution of India, prohibitions or limitations or provisions contained in ordinary laws cannot act as prohibitions or limitations on constitutional powers under Article 142. It could mean which one of the following?
(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 a grave financial crisis in the country, the President of India can declare a Financial Emergency without counsel from the Cabinet.
(d) State Legislatures cannot make laws on certain matters without the concurrence of the Union Legislature.
[I.A.S. (Pre) 2019]
Ans. (b) The Supreme Court of India is not constrained in the exercise of its powers by laws made by the Parliament.
- The Supreme Court has the power to make decisions and orders in any case it deals with in order to make sure justice is served.
- These decisions and orders must be followed throughout India.
- No rules have been made yet for how this should be done, but the President will decide how it should be done until rules are made.
|
51. In India, the power of Judicial Review is enjoyed by?
(a) The Supreme Court alone
(b) The Supreme Court as well as High Courts
(c) All the Courts
(d) None of the above
[U.P. P.C.S. (Mains) 2017]
Ans. (b) The Supreme Court as well as High Courts
- Judicial Review is a concept that began in the United States and was first presented in the famous case of Marbury vs Madison (1803) by John Marshall, the then Chief Justice of the American Supreme Court.
- The Constitution of India gives the Supreme Court and High Courts the authority to review the laws.
- The Supreme Court has declared Judicial Review as an important part of the Constitution.
|
52. Judicial review in the Indian Constitution is based on –
(a) Due Process of Law
(b) Procedure established by Law
(c) Rule of Law
(d) Precedents and conventions
(e) None of the above
[Chhattisgarh P.C.S. (Pre) 2015]
Ans. (b) Procedure established by Law
- The Indian Constitution has a strong feature called Judicial Review which is run by an independent judiciary.
- This concept is outlined in Articles 13, 32, 136, 137, 226, and 227 of the Constitution.
- Judicial Review in India is done according to rules set by the law.
|
53. Who has the last authority to explain the Constitution?
(a) President
(b) Attorney General of India
(c) Speaker of Lok Sabha
(d) Supreme Court
[M.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 1994]
Ans. (d) Supreme Court
- The Supreme Court has the last say when it comes to understanding the Constitution.
- The Supreme Court is considered the protector of the Constitution.
|
54. Who said ‘ judicial activism’ should not become ‘judicial adventurism’?
(a) Justice P.N. Bhagavati
(b) Justice A.S. Anand
(c) Justice Ranjan Gogoi
(d) Justice Deepak Mishra
[Jharkhand P.C.S. (Pre) 2021]
Ans. (b) Justice A.S. Anand
- Justice A.S. Anand stated that courts should not take extreme actions.
- This is because when the executive and legislature do not act, courts tend to take action, but this should not become too extreme.
|
55. Who is the custodian of the Indian Constitution?
(a) President
(b) Parliament
(c) Council of Ministers
(d) Supreme Court
[M.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2010, 2015, M.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2016]
Ans. (d) Supreme Court
- Justice A.S. Anand stated that judges should not overstep their authority.
- Judicial activism is usually created because the executive branch and legislature do not take action, while Judicial adventurism is an extreme form of Judicial activism.
|
56. Which of the following is the custodian of the Constitution of India?
(a) The President of India
(b) The Prime Minister of India
(c) The Lok Sabha Secretariat
(d) The Supreme Court of India
[I.A.S. (Pre) 2015]
Ans. (d) The Supreme Court of India
- The Supreme Court is responsible for protecting the Constitution of India which is the highest law in the country.
- The Constitution is constantly changing and outlines the basic political principles, the responsibilities of the Government, and the rights and duties of citizens.
|
57. The Guardianship of the Indian Constitution is vested in:
(a) President
(b) Lok Sabha
(c) Supreme Court
(d) Council of Ministers
[M.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2015]
Ans. (c) Supreme Court
- The Supreme Court is responsible for protecting the Constitution of India, which is the highest law in India.
