CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – I

QUESTION BANK
DETAILED QUESTIONS:

UNIT I

1. Discuss the main features of the Government of India Act, 1919. (Montague Chelmsford
Reforms).

In 1919, there was a landmark constitutional development through the Montague

(secretary of state) Chelmsford (viceroy) report, which led to the enactment of the
government of India act. The main features of the 1919 act were
1. The britishers gave a declaration and promise to provide a responsible
government to the Indian citizens.
2. For the first time, a dyarchy system of government was introduced with the
objective to train the natives in the act of self government. This dyarchy system
divided the legislation subjects into central and provincial. This federal form gave
inspiration to the constituent makers while framing relations between center
and states. The subject matters in the provincial lists were divided into reserve
and transferred. Important matters such as police, justice, jail, finance, irrigation
were in the reserve subjects and they were governed by the governor and his
executive council, and the responsibility of legislature, education, agriculture
were given to the Indian ministers and governors. The governor had a veto
power to overrule the ministers and council. The opinions of Indians weren;t
taken into account. Approval of the bill was very tough for Indians and they had
to approach authorities for finance as it came under the reserved matters.
3. The Montague Chelmsford Reforms also bought in central government with an
upper house with 60 members of whom 34 were elected and a lower house of
144 members of whom 104 were elected. In the central level. The governor
general had overriding powers, and his sanction was required to introduce bills
relating to certain matters. The governor general could reserve some bills for the
consideration of the crown. He also had the power of certifying any bill and
making it permanent despite legislature’s opposition and could make temporary
ordinances in cases of emergency.
4. Though there was a dyarchy system introduced in the reforms, the structure still
remained unitary. The center had power to legislate on any matter and in case of
 any controversy or repugnancy, the final authority was the governor general and
not the courts.
These reforms failed to fulfill the aspirations of the people of India for swaraj due to the
reasons given but giving the demand of a responsible government and a failure to
establish trust federalism through the dyarchy.

2. Discuss the main features of Government of India Act, 1935.

A persistent demand for further reforms led the British appoint a statutory commission
known as Simon commission consisting of four members from the conservative party
and 2 from the labour party. The commission headed by Sir John Simon submitted its
report in 1930. A white paper was prepared for the round table conference and was
submitted to the select committee of parliament. In accordance with the
recommendations, the government of India act of 1935 was passed.
1. All India Federation: The act aimed at establishing an All India Federation of
British India provinces and princely states who desired to come into the
federation. The act proposed a federation talking to the provinces and the Indian
states as one unit. This concept was a failure as the rulers of Indian states will
not give consent to access to the federation.
2. The dyarchy at the provincial level was abolished and established at the center
level. The executive authority at the center was with the governor general and
the federal subjects were divided into reserved and transferred. Subjects like
defence, external affairs were to be made by the governor general in his
discretion in the transferred subjects were to be administered by the governor
general who was to act by the aid and advice given by the ministers.
3. Provincial autonomy: This new feature of provincial autonomy aimed to divide
the legislative powers in between the provincial and central legislatures. The role
of a federal government was aimed. The executive authority of the province was
the governor and was required to act with the advice of the ministers.
4. Federal legislature: The federal legislature consisted of two houses - the
Legislative Assembly with a tenure of five years and the Council of States. The
powers of the legislature were limited and the financial bills were to originate
only from the lower house.
5. Provincial governments: The provincial executive consisted of the governor and
council of ministers, but the governor had discretionary powers, powers
exercised as an individual judgement, powers to be exercised by advice.
 6. The distribution of legislative power was made between the center and the
provinces. The act got in a threefold division of power with the federal list,
provincial list and concurrent list.
7. A federal court was established with one chief justice and six other judges in
Delhi.
This act was greatly criticized by almost all the parties in India. It came into force only in
the provinces in 1937 with minor amendments and when the world war broke out in
1939, the British declared India as belligerent without consulting the Indian legislatures.
Consequently the congress ministers resigned from the office.

3. Write a brief note on the Constituent Assembly and passing of the Indian Constitution.

The cabinet mission came to India in 1946 and it proposed the framing of a new
constitution, a constituent assembly was to be elected. The proposal of the cabinet
mission was accepted and in July 1946, elections to constituent assembly took place.
The constituency assembly came into being in November 1946. Its members were
elected by the provincial assembly and out of the 296 seats, Congress won 211 and
Muslim League, 73 seats. The rest were not filled up. The constituent assembly was not
a sovereign body and it has to work within the framework of the cabinet mission
scheme. It could not change the outline of the constitution as given in the cabinet
mission plan. But on passing the indian independence act, the limitations were
removed. The struggle of independence was over on 15ht August but attainment of
independence was not an end. It was the beginning of the struggle to live as an
independent nation, to establish democracy based on the ideas of justice, liberty,
equality, fraternity. Some important members of the constituent assemblies were Dr. BR
Ambedkar, Jawaharlal Nehru, Rajenra Prasad, Sardar Patel, Maulana Azad, Gopalswamy
Iyengar, Alladi Krishnaswami Iyer, Abdul Gaffar Khan, etc. On 9th December 1946, the
constituent assembly had its first meeting and on 11th December, Dr. Rajendra Prasad
became its permanent chairman. But this was an atmosphere of uncertainty because
the Muslim League buoycotted the assembly. The assembly adopted the objective
resolutions which later became the Preamble. The assembly appointed various
committees such as drafting committee, union power committee, provincial constitution
committee, rules of procedure committee, etc. As many as 7635 amendments were
proposed and 2473 were discussed. There were 11 sessions and the draft was
considered for 114 days. In total, the assembly sat for two years, 11 months, 18 days.
On 26th November 1949, the Constitution was adopted and it came into force on 26th
January 1950.

UNIT II
1. Explain the essential characteristics of a federal Constitution. Is the Constitution of India
federal? (or) Discuss elaborately the nature of the Indian Constitution.