- The Constitution is a document that is constantly evolving and outlines basic political principles, the organization of the government, and the rights, duties, and goals of citizens.
|
58. Given below are two statements, one is labeled as Assertion (A) and the other as Reason (R).
Assertion (A): The Supreme Court of India has exclusive jurisdiction regarding the Constitutional Validity of Central laws.
Reason (R): The Supreme Court is the Guardian of the Indian 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).
(c) (A) is true, but (R) is false
(d) (A) is false, but (R) is true.
[U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2019]
Ans. (d) (A) is false, but (R) is true.
- The state High Courts have the right to decide if a central law follows the Constitution or not.
- The Supreme Court and High Courts can make orders (writs) to protect people’s basic rights.
- So, the Supreme Court is not the only one in charge.
- The Supreme Court looks after the Constitution of India.
- Option (a) is incorrect according to the UPPSC.
|
59. Who has the right to seek advisory opinion of the Supreme Court on any question of law –
(a) Prime Minister
(b) President
(c) Any High Court
(d) All of the above
[U. P. P. S.C. (GIC) 2010]
Ans. (b) President
- The Constitution of India states that the President has the authority to ask for advice from the Supreme Court.
|
60. Under this Article, the President of India refers to the Supreme Court regarding the process of appointment and transfer of Judges in the Supreme Court and High Courts.
(a) Article 127 sub-clause (1)
(b) Article 143 sub-clause (1)
(c) Article 143 sub Clause (11)
(d) Article 144 sub Clause (a)
[U.P. Lower Sub. (Pre) 1998]
Ans. (b) Article 143 sub-clause (1)
- Under Article 143 (1), the President has the power to ask the Supreme Court for their opinion on important legal or factual questions.
- This means the President can refer matters related to the appointment and transfer of judges in the Supreme Court and High Courts of India to the Supreme Court for consideration.
|
61. 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 –
(a) The President of India
(b) The Chief Justice of India
(c) The Parliament
(d) The Union Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs
[I.A.S. (Pre) 2003]
Ans. (c) The Parliament
- The Constitution says that Parliament has the power to give the Supreme Court additional authority to deal with matters in the Union List.
|
62. By whom the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India can be enlarged?
(a) President of India
(b) Parliament by passing a resolution
(c) Parliament by making a law
(d) President in consultation with Chief Justice of India
[Uttarakhand P.C.S. (Pre) 2012]
Ans. (c) Parliament by making a law
- The Parliament can give the Supreme Court of India more authority by passing a law.
- This is allowed under Article 138 of the Indian Constitution, which allows Parliament to expand the authority and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
|
63. Which of the following statements regarding the Advisory Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is correct?
(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
(c) 2 and 3
(d) 2 and 4
[I.A.S. (Pre) 1994]
Ans. (c) 2 and 3
- Article 143 states that the President can ask the Supreme Court for advice on matters of public importance, or any past agreements or similar subjects.
- The Supreme Court doesn’t have to answer in the first case, but they must in the second.
- The Supreme Court’s full bench of five members will hear the reference, but their advice isn’t binding on the government.
|
64. With reference to the Constitution of India, consider the following statements:
1. No High Court Shall have the Jurisdiction to declare any central law to be constitutionally invalid.
2. An amendment to the Constitution of India cannot be called into question by the Supreme Court of India.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
[I.A.S. (Pre) 2019]
Ans. (d) Neither 1 nor 2
- The 42nd Amendment Act of 1976 made it so that the High Court could not question the constitutional validity of Central Law.
- However, the 43rd Amendment Act of 1977 returned the original power to the High Court, allowing them to make Central Law unconstitutional if it was against the Constitution.
- The same goes for the Supreme Court, which can call into question any Constitutional Amendment if it goes against the basic structure of the Constitution.
- Therefore, both statements were incorrect.
|
65. The advisory powers of the Supreme Court of India imply that it may
(a) Advise the President on the issues of law or fact which are of public importance.
(b) Advise the government of India on all constitutional matters.
(c) Advise to the Prime Minister on legal matters.
(d) Advise to all the above persons.
[U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2016]
Ans. (a) Advise the President on the issues of law or fact which are of public importance.
- The 42nd Amendment Act in 1976 limited the High Court’s ability to check if laws made by the central government followed the Constitution.
- However, the 43rd Amendment Act in 1977 changed this, and the High Court and Supreme Court were allowed to question laws that went against the Constitution.
- Therefore, both of the statements are incorrect.
|
66. The Supreme Court of India tenders advice to the President on a matter of law or fact:
(a) On its initiative
(b) Only if he seeks such advice
(c) Only if the matter relates to the Fundamental Rights of citizens
(d) Only if the issue poses a threat to the unity and integrity of the country
[I.A.S. (Pre) 2001]
Ans. (b) Only if he seeks such advice
- According to the Indian Constitution, the President of India can ask for advice from the Supreme Court of India on any legal or public issue.
|
67. Who has the right under the Constitution to seek the opinion of the Supreme Court on the question of law?
(a) President
(b) Any High Court
(c) Prime Minister
(d) All the above
[U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2012]
Ans. (a) President
- The Indian Constitution has a rule (Article 143(1)) that says the Supreme Court of India can give advice to the President of India if asked, on legal or public matters.
|
68. Consider the following statements:
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 matter is related to the Fundamental Rights of the citizens.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) 3
(d) 1 and 2
[I.A.S. (Pre) 2010]
Ans. (b) 2 only
- The Indian Constitution states that the Supreme Court of India can give advice to the President of India about any legal or public issues.
|
69. 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)?
(a) Article 142
(b) Article 143
(c) Article 144
(d) Article 145
[I.A.S. (Pre) 2003]
Ans. (b) Article 143
- In 2002, President Abdul Kalam asked the Supreme Court for help with a disagreement between the Election Commission and the Government concerning the elections in Gujarat.
- The questions were about the limits of the Election Commission’s authority according to Article 324, the effect of Article 174 on the Commission’s power, and whether the Commission could suggest that the President impose a rule in a state.
|
70. Which of the following Articles of the Constitution of India have been declared by the Supreme Court as the ‘Inviolable basic structure’ of the Constitution:
Select the correct answer from the code given below:
1. Article 32
2. Article 226
3. Article 227
4. Article 245
Code :
(a) 1, 2 and 3
(b) 1, 3 and 4
(c) 1, 2 and 4
(d) 1, 2, 3 and 4
[U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 1999]
Ans. (a) 1, 2 and 3
- The Supreme Court ruled in the Kesavananda Bharati Case that the power of judicial review, which is given to both the Supreme Court and High Courts in the Constitution, is an important part of the Constitution’s basic structure.
- Article 227 states that High Courts have control over all other courts in the area it oversees.
- The ruling of the Kesavananda Bharati Case made these three articles an unchangeable part of the Constitution of India.
|
71. Under which Article of the Constitution of India Supreme Court safeguards the Fundamental Rights of the Indian citizens?
(a) 74
(b) 56
(c) 16
(d) 32
[U.P.P.S.C.(GIC) 2010]
Ans. (d) 32
- Article 32 of the Indian Constitution is the right for people to use legal remedies to enforce the fundamental rights that are written in Part III of the Constitution.
- The Supreme Court has the authority to give orders or writs to protect these fundamental rights.
|
72. To become a Judge of the Supreme Court, a person must be an advocate in the High Court for at least how many years?
(a) 20
(b) 10
(c) 8
(d) 25
[M.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2002]
Ans. (b) 10
- Article 124 of the Indian Constitution outlines the creation and structure of the Supreme Court.
- The Constitution states that in order to be appointed as a Judge of the Supreme Court, a person must meet certain qualifications outlined in Article 124 (3).