Abraham Lincoln called the United States as an indestructible federation of

indestructible states. Article 1 of the Indian Constitution says that India that is Bharat
shall be a union of states. BR Ambedkar while submitting the draft clearly specified the
advantage of using union over federation. Usage of this term union indicates that the
Indian state is not the result of some sort of arrangement among the states and these
states have no power to secede from India. Though the constitution of India does not
use the word federation, there are five essential criteria that decide whether a country
is federal or not. Firstly, distribution of power. In India, schedule 7 of the Indian
constitution divides the subject matters of legislation into three lists. These are the
union list, state list and concurrent list. Hence, it is clear that power is distributed within
the union and the states. Secondly, a federal state derives its existence from a
constitution. Hence, every power of the legislature, judiciary and executive is discharged
from the constitution and the sovereignty in India is not political but in the constitution.
Thirdly, a federal constitution must almost necessarily be written in nature. It will
practically be impossible to maintain constitutional supremacy unless it is in writing.
And, as we all know, the Indian constitution is a written one. Fourth essential criteria of
a federal system is rigidity. A written constitution is always said to be rigid when it
comes to the amendment procedure. In India, there is a complex procedure when it
comes to amendment of the constitution as it requires 2/3rd majority in the house
president’s assent and a clearance by the SC. However, there have been over 100
amendments made in the constitution. This shows that India has adopted a unique
blend of a rigid and flexible constitution. Fifth criteria is authority of courts. In a federal
state, legal supremacy is an essential feature. In India, Article 50 directs the state to
separate the executive and the judiciary. The SC of India is the sole interpreter of the
constitution and has the right to strike down any law or even an amendment if it
violates the basic structure of the constitution. The indian judiciary also has an
independence when it comes to the appointment and transfers of judges. Though these
say that India is almost a federal set up, there has been a deviation from this in several
other articles of the constitution.
Article 155 of the Constitution deals about the appointment of governors for states. The
president has the sole power to appoint the governors. This makes the governor a
subordinate to the president. The president has veto powers as per Article 200,201 and
288. Kerala Education Bill is a case of this power exercised after centre’s advice.
Article 249 of the Indian Constitution enables the Centre to legislate on the subject
matters of state through a resolution with 2/3rd majority in rajya sabha.
 Contrary to Lincoln’s words we can say that India is an indestructible union of
destructible states as Article 3 enables the Parliament to increase, decrease the
boundaries of the state or change the names of states. This was argued to be an
encroachment on the rights of the states. This Article was invoked during the state
reorganisation act in 1956.
Whenever an emergency is declared in the country the whole country takes a unitary
form and the control of the entire country goes to the Centre. Part 18 of the
constitution contains emergency provisions.

2. Explain in detail the salient features of the Indian Constitution.

The Indian constitution is a very dynamic creation of our constituent makers. The
constitution is the sovereign law and every person should abide by it. The salient
features of the constitution are
1. Lengthiest constitution in the world. The Indian constitution is the lengthiest and
the most detailed of all written constitutions of the world. The constitution
originally consisted of 395 articles, 22 parts and 8 schedules, and currently
consists of 395 articles, 25 parts, 12 schedules and one preamble. The Indian
constitution was framed having gained experience from the working of all known
constitutions of the world. The constitution makers considered the vastness and
all peculiar problems, and framed this comprehensive document.
2. Establishment of a sovereign socialist secular democratic republic. The sovereign
word emphasizes that India is no more dependent on any other outside
authority, and is sovereign both internally and externally. Though many people
argue that its membership in the Commonwealth and UN restrict its sovereignty,
it does not in any way restrict the power to rule itself. The word socialist was
added in the 42nf amendment of the constitution and it did not exist during the
original version. However, the word socialism should not be interpreted as a
typical communistic socialism, but can be said as the base to establish the
principles of Gandhian socialism. Secularism also was added only during the
42nd amendment. This clearly says that India has no official religion and it treats
all religions equally. Article 25 of the constitution gives every person his right to
profess, propagate and practice his religion. The term democratic indicates that
the government which is formed is always from the will of the people. The rulers
are elected by the people and are responsible to govern them. The term republic
signifies that there shall be an elected head of a state who will be the chief
executive head. The president of India, unlike the king of Britain or Saudi, is not a
hereditary monarch but an elected person chosen for a limited period.
3. Parliamentary form of government. The constitution establishes a parliamentary
form at both union level and the state level. In India, we have a two tier or a
bicameral legislature at the center known as the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha.
Though the states have a unicameral legislature (Vidhan Sabha), there are seven
states that have a bicameral legislature. The parliamentary system has its
advantages of providing a responsible government and the government enjoys
its position as regards to its achievements and failures. This system was
preferred because it was already an existence in India during the British era and
it provided for accountability of ministers to the legislature. However, the
success of this system has been marred by multiplicity of political parties,
defection, lack of cohesiveness and criminalisation of politics.
4. Unique blend of rigidity and flexibility. A written constitution is always said to be
rigid when it comes to the amendment procedure. In India, there is a complex
procedure when it comes to amendment of the constitution as it requires 2/3rd
majority in the house president’s assent and a clearance by the SC. However,
there have been over 100 amendments made in the constitution. This shows
that India has adopted a unique blend of a rigid and flexible constitution.
5. Fundamental Rights. are basic rights that are available to the citizens and some
even available to any person in India. These rights are prohibitions against the
state. The state cannot make any law which abridges any rights of citizens and
the constitution provides a fundamental right to approach the SC in case of any
violation of a fundamental right under Article 32. BR Ambedkar called this right
as the heart and soul of the constitution. Though these rights are fundamental in
nature, they are not absolute. There are certain reasonable restrictions to these
rights.
6. Directive Principles of State Policy. The DPSP contained in part IV of the Indian
constitution sets the aims and objectives to be taken up in the governance. But
these rights are not justiciable.
7. Federation with strong centralising tendency. Refer to question 1.
8. Adult suffrage. Under the Indian constitution, every man above the age of 18
(originally 21) has been given the right to vote and elect representatives for the
legislature through Article 326, and there can be no restriction on the grounds of
sex, religion, race, caste, class.
9. An independent judiciary. In India, Article 50 directs the state to separate the
executive and the judiciary. The SC of India is the sole interpreter of the
constitution and has the right to strike down any law or even an amendment if it
violates the basic structure of the constitution. The indian judiciary also has an
independence when it comes to the appointment and transfers of judges.
 10. Single citizenship. Though the constitution of India is federal and provides dual
polity, there is only a single citizenship for hold of India unlike the American
constitution which provides dual citizenship for the country as a whole and the
state. There is no state citizenship in India, and every Indian is a citizen of India
and enjoys the same rights as the others.
11. Fundamental duties. The 42nd amendment act in 1976 inserted part IVA and
Article 51A as the fundamental duties. Originally 10 duties were listed in this
Article and in 2002, an 11th duty was added. The fundamental duties show a
constant reminder to every citizen that the constitution has confirmed certain
fundamental rights on him and it also requires the citizens to observe basic
norms of democratic conduct and behaviour.
12. Judicial review. Judicial review is the power of courts to check the
constitutionality of legislative acts within their jurisdiction. If the provisions of
any statutes are found to be violative of any of the articles of the constitution,
then they are empowered to strike down the provisions.

3. “Preamble is a key to open the minds of the makers of the Indian Constitution”.
Elucidate. (or) “The Preamble does not grant any power but it gives a direction and
purpose to the Constitution”. Elucidate.