- In India, anyone who is a Judge at a High Court for 5+ years, or an Advocate at a High Court for 10+ years, or is considered a well-known Lawyer by the President, can become a citizen.
|
73. Who amongst the following, recently appointed as Supreme Court judge, was not earlier judge of a High Court?
(a) D. Y. Chandrachud
(b) A.M. Khanwilkar
(c) L. Nageshwara Rao
(d) Ashok Bhushan
[U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2016]
Ans. (c) L. Nageshwara Rao
- L. Nageshwara Rao is a Judge at the Supreme Court of India.
- He is the seventh person to become a Judge at the Supreme Court after coming from the Bar.
- He was officially given the role on 13th May 2016.
|
74. “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 –
(a) The President of India
(b) The Chief Justice of India
(c) The Member of Parliament
(d) The Governor
[U.P.P.C.S. (Spl) (Mains) 2004]
Ans. (b) The Chief Justice of India
- The Constitution of India has a Third Schedule that lists the oaths and promises that Union and State Ministers, Members of Parliament, Members of State Legislatures, Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts, and the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India must make.
- There are 10 of these oaths or promises.
- The Chief Justice of India and the Comptroller and Auditor General of India must make a specific oath.
|
75. Which of the following cases comes under the Jurisdiction of High Court and Supreme Court?
(a) Dispute between the Centre and States.
(b) Dispute between States.
(c) Enforcement of Fundamental Rights.
(d) Protection from violation of the Constitution.
[U.P. Lower Sub. (Pre) 2004]
Ans. (c) Enforcement of Fundamental Rights.
- The Supreme Court has the power to enforce people’s Fundamental Rights, according to Article 32 of the Indian Constitution.
- High Courts can use Article 226 to do the same.
- The Supreme Court is also in charge of issues between States and between the Centre and a State, as outlined in Article 131.
|
76. Which of the following statements is not true about the power of the Supreme Court of India?
(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.
(c) It has advisory jurisdiction on a question of law or fact which may be referred to it by the President of India
(d) It has the power to review its own judgment or order.
[U.P. P.C.S. (Mains) 2017]
Ans. (a) It has the exclusive power to issue writs to protect the fundamental rights of the People.
- The Supreme Court and High Courts have the power to make sure that people’s fundamental rights are protected.
- This power is not exclusive to the Supreme Court.
|
77. Who has the right to transfer any case anywhere in India?
(a) President
(b) Supreme Court
(c) High Court
(d) None of these
[M.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2010]
Ans. (b) Supreme Court
- Article 139A states that the Supreme Court is allowed to move any case from one place in India to another.
- If the same or similar questions of law are being discussed in the Supreme Court and one or more High Courts, or if two or more High Courts and the Supreme Court are dealing with these questions of law, the Supreme Court can decide to take the case away from the High Courts and take care of it themselves if they feel that these questions are very important.
|
78. Under which article, did the Supreme Court recently declare the Migrants (Determination by Tribunal) Act, 1983 as unconstitutional for violation of the sacred duty of the center?
(a) Article – 355
(b) Article – 356
(c) Article – 256
(d) Article – 257
[U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2002]
Ans. (a) Article – 355
- The Supreme Court of India ruled on 13 July 2005 that the Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act was not allowed under the Constitution.
- A group of three judges declared the Act unlawful and said that having so many illegal migrants from Bangladesh in Assam was an attack on the state and caused major disruption.
|
79. Consider the following statements:
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 to the Consolidated Fund of India.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
[I.A.S. (Pre) 2005]
Ans. (d) Neither 1 nor 2
- The Constitution allows Parliament to increase the authority of the Supreme Court in regard to matters in the Union List.
- Statement 1 is incorrect.
- The financial costs of the Supreme Court, such as salaries, allowances, and pensions for its staff, are paid for by India’s Consolidated Fund.
- Statement 2 is also incorrect.
- The costs for High Court administration are paid for by the Consolidated Fund of the State.
|
80. Consider the following statements:
1. Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer was the Chief Justice of India.
2. Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer is considered 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
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
[I.A.S. (Pre) 2008]
Ans. (b) 2 only
- Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer (15 November 1915 – 4 December 2014) was a judge of the Supreme Court, but he was not the Chief Justice of India.
- He is remembered for getting Public Interest Litigation started, alongside Justice P.N. Bhagwati.
|
81. Who was the Chief Justice of India when Public Interest litigation was introduced in the Indian Judicial System?
(a) M. Hidayatullah
(b) A.M. Ahmedi
(c) P.N. Bhagwati
(d) A.S. Anand
[U.P. P.C.S. (Pre) 2018]
Ans. (c) P.N. Bhagwati
- Prafullachandra Natwarlal Bhagwati (PN Bhagwati) accepted Kapila Hingorani’s petition known as Hussainana Khatoon v/s State of Bihar (1979).
- This was the first time a case based on Public Interest Litigation was considered.
- Y.V. Chandrachud was the Chief Justice of India at the time, while P.N. Bhagwati was the 17th Chief Justice of India and served from July 12, 1985 to December 20, 1986.
|
82. The source of the ‘Basic Structure Theory of the Constitution’ in India is
(a) The Constitution
(b) Judicial Interpretation
(c) Opinion of the Jurists
(d) Parliamentary Statute
[U.P. U.D.A./L.D.A. (Mains) 2010]
Ans. (b) Judicial Interpretation
- The Parliament cannot use Article 368 to make big changes to the main parts of the Constitution.
- This was decided in the Keshavananda Bharati Case and was also agreed on in the Minerva Mill’s Case, 1980.
|
83. The Supreme Court of India is a ‘Court of Record.’ It implies that –
(a) It has to keep a record of its decisions
(b) All its decisions have evidentiary value and cannot be questioned in any court.
(c) It has the power to punish for its contempt.
(d) No appeal can be made against its decisions.
[U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2008]
Ans. (b) All its decisions have evidentiary value and cannot be questioned in any court.
- RArticle 129 of India’s Constitution states that the Supreme Court is a Court of Record. This means that the court’s judgments and proceedings are recorded for future use in other cases. This court also has the power to punish anyone who shows it disrespect. This means that the Court’s decisions are legally binding and cannot be challenged in any other court. Option (b) is the correct answer according to the Uttar Pradesh Commission.
|
84. Which of the following Courts in India is/are known as the Court (s) of Record?
(a) The High Courts only
(b) The Supreme Court only
(c) The High Courts and the Supreme Court
(d) The District Courts
[U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2008]
Ans. (c) The High Courts and the Supreme Court
- The Constitution of India states that the Supreme Court and the High Courts should both be ‘Courts of Record’ and they will have the power to punish people who disrespect them.
|
85. Which one of the following is correct about the Supreme Court regarding its Judgment?
(a) It can change the Judgment
(b) It can not change the Judgment
(c) Only the Chief Justice of India can change the Judgement
(d) Only the Ministry of Law can change the Judgment.
[U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2005]
Ans. (a) It can change the Judgment
- The Supreme Court has the authority to look over any decision or ruling, as long as it follows the laws made by Parliament and the rules of Article 145.
|
86. The Supreme Court holds its meetings in New Delhi, but it can meet elsewhere –
(a) With the approval of the President.
(b) If the majority of Judges of the Supreme Court so decide.
(c) With the approval of Parliament.
(d) On the request of the State Legislature.
[U.P.P.C.S. (Spl) (Mains) 2008]
Ans. (a) With the approval of the President.
- The Supreme Court will be located in Delhi, or wherever the Chief Justice of India and the President decide it should be located at different times.
|
87. Which one of the following is appointed as the fourth female Judge of the Supreme Court in April 2010?
(a) Justice Fathima Beevi
(b) Justice Sujata Manohar
(c) Justice Gyan Sudha Misra
(d) Justice Ruma Pal
[U.P. Lower Sub. (Pre) 2008 (*)]
Ans. (c) Justice Gyan Sudha Misra
- At the time the question was asked, Justice Gyan Sudha Mishra was the only female Judge of the Supreme Court of India.