The preamble sets out the main objectives which the legislation is intended to achieve.
It is a broad introduction to the whole of the constitution and it's helpful to understand
the policy and the intent of the legislature. In the Berubari’s case, the SC held that the
preamble is a key to open the mind of the makers of the constitution. It also said that
the preamble is neither a source of substantive powers nor a source of privation of
powers. Justice Gajendra Gadkar said that when there is an ambiguity, we can go back
to the preamble and understand the noble vision of the constituent makers. Later in the
KesavaNanda Bharati v UOI, this case was overruled and the court held that the
preamble is part of the constitution.
The first lines of the preamble says that we the people of India have solemnly resolved
to constitute India into a sovereign socialist secular democratic republic. The sovereign
word emphasizes that India is no more dependent on any other outside authority, and is
sovereign both internally and externally. Though many people argue that its
membership in the Commonwealth and UN restrict its sovereignty, it does not in any
way restrict the power to rule itself. The word socialist was added in the 42nf
amendment of the constitution and it did not exist during the original version. However,
the word socialism should not be interpreted as a typical communistic socialism, but can
be said as the base to establish the principles of Gandhian socialism. Secularism also was
 added only during the 42nd amendment. This clearly says that India has no official
religion and it treats all religions equally. Article 25 of the constitution gives every
person his right to profess, propagate and practice his religion. The term democratic
indicates that the government which is formed is always from the will of the people. The
rulers are elected by the people and are responsible to govern them. The term republic
signifies that there shall be an elected head of a state who will be the chief executive
head. The president of India, unlike the king of Britain or Saudi, is not a hereditary
monarch but an elected person chosen for a limited period.
The preamble secures to every citizen social economic and political justice and gives the
liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship, equality of status and of
opportunities, and to promote among them all fraternity assigning the dignity of the
individual and the unity and the integrity of the nation. In the KesavaNanda Bharati
case, it was also held that the preamble can be amended but it created a limitation to
amend basic elements in the preamble.

4. What are the various modes of acquisition of citizenship given under the Citizenship Act
of 1955?
5. Explain the various categories of Indian Citizenship under the Indian Constitution. How
is domicile different from citizenship?
UNIT III

1. Critically analyze the scope of “other authorities” within the definition of State under
Article 12 of the Indian Constitution. (or) What are the tests laid down by the Supreme
Court in determining whether a body is an agency or instrumentality of the State? Refer
to decided cases.

In Article 12, the expression “other authorities'' is used after mentioning a few of them
such as the government, legislature and all local authorities. In the University of Madras
v Shanta bhai case, the Madras HC held that the rule ejusdem generis was applied. So, it
meant that other authorities could only mean authorities exercising governmental or
sovereign functions. Hence, not including universities. This was overruled in the Ujjam
bhai v State of UP case, and the court took a liberal interpretation. Later, in the
electricity board Rajasthan v Mohanlal, the SC held that the expression “other
authorities” is wide enough to include all authorities created by constitution or statutes
on whom powers are conferred by law. In subsequent decisions, the SC has given a
broad and liberal interpretation of other authorities. In the RD Shetty v international
airport authority of India case, the SC laid down a test to determine whether a body is
an agency or instrumentality of the state. The test for determining this are
1. Financial resources of the state is the chief funding source. The entire share
capital of the corporation is held by the government.
2. Existence of deep and permissive state control
3. Functional character being government and essence
4. A department of government is transferred to a corporation
5. Whether the corporation enjoys monopoly status

In the Somprakash v UOI, it was held that the Bharat Petroleum corporation or any
other government company fell within the meaning of state. Ajay Hasia v Khalid Mujib
case, any society that is registered under society registration act is an agency, hence also
comes under the purview of Article 12.

2. “Article 14 permits classification but prohibits class legislation”. What is the test of
reasonable classification? Discuss in detail with reference to decided case laws.
 Article 14 of the constitution guarantees equal protection of law. But this does not mean
that all laws must be general in character. It does not mean that the same laws should
apply to all persons. Article 14 permits a reasonable classification but prohibits class
legislation. An identical treatment in unequal circumstances leads to inequality.
Therefore, we need a reasonable classification for equal treatment of equal people.
However, while making such laws, Article 14 forbids class legislation. A class legislation
makes an improper discrimination by conferring particular privileges upon a class of
persons arbritrarily selected from a large number. The test of reasonableness in
classifying must fulfill the following two conditions
1. The classification must be found on intelligible differentia which differentiates
persons group together from the others left out.
2. The differentia must have a rational relation to the object to be achieved. There
must be a nexus between the basis of classification and the object of the act that
makes the classification.
The proposition laid down in Dalmia’s case still holds good governing a valid
classification and provides the true meaning and scope of intelligible differentia in
Article 14. Sum of the observations made in this case were
1. A law must be constitutional even if it relates to a single individual
2. There is a presumption in favour of constitutionality of the statute and this may
be rebutted in certain cases when no classification at all is made.
3. It is presumed that the legislature understands the needs of its own people.
4. The classification can be made on a different basis and it need not be
scientifically perfect and there is no requirement of mathematical nicety.
5. There can be no discrimination both in substantive as well as procedural law.
EP Royappa case
In the DS Nakara v UOI case, the government issued an office memorandum announcing
a liberalized pension scheme for government servants but made it applicable only to
those who retired before a certain date. The SC struck down this provision holding it to
be arbitrary and violative of Article 14.

3. What is the protection guaranteed to the citizens of India under Article 15 of the
Constitution of India?

Article 15 of the constitution prohibits any form of dicrimination on the grounds of

religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth and no citizen on these grounds shall be subject
to any restirction with regards to access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and to the
use of wells, tanks, roads, etc. However, clause 3 of this article gives the state powers to
make special provision for women and children. In the Yusuf v State of Bombay case, the
 appellant was prosecuted under Section 497 of the IPC. He contended that this section
contraveiled Article 14 and 15. The court then held that the IPC section 497 was not
unconstitutional. This was later overruled in Joseph Shine v UOI case and held that
section 497 was violative of Article 14, 15(1) and 21.

Clause 4 of this article allows the state to make special provisions for the advancement
of socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or SCs/STs. The Champakam
Dorairajan v State of Madras, the government reserves seats in tube medical and
engineering colleges exclusively on the basis of religion, race and caste. The SC held this
order void as violative of Article 15(1). Article 15(4) was inserted in the constitution to
the first amendment after this case. In the Balaji v State of Mysore, the Mysore
government issued an order reserving around 68% of its seats for backward sections.
The SC held that Article 15(4) enables the state to make special and not exclusive
provision for backward classes. Speaking generally the court said that the reservation
should not exceed 50%. In the TMA Pai foundation v State of Karnataka and PA Inamdar
v State of Maharashtra, the SC held that the state could not make reservation of seats in
admissions in privately run educational institutions.

4. Explain the scope and extent of Article 16(4) by referring to Indra Sawhney v. Union of
India. What is the stand taken by the Supreme Court in matters relating to reservation?

Article 16 clause 4 is an exception to the general rule in Article 16(1) and (2). It
empowers the state, makes special provision for the reservation of appointments of
posts in favour of any backward class of citizen which in the state are not adequately
represented. Article 16 applies only when two conditions are satisfied
1. The class of the citizen is backward
2. The class is not adequately represented in the service of the state.
In Balaji v State of Mysore case, the SC held that Article 15(4) enables the state to make
special and not exclusive provision for backward classes. In the Devadasan v UOI case,
the constitutional validity of the carry forward rule framed by the government to
regulate appointment of persons of backward classes was involved. The carry forward
rule aimed at providing reservation for the seats that were not filled up or that were
vacant by carrying forward it to the next year. The SC held this rule as unconstitutional.

Mandal Case: Indra Sawhney v UOI

In 1979, the government of India appointed the second backward classes commission
under the chairmanship of DP Mandal. The commission submitted its report in 1980 and
 it had identified 3743 castes as socially and educationally backward. This was not
implemented for the next few years after the Congress came to power. In 1990, the
then prime minister VP Singh issued an official memorandum reserving 27% of seats for
the backward classes on the basis of the Mandal commission. This was challenged in the
court and the SC in a 6:3 majority held that the OM was valid. The court also examined
the previous judgements and held that the carry forward rule can exist but should not
exceed 50%. The court also held that there shall be no reservation when it comes to
promotion, and it held that the creamy layer that is those in this caste who advance
economically and socially shall be excluded from the reservation.

5. What are the fundamental freedoms guaranteed to the citizens of India under Article 19
of the Constitution?

Article 19 guarantees six freedoms to the citizens of the country.

1. Freedom of speech and expression. Freedom of speech and expression means
the right to express one’s own convictions and opinions freely by words of
mouth writing, printing pictures or any other mode. As the expression,
publication is included in this right, the freedom of press is guaranteed from this
right. This article also includes expression of one’s ideas through any
communicable medium or visible representation such as gestures, signs, etc.
After the enactment of the right to information act 2005, the right to
information has also been included under this fundamental principle. In the
Romesh Thapar v State of Madras, it was held that freedom of speech and press
lay at the foundation of all democratic organizations, for without free political
discussion, no public education, so essential for the proper functioning of the
process of a popular government, is possible.
Bennett Coleman & co v UOI:
In this case, a newsprint control order was challenged as it fixed the maximum
number of pages as 10 to be printed in any newspaper. This was challenged in
the supreme court as it had violated article 19. The government defended the
order saying that the order would help small newspaper companies. The SC held
that the policy was not reasonable within the ambit of Article 19(2) and said that
it took away the right of freedom of speech and expression. The SC went on to
say that the freedom of press is both quantitative and qualitative and the
freedom lies in both circulation and in content.
Article 19(2) imposes restrictions on Article 19(1(a)) on eight grounds which are
sovereignty and integrity of India, public order, friendly relations with foreign
 states, decency or morality, contempt of court, security of the state, defamation,
incitement to an offence.
2. Article 19(1(b)) guarantees the fundamental right to assemble peaceably,
without arms. The right of assembly is implied in the very idea of all democratic
forms of government. This right also includes the right to take out processions.
When a lawful assembly becomes unlawful as per section 141 of the IPC, this
right is suspended. Article 19(3) imposes reasonable restrictions on the grounds
of sovereignty and integrity of the country and public order.
3. Article 19(1(c)) guarantees the fundamental right to form associations. This right
is not merely a right to form an association, but also to continue with the
association. This right thus includes the right to form companies, societies,
partnerships, trade unions and political parties.
Damayanti v UOI:
In this case, the validity of Hindi Sahitya Sammelan Act was challenged. The
petitioner who was a member of that association, was removed through an
alteration of the composition of the members through this act. The SC held that
this was violative of the fundamental right guaranteed under 19(1(a)) and it also
said that the right to form an association also gave the right to continue the
association. Under Article 19(4), reasonable restrictions are imposed on this right
on the grounds of sovereignty and integrity of the country, public order and
morality.
4. Article 19(1(d)) gives the fundamental right of freedom of movement. The
constitution says that the entire country is one unit and it is the right of the
citizen to freely move throughout the country. The object of this right was to
make the Indian citizens national minded and not parochial. Article 19(5) poses
reasonable restrictions to this right on the grounds of the interests of the general
public, protection of interests of any ST.
In the NB Khare v State of Delhi, the district magistrate ordered the petitioner to
remove himself from Delhi district and not return there for three months. The Sc
held that the power to make the order of externment was given to the state and
it was not unreasonable to make such an order.
5. Article 19(1(e)) gives the fundamental right of freedom of residence. This right is
complementary to the right to freedom of movement. The objective of this
clause was to remove internal barriers within India or any of its parts.
Reasonable restrictions can be imposed on the grounds of the interests of the
general public, protection of interests of any ST.
State of MP v Bharat Singh:
 There was a state law that could issue an order requiring a person to reside or
remain in such a place as might be specified by, or ask him to leave the place and
to go to a place selected by the authority. The SC held that this was
unconstitutional and violative of article 19(1(e)).
6. Article 19(1(g)) gives the fundamental right to profession, occupation, trade or
business. This is subject to Article 19(6) which imposes reasonable restrictions on
the grounds of interests of general public, professional or technical qualification
for practicing any profession or carrying any occupation, trade or business, or the
state or corporation owned by the state of any trade, business, industry or
service. The state can exclude the citizens completely or partially.
PA Inamdar v State of Maharashtra:
In this case, it was held that the right to establish an educational institution for
charity or for profit, being an occupation, is guaranteed under the constitution to
all the citizens.

6. “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to the
procedure established by law”. Discuss.
Article 21 of the constitution states that “No person shall be deprived of his life
or personal liberty except according to the procedure established by law”. The word
law in this would be a validly enacted law and in order to be a valid law it must be just
fair and reasonable. Life and personal liberty are subject to procedure established by
law. This makes art.21 a safeguard against arbitrary legislation.

In the AK Gopalan v. state of Madras case SC held that the term personal liberty
in art.21 means nothing more than the liberty of the physical body. This was a very
narrow interpretation and was overruled in Maneka Gandhi’s case. In Maneka Gandhi’s
case the authorities the passport of the petitioner was confiscated as per provision of
section 10(3)(c) of the passport act 1967. This section was challenged in this case by the
petitioner. The court held that the procedure prescribed by law has to be fair, just and
reasonable,(ie.,which embodies the principle of natural justice) not fanciful, oppressive
or arbitrary. However, the passport was not returned and the section was held valid.
The SC through various judgements extended the pervie and ambit of article-21. In the
Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation SC held that article-21 also includes the
right to livelihood. The SC in the Unnikrishnan case further went on to say that, article-
21 includes right to go abroad, right against solitary confinement, right against
handcuffing, right against delayed execution, right against custodial death, right against
public hanging, doctors assistance. In the RELK v. UoI case, the SC held that the right to
breathe clean air was also under art-21.
 In the State of Maharashtra Vs Maruti Shripati Dubal. In this case the HC held
that right to life includes right to die and struck down Section 309 of IPC which provides
punishment to a person to commit suicide as unconstitutional. The same view was taken
in the case of T Rathinam Vs Union of India. The issue was again raised in Gian Kaur Vs
State of Punjab. A five judge constitution bench overruled the Rathinam case and held
that the right to die does not come under Article 21 and said that Section 309 was
constitutionally valid, went on to say that the right to die is inherently in-consistent with
the right to life. In 2018 a Five Judge Bench in Common Cause Vs Union of India
unanimously held that the case of Aruna Shaugaug had wrongfully ruled that passive
euthanasia can be made lawful only by legislation. The court laid down directive through
which terminally ill people have the right to chose not to remain in a vegetative state
and hence making passive euthanasia valid under law.