- She was promoted to this position on 30 April 2010, after working as Chief Justice of Patna High Court.
- Before her, Justice Fatima Beevi, Judge Sujata Manohar, and Justice Ruma Pal had also served as Judges of the Supreme Court.
- Justice Ranjana Prakash Desai was the fifth woman Judge, who served from 13 September 2011 to 29 October 2014.
- Currently, the Supreme Court has one sitting woman Judge, Indira Banerjee.
- Justice R. Bhanumati retired in July 2020, and Justice Indu Malhotra retired in March 2021.
|
88. Which one of the following judges of the Supreme Court of India has not worked in the Rajasthan High Court as a judge?
(a) Justice N.M. Kasliwal
(b) Justice B.S. Chouhan
(c) Justice A.K. Mathur
(d) Justice R.C. Lahoti
[R.A.S/R.T.S (Pre) – 2018]
Ans. (d) Justice R.C. Lahoti
- Ramesh Chandra Lahoti was the 35th Chief Justice of India, from June 2004 to November 2005.
- He began his legal career in Guna District (MP) in 1960 and officially became an advocate two years later in 1962.
|
89. TDSAT judgments can be challenged in the:
(a) TRAI, High Court, Supreme Court
(b) TRAI and Supreme Court
(c) High Court and Supreme Court
(d) Supreme Court only
[U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2003]
Ans. (c) High Court and Supreme Court
- In 2000, the TRAI Act was changed to make it clear what the rules are and to create a system to settle disputes in the telecommunications sector.
- The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) was set up to decide on disagreements and appeals.
- For telecom, broadcasting, and airport tariff issues, the Supreme Court can be asked to look at the Tribunal’s decisions, but only if there’s a legal question.
- For cyber matters, the Tribunal’s decisions can be appealed to the High Court.
- Option C is the correct choice.
|
90. Public Interest Litigations was introduced by –
(a) A Parliamentary Act
(b) A Constitutional Amendment
(c) Judicial initiative
(d) None of the above
[U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2008]
Ans. (c) Judicial initiative
- Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is a way for people or non-governmental organizations to get help from the court in cases that involve the public interest.
- This is based on the principles of Article 39A of the Indian Constitution, which was created to protect and give people social justice quickly.
- Before the 1980s, only the person affected by the issue could approach the court.
- But, after the Emergency period, the Supreme Court allowed anyone to approach the court for help. Justices P.N. Bhagwati and V.R. Krishna Iyer were some of the first judges to accept PILs. PILs can be filed in both the High Court and the Supreme Court.
|
91. PIL is:
(a) Public Interest Litigation
(b) Public Inquiry Litigation
(c) Public Investment Litigation
(d) Private Investment Litigation
[M.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2013]
Ans. (a) Public Interest Litigation
- Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was created to protect the principles in the Constitution of India and provide social justice quickly.
- Before the 1980s, only people with an issue could go to court.
|
92. Where can the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) be filed?
(a) Only in the Supreme Court of India
(b) Only in High Courts of States
(c) In Central Administrative Tribunals
(d) Both in High Courts & Supreme Court
[Uttarakhand P.C.S. (Pre) 2012]
Ans. (d) Both in High Courts & Supreme Court
- Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is a way to use the law to help make sure that Social Justice is given quickly, based on the principles written in Article 39A of the Indian Constitution.
- Before 1980, only people with a problem could go to the court for help.
- After the Emergency time, the Supreme Court made it so that any person or NGO could go to court if something was wrong that affected the public.
- Judges P. N. Bhagwati and V. R. Krishna Iyer were among the first to accept PILs.