7. What are the rights of arrested persons under Article 22 of the Constitution?

Article 22 of the constitution guarantees protection against arrest. These include

punitive detentions, i.e., arrest under ordinary laws, and preventive detention (arrest
under preventive detention laws).

The rights available against arrests under ordinary law are

● right to be informed of the grounds of arrest - Article 22(1) states that any
person who is arrested cannot be detained in custody without being informed of
the grounds of any such arrest as soon as possible. This clearly portrays that n o
arrest can be made because it is lawful for the police to do so. Every arrest
requires reason and justification and not just the power to arrest. In the Joginder
Kumar v State of UP case, it was held that a detained person should know the
costs of his detention and is entitled to inform a third person the location of his
detention.
● Right to be defended by a lawyer of his own choice - Article 22(1) also states that
any person who is arrested has the right to consult a lawyer of his own choice.
This right is from the moment of the person’s arrest. In the case of Hussainara
Khatoon v home secretary, the courts observed that a large number of people in
the jail were awaiting their trial in a court of law. The accused who were under
arrest were deprived of their freedom even before the commencement of their
trial. It was also declared that the right to free legal aid under Article 39A was a
fundamental right and this was expressed through amendments.
 ● Right to be produced before magistrate - Article 22(2) ensures that the right of
accused to be produced before a magistrate. The arrested person should be
bought before a magistrate or judicial officer without any unnecessary delay.
This right protects the accused from being detained on wrong or irrelevant
grounds.
● No detention can be beyond 24 hours except by order of the magistrate - Article
22(2) also states that no person who is arrested should be detained for more
than 24 hours without being produced before MAGISTRATE OR JUDICIAL
AUTHORITY AND getting the detention authorized. This mention of 24 hours
excludes the travel. This right protects the accused from wrongful detention. In
the state of Punjab v Ajaib Singh, this right of the accused was infringed and thus
he was paid compensation as a constitutional remedy. It was held that cases of
arrest without warrant require greater protection and production of accused
within 24 hours ensures the legality of arrests.
Article 22 provides protection against certain arrests and preventive detention. The
constitutional safeguard available against preventive detention are
● clause 4a of article 22 says that no law framed for preventive detention give the
authority to detain a person for more than 3 months unless the advisory board
reports sufficient cause for detention. The advisory board must have persons
should be qualified as that of judge of a HC and he must submit the report
before expiry of 3 months,
● clause 5 of article 22 states that while detaining the person the reason for his
detention must be communicated to him as soon as possible and the ground of
detention should have a rational connection with the object with which the
detanue is prevented from attaining. The communication should have material
facts and should not be mere statements.The detaining authority has no
obligation to provide grounds of detention prior to the arrest but he is advised to
do so at the earliest. A person already in custody can be detained when there
are reasonable and sufficient causes to do so.
● Clause 5 also mentions the detenu right of representation. The authority
providing the detention order shall afford at the person the earliest opportunity
of making a representation against the order.

8. Explain in detail the secular character of the State and enumerate the provisions relating
to Right to Freedom of Religion in India.
In 1976 Government of India enacted the 42nd Amendment Act and the word
‘Secular’ was added to the Preamble and 9 judge bench, in the Sr Bommai case ruled
that Secularism is the basic feature of the Constitution of India. It also observed that
religion and politics cannot be mixed together.

Article 25 of the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion to all persons in India. It

provides all persons in India freedom of conscience, and the right to freely profess,
practice and propagate religion subject to public order, morality and health.
However this doesn't prevent the state from making laws for regulation or
restriction of any economic, financial, political, or any secular activity associated with
religious practice and opening of Hindu religious institutions of public character for
all the classes and sections of the Hindus.

In Hasan Ali v. Mansoor Ali the Bombay High Court held that Articles 25 and Article
26 not only prevents doctrines or beliefs of religion but also the acts done in
pursuance of religion. It thus guarantees ceremonies, modes of worship, rituals,
observances, etc which are an integral part of religion.

In the Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala three children from Kerala who belonged to
a Syrian Christian community refused to sing the national anthem. They believed
worshipping only on Jehova. They were dismissed. When this was challenged , The
Supreme Court held that the action of the headmistress of expelling the children
from school for not singing the national anthem was violative of their freedom of
religion.The Supreme Court in the case of M Ismail Faruqi v. Union of India held that
the mosque is not an essential part of Islam. Namaz (Prayer) can be offered by the
Muslims anywhere, in the open as well and it is not necessary to be offered only in a
mosque. A 5 judges bench of the Supreme Court heard the controversial Triple Talaq
case and held it to be invalid.

Article 26 confers a right on every religious denomination or any section of such

religious denomination Establishing and maintaining institutions for religious and
charitable purposes, Managing its affair with regard to religion, Owing and acquiring
property Administering the property in accordance with the law. In Durgah
Committee Ajmer v. Syed Hussain Ali the Supreme Court observed that if the
religious denomination never had the right to administer property or if it has lost its
right then such right cannot be created under Article 26 and therefore cannot be
invoked.
 Article 27 of the Constitution prevents a person from being compelled to pay any
taxes which are meant for the payment of the costs incurred for the promotion or
maintenance of any religion or religious denomination. Article 28 prohibits providing
religious instructions in any educational institutions that are maintained out of the
state funds. However this doesn't apply to institutions administered by the states
but established under endowment or trust. It also prohibits any person attending a
state recognized or state-funded educational institution is not required to take part
in religious instruction. In the Aruna Roy v. Union of India a PIL was filed in the
supreme that NCFSC which came under NCERT violated this provision of the
constitution. NCFSE provides education for value development relating to basic
human values, social justice, non-violence, self-discipline, compassion, etc. The court
ruled that there is no violation of Article 28 and there is also no prohibition to study
religious philosophy for having value-based life in a society.

9. What are the rights guaranteed to minorities under Article 29 & 30 of the Constitution
of India?

Article 29(1) gives to all the citizens , the right to preserve their language, script or
culture of its own and Article 29(2) gives the Right of a citizen not to be denied
admission into state maintained and state-aided institutions on the ground only of
religion, race, caste, or language.

Article 30(1) gives the linguistic or religious minorities in India The right to establish, and
administer educational institutions of their choice and Article 30(2) bars the state, while
granting aid to educational institutions, from discriminating against any educational
institution on the ground that it is under the management of a linguistic or a religious
minority.

Dr. Naresh Agarwal v. Union of India, In this case 50% of the seats were to be filled on
the basis of entrance examination conducted by Aligarh Muslim University and the
other 50% of the seats was reserved for Muslim Candidates. The Supreme Court held
that AMU is not a minority institution and struck down the amendment which was made
in the favor of Aligarh Muslim University.

St. Stephen’s College v. University of Delhi case the preference given to Christian
students by St.Stephen’s College was challenged. The Court held that an important part
of administration is admission of students and the minority institutions had their right to
select students. The selection was set by giving 50% of the seats by merit and 50% based
 on the minority community. This was however overruled in T.M.A Pai Foundation v.
State of Karnataka. The court held that A minority institution may have its own
procedure and method of admission as well as selection of students, but such a
procedure must be fair and transparent, and the selection of students in professional
and higher education colleges should be on the basis of merit.

St. Xavier College v. State of Gujarat it was held that "the spirit behind the provision of
the following article is conscience of the nation that the minorities, religious as well as
linguistic, are not prohibited from establishing and administering educational institutes,
of their choice for the purpose of giving their child the best general education to make
them complete man and women of the country."

10. Can a law enacted to enforce a directive principle infringe fundamental rights? Justify
your answer with relevant case laws.

State of Madras Vs Champakam Dorairajan, the Supreme Court's approach was rigid as
it held that Directive Principles of State Policy cannot override the provisions contained
in Part III of the Constitution of India but have to conform to and run as subsidiary to
Fundamental Rights.

Kesavanda Bharati v State of Kerala It was held that where it was held that the directive
principles were in harmony with the country’s aims and objectives and the fundamental
rights could be amended to meet the needs of the hour.

Minerva Mills Ltd. v Union of India[20], the court believed that the harmonious relation
between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles was a basic feature of the
Constitution. It was stated that Part III and Part IV together comprised of the core of the
constitution and any legislation or amendment that destroyed the balance between the
two would be in contravention to the basic structure of the Constitution.

Sanjeev Coke Mfg. Co. v M/s Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. the Supreme Court held that the
part of the Minerva Mills judgment that dealt with Article 31 C of the Constitution was
just an obiter dictum.

UNIT IV

1. Explain in detail the Presidential Election.

 Article 54 of the Indian constitution provides that the president shall be elected by an
electoral college consisting of the elected members of both houses of parliament, the
elected members of legislative assemblies of state (state shall also include the national
capital territory of Delhi and the UT of Puducherry). The election of president shall be
held in accordance to the system of proportional representation as per Article 55(3),
and this voting is done through a secret ballot. The values of votes casted by the
members are determined by Article 55.
The formula for determining the votes held by an MLA = (total population of the
state/UT divided)/(the total number of elected members of the state legislative
assembly * 1000). The population of the territory is determined by the 1971 census, and
this continues till the year 2026. As the population varies from state to state, the value
of a vote of an MLA in Uttar Pradesh is 208 and that of Sikkim is 7.
The value of an MP vote = (sum of vote value of elected members of all states legislative
assembly)/(the sum of elected members of both houses). So, the current number is
549495/776 = 708.11 which is rounded to 708.
(Mode of voting - elaborate with example by using ABCD)

2. Discuss the powers and functions of the President of India.

Executive power. Article 77(1) states that the executive power of the union is vested in
him and all the executive functions are executed in the name of the president. The
president is considered as the head of the Indian republic. The president has the power
to appoint the PM and on his advice, other ministers of the union (Article 75(1)).
1. The judges of SC and HC (Article 124(2) and 217(1))
2. Governors of state (Article 155)
3. Attorney General (Article 76)
4. CAG (Article 148)
The authorities appointed by the president hold their office during the pleasure of the
president. The president has to exercise his powers on the aide and advice of the council
of ministers. In the Ram Jawaya Kapur v State of Punjab case, it was held that the
president is just a formal or constitutional head and the real executive powers are
vested in the council of ministers. In the UN Rao v Indira Gandhi case, the SC held that
the president cannot exercise the executive power without the aide and advice of the
council of ministers, and any such action is unconstitutional.
Military powers. The president is the supreme commander of the defence forces of the
country. The president has powers to declare war and peace. The exercise of the
military powers of the president is regulated by law.

Diplomatic powers. As the head of the state, the president sends and receives
ambassadors, and other diplomatic representatives. All treaties and international
agreements are negotiated and concluded in the name of the president though subject
to ratification by parliament.

Legislative powers. The president of India has the power to summon and prorogue the
parliament and he can dissolve the Lok Sabha subject to Article 85(1). The president is
bound to summon parliament within six months from the last sitting of the former
session. In case of any deadlock between the two houses of the parliament, the
president can summon a joint session under Article 108, and in the joint session, the
president outlines the general policy and programme of the government (Article 86).
Every bill by the parliament is sent to the president for his assent under Article 111. He
may give assent or withhold assent or in the case of a bill other than a money bill, return
to the house for reconsideration with some of his suggestions. If it is passed again, he is
bound to give assent. A bill for the recognition of a new state or alteration of state
boundaries can only be introduced after the president’s recommendation under Article
3, and the state bills for imposing restrictions on commerce also requires his
recommendation under Article 304. The president nominates twelve members of the
Rajya Sabha from persons having special knowledge or experience of literature, art,
science and social service under Article 80(3). The president has to lay before the
parliament, the annual financial budget, the report of CAG, various reports of the
commission such as finance commission, UPSC, SC/ST commission, etc.
Ordinance making powers. The president if at any time when both houses of parliament
are not in session, and the president is satisfied that circumstances exist which render it
necessary for him to take immediate action, he may issue an ordinance as under Article
123. An ordinance promulgated is a law having the same effect as an act by the
parliament. The ordinance however ceases to operate at the expiry of six weeks from
the date of reassembly of the parliament unless a resolution disapproving it is passed by
the houses before the 6 weeks. The president may also withdraw such ordinances at any
time. This power is exercised by the president on his own satisfaction and the court
cannot inquire into the reasons for the subjective satisfaction of the president. The
ordinance making power of the president is coextensive to the legislative power of the
parliament. RK Garg v UOI: In this case, a five judge bench held that the special bearer
bonds ordinance 1981 was not ultra vires of Article 123 of the constitution. The
 president is entitled to amending or altering taxes, and there can be no limitation for
the president to act in accordance to any legislative power as his power is coextensive.
AK Roy v UOI: In this case, the court held that the ordinance of the president shall
always be subject to test of vagueness, arbitrariness, reasonableness and public
interests.