- PILs can be filed in both High Courts and the Supreme Court.
|
93. The concept of Public Interest Litigation originated in:
(a) Australia
(b) India
(c) The United States
(d) The United Kingdom
[I.A.S. (Pre) 1997, U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2011, R.A.S./R.T.S. (Pre.) 2018]
Ans. (c) The United States
- The term “PIL” (Public Interest Law) started in the US. Since the 1800s, different groups in the US have been helping to develop Public Interest Law as part of the legal aid movement.
- The first legal aid office was set up in New York in 1876.
|
94. ‘Judicial Activism’ in India is related to –
(a) Committed Judiciary
(b) Public Interest Litigation
(c) Judicial Review
(d) Judicial Independence
[U.P.R.O. /A.R.O. (Pre) 2014]
Ans. (b) Public Interest Litigation
- Judicial Activism in India is linked to court cases that are in the public’s interest.
- This type of activism began in India in the middle of the 1970s and was started by the Supreme Court.
|
95. The status of women in Indian Society was glorified by a Judgement of a Court in September 2003. The Court is–
(a) Supreme Court of India
(b) Local Courts
(c) Special Courts
(d) High Court, U.P.
[U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2009]
Ans. (a) Supreme Court of India
- On September 23, 2003, Justice M.B. Shah of the Supreme Court of India praised the importance of women in Indian Society with an important court ruling.
- The Court declared that giving women priority for jobs such as Principal of a Government College for Girls does not go against Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Constitution.
|
96. Under which law is it prescribed that all proceedings in the Supreme Court of India shall be in English language?
(a) The Supreme Court rules, 1966
(b) Article 145 of the Constitution of India.
(c) A Legislation made by Parliament.
(d) Article 348 of the Constitution of India.
[U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2013]
Ans. (d) Article 348 of the Constitution of India
- Article 348(1)(a) states that all proceedings in the Supreme Court and any High Court must be conducted in English.
- This applies to Acts, Bills, and other documents.
|
97. In which of the following cases the Supreme Court observed that the Central Bureau of Investigation is a ‘Caged Parrot’?
(a) Rail Board Bribery Case
(b) Vineet Narain Vs. Union of India
(c) 2G Spectrum Scam Case
(d) Coal Gate Scam Case
[U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2015]
Ans. (d) Coal Gate Scam Case
- The Supreme Court has criticized the CBI very harshly in the Coal Gate allocation scandal.
- They have called the CBI a “Caged Parrot”.
|
98. The correct sequence of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India is –
(a) B.P. Sinha, P.B. Gajendragadkar, S.R. Das
(b) K.G. Balakrishanan, S.H. Kapadia, H.L. Dattu
(c) Ranjan Gogoi, N.V. Raman, Deepak Mishra
(d) H.L. Dattu, T.S. Thakur, Jagdish Singh Khehar
[R.A.S./R.T.S. (Pre) 2021]
Ans. (d) H.L. Dattu, T.S. Thakur, Jagdish Singh Khehar
- Based on the given question, the accurate order of Chief Justices of the Supreme Court is as follows:
- Justice S.R. Das (1.2.1956 to 30.9.1959)
- Justice B.P. Sinha (1.10.1959 to 31.01.1964)
- Justice P.B. Gajendragadkar (1.02.1964 to 15.03.1966)
- Justice K.G. Balakrishnan (14.01.2007 to 12.05.2010)
- Justice S.H. Kapadia (12.05.2010 to 28.09.2012)
- Justice H.L. Dattu (28.09.2014 to 02.12.2015)
- Justice T.S. Thakur (03.12.2015 to 03.01.2017)
- Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar (04.01.2017 to 27.08.2017)
- Justice Deepak Mishra (28.08.2017 to 02.10.2018)
- Justice Ranjan Gogoi (03.10.2018 to 17.11.2019)
- Justice Sharad Arbind Bobde (18.11.2019 to 23.04.2021)
- Justice N.V. Raman (24.04.2021 to present)
|