Pardoning powers. The president under Article 72 has the power to pardon, commute,
remit, respite and retrieve the sentence of any person convicted of offenses. In the
Kuljeet Singh v Lt. Governor of Delhi case, the petitioners Ranga and Billa were found
guilty of murdering two innocent children and were awarded death sentence by
session’s court and was confirmed by the HC, and an SLP against the judgement was
dismissed by the SC. Thereafter, a mercy petition was filed under Article 72 for the
president to grant pardon. The president rejected without assigning any reasons. The
petitioners contended that the president’s power to pardon was not exercised fairly and
reasonably while the court held that the exercise of the president's power under Article
72 will be examined on facts and circumstances of each case. The court has retained the
power of judicial review even on a matter vested by the constitution solely on an
executive. Epuru Sudhakar v State of AP case.

Emergency powers. The president under Article 352 can proclaim emergency if he is
satisfied that the security of India is threatened by war or aggression or armed rebellion.
Under Article 356, the president may proclaim a state emergency on the report of a
governor of the state if the president is satisfied that the state cannot be carried on in
accordance with the constitution. When the financial stability or credit of India is
threatened, the president can proclaim financial emergency under Article 360. The
president during emergency may suspend all fundamental rights except article 21 and
22 and assume the power of a governor of any state.
3. Position of president

Article 74(1) says that there shall be a council of ministers to the prime minister at the
head to aid and advise the president who shall, in the exercise of his functions, act in
accordance with such advice provided that the president may require the council of ministers
to reconsider such advice. The question whether any advice was tendered by minister to
president shall not be inquired in any court. Prior to the 42nd amendment, there was an
ambiguity regarding the position of the president. There was no clear provision whether the
president was bound by the ministerial advice or not. A literal interpretation of that provision
by any ambitious president could have made him choose to become a real ruler and not remain
a nominal head. Ambedkar in his speech in the constituent assembly said that the president
occupies the same position as the king under the English constitution. He is the head of the
state but not of the executive. He represents the nation but does not rule the nation. His place
is that of a ceremonial device on a seal by which nation’s decisions are made known. He cannot
do anything contrary to the advice nor can he do anything without their advice. In the Ram
Jawaya Kapur v State of Punjab case, it was held that the president is just a formal or
constitutional head and the real executive powers are vested in the council of ministers. In the
UN Rao v Indira Gandhi case, the SC held that the president cannot exercise the executive
power without the aide and advice of the council of ministers, and any such action is
unconstitutional. The 42nd amendment of the constitution removed the vacuum and said that
the president shall be bound by the advice of the council of ministers. A proviso was added in
the 44th amendment which gave the president power to make the council of ministers
reconsider the advice. The president role at best may be advisory. He may act as a guide,
philosopher and friend to the ministers but cannot assume to himself the role of their master.
Article 75(2) says that the council of ministers hold their office during the pleasure of the
president. This does not give the president absolute power to dismiss the ministers. He can
exercise that power on the advice of the PM. In SP Gupta and others v President of India and
others, it was held that though the advice given by the council of ministers cannot be enquired
by the courts, the material on the basis of which such advice is given are not sect\ret and can
be scrutinized.

4. Define ‘Money Bill’. Explain the procedure for passing a ‘Money Bill’. State the
difference between Money Bill and Ordinary Bill.

Sno. Money Bill Ordinary Bill

1. A money bill can be introduced only in An ordinary bill can be introduced in any
the Lok Sabha and not in the Rajya house.
Sabha. (Article 110(2))

2. A money bill is introduced in the Lok An ordinary bill can be introduced either by
Sabha only by a minister and it can a minister or by a private member.
only be a public bill.

3. A money bill can be introduced only The recommendation of a president is not

with the recommendation of the required.
 president.

4. A money bill cannot be amended by An ordinary bill can be amended, rejected in

the Rajya Sabha and it should be the Rajya Sabha. Rajya Sabha can detain it
returned within 14 days to the Lok for a maximum of six months.
Sabha with or without any
recommendation. (Article 109)

5. The certification of the speaker is An ordinary bill originating in Lok Sabha

required when it comes to the money does not require approval when transmitted
bill in the Lok Sabha when transmitted to Rajya Sabha.
to Rajya Sabha.

6. There is no joint sitting when it comes When there is any deadlock between the
to money bills. two houses, the president can call for joint
sitting.

7. If the money bill is defeated in the Lok An ordinary bill introduced by a member of
Sabha, the entire council of ministers the government, when defeated, leads to
have to resign. resignation of the government.

8. The president can reject or accept a It can be accepted, rejected or sent for
money bill but cannot send it for reconsideration.
reconsideration.

UNIT V

1. “The Indian Constitution envisages several jurisdictions of the Supreme Court”. Discuss.
Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court

Court of Record
Article 129 makes a supreme court a court of record and confers all the powers of such
a court including the power to punish its own contempt. The contempt of courts Act
1971 defines the power of court for punishing contempt of court. According to this act
contempt of court includes, civil contempt (willful disobedience to any judgement,
decree, order etc or wilful breach of an undertaking given to the court) Criminal
contempt (publication spoken or written of any matter or doing any act which is.
 scandalises or intent to scandalise to lower authority of court; b. prejudices to interfere
with due course of aunty judicial proceedings c. interfere or obstruct administration of
justice).
The following acts will not amount to contempt.
Innocent publication, fair and accurate report of judicial proceedings, fair criticism of
judicial act, complaint made in good faith against presiding officers of subordinate
courts,
Contempt of court is punishable with imprisonment which may extend to 6 months or
fine upto 2000.

Original Jurisdiction

The SC has original jurisdiction in any dispute

a. between GOI and one or more states

b. between GOI and any state, or state on one side and one or more states on the
other
c. between two or more states
No suit brought in by private individual against government will be entertained in the
supreme court

The dispute related to original jurisdiction must involve a question of law or fact on which the
existence of legal rights depends. This means that the courts do not have jurisdiction in matters
of political nature.

Appellate Jurisdiction: (article 132)

The SC is the apex court in the country which means that it is the highest court of appeal.in the
country. The appellate jurisdiction of the SC are of 4 main categories
1. Constitutional matters: an appeal in constitutional matters requires 3 conditions for
grant of certificate ;by the high court. 1. The order must be appealed against the
judgement, decree or final order made by HC in civil , criminal and other matters. 2. The
case must involve a question of law as to interpretation of the constitution. 3. If the
HCcertifies the case to be heard by the SC
2. Civil Cases (article 133)
An appeal shall lie to the SC from a judgement, decree or final orders in the civil
proceedings of the HC. Only if the HC certifies that the case involves substantial question of law
of general importance and in the opinion of the HCsuch question should be decided by the SC
3 An appeal in criminal cases (article 134)
An appeal in SC to any judgment final order or sentence in a criminal proceedings of a HC in the
following two ways with certificate of HC / without certificate of the HC
Without Certificate - Has on appeal reversed an order of acquittal of an accused person and
sentence him to death
Has withdrawn on trial before itself any case from any court subordinate to its authority and in
such trial convicts the acquitted person and sentences him to jail.

Special Leave Appeal (article 136)

Wide powers and vested with the SC under this article. Power given under this article is special
residuary power which is exercisable outside the purview of ordinary law. It vests in the SC a
plenary jurisdiction in hearing appeals by granting special leave against any kind of judgement
of order made by any court or tribunal in any proceedings and has left this power entirely to the
discretion of the court unfettered by any restrictions. However, this cannot be done in a
military trial.

Advisory jurisdiction:
The President thinks that a question of law of fact has arisen or likely to arise and the question
of nature of public importance, that it is expedient to obtain the opinion of SC he may refer for
the advisory of SC under article 143.

Article 141 states that the judgement of the SC will be binding on all courts. This erupts the
question whether the SC is bound by its own decisions. Art.137 provides the SC the power to
review its own judgement but it is subject to any law passed by the parliament

Writ Jurisdiction:
Art.32 confers powers to the citizen to approach SC in the case of any violation of fundamental
rights. This article also included a PIL which can be filed in the SC for violation of rights of a
group of members.

Habeas corpus, mandemous, tertiarrary, quo warranto, prohibition

Case laws:
Vinay Chandra Misra case
SC bar association vs Union of India
UoI Vs State of Rajasthan
2. Explain in detail the provisions relating to appointment and removal of Judges.

An impartial and independent judiciary is necessary to protect the rights of individuals

and provide equal justice without any fear. The constitution has ensured independence of
the judiciary through several provisions. Article 50 of the Indian Constitutions directs the
state to separate the judiciary from the executive.

The Constitution does not leave the appointment of the judges of the supreme
court to the unguided discretion of the executive. Earlier, the Supreme Court in
the judges transfer case 1 (SP Gupta v Union of India) interpreted that the word
consultation in Article 124 and 217 did not mean concurrence, and als held that
the executive was not bound by the advice of the judges. Secondly, Article 222
gave the president the power to transfer judges from one High Court to another.
This undermined the independence of the judiciary. After the Keshava Nanda
Bharati case judgement, the then executive, had misused this power in appointing
justice a.n.ray superseding three senior judges.

Fortunately, in the judges transfer case 2 (SC’s advocate on record association v

UOI), the SC overruled the SP Gupta case, and held that the opinion of the chief
justice held primacy during the selection process of judges. He also held that the
chief justice would require to consult two of the senior most judges before
sending his recommendation. The executive was bound by this and the political
influence was eliminated.

In the judges transfer case 3, the SC held that the open courts consultation process
to be adopted by the CJI requires consultation of plurality of judges. The
expression consultation with the chief justice of India in Article 217(1) and 222
requires a consultation with a plurality of judges. The court held that the CJI must
consult a collegium of four senior most judges of the SC and made it clear that if
two judges give adverse opinion, the CJI should not send the recommendation to
the president.
 In 2014, the parliament passed the 99th amendment act and inserted Article 124A,
124B and 124C to create the national judicial appointments commission which
consisted of the chief justice, two SC judges, law minister, two eminent persons
nominated by a committee of the PM, chief justice and leader of opposition, with
one member nominated from the SC/ST/OBC/minority/women. The SC struck
down this amendment helding it to be unconstitutional and therefore, ensuring an
independence of the judiciary.

SHORT QUESTIONS: (Both 7 Marks and 5 Marks)

UNIT I

1. Discuss the main features of the Indian Councils Act of 1909. (Minto Morley
Reforms).
One of the first attempts to introduce a representative and popular element was
made by the Minto Morley Reforms, known by the secretary of state Morley and the
viceroy Minto. The size of the legislative councils were increased. The number of
additional members to the governor general’s council was raised from 16 to 60. By
the act of 1909, the power of the legislative councils were enlarged at both center
and provincial levels and were also given the power to discuss any matter. The
council had the right of discussing and moving the resolution on the financial
statement but they are not given power for voting. Satyendra Pal Sinha became the
first Indian to become a governor of a state post this act.

2. Regulating Act, 1773.

 After the grant of Diwani after the battle of Plassey in 1757, the East India company
became the real masters of the regions of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. The 1773
regulating act was the beginning of parliamentary control and there was direct
intervention and the company became responsible for administration of civil justice
in collection of land revenue. The presidency in Bombay and Madras were bought
under the control of Calcutta. The SC was established in Calcutta and the position of
governor general was introduced first to this act. The concept of federalism was
also introduced.

3. The Act of Settlement, 1781

To remove the defects and shortcomings of the regulating act, an act of settlement
was passed in the year 1781. The actions of the public servants were exempted from
the SC. It settled the question of jurisdiction of the court over servants and natives. It
made clear what law could apply to the SC. The governor general and the SC were
given power to exercise over the subordinates and people.

4. The Pitt's India Act, 1784.

In the Pitt’s India Act of 1784 a double government was established. The entire
political and diplomatic power was given to the board of control in England. After
this act, India came under the direct control of the board of control in England and
board of directors were appointed in India.

5. The Government of India Act, 1858. (Royal Proclamation)

The objective Pitt’s India Act to establish a double government failure. The board of
control failed to have proper control over the company’s affairs. After the revolt
against the company in the year 1857, the British passed the act of 1858 for a better
government. The 1858 government of India act transferred all the powers from the
company to her majesty. The power of crown was to be exercised by the secretary
of state assisted by a council and the first viceroy, Lord Canning was appointed.

6. Federal Court.

The government of India act 1935 established a Federal court in Delhi. The federal
court had one chief justice and not more than six other judges and the age of
 retirement of these judges was 65. The necessary qualifications were also given
under this act and the judges were appointed by the crown. The federal court
exercises original, appellate and advisory jurisdiction. However, the federal court
was not the apex court and appeals were allowed to the privy council from the
decisions of the federal court.

7. The Cripps Mission.

The British government realised that it was difficult to remain indifferent towards
the Indian problem. Therefore, the British government sent Sir Stafford Cripps to
negotiate with India to secure their cooperation in WWII. The British promised that
they would draft a constitution with the representation of all princely states and
political parties. They also said that the constitution making body shall be composed
of persons elected by the provincial legislatures and nominated by the Indian
princes. Indians were not satisfied by the above proposals and they outrightly
rejected the mission.

8. The Indian Independence Act, 1947.

The Indian independence provided for the creation of two independent dominions,
India and Pakistan from 15th August 1947. Each dominion was to have a governor
general who was appointed by the king, and the constituent assembly of both
dominions were empowered to frame laws for their respective territories. Till the
conditions were framed, the provinces were governed by the Government of India
Act 1935. The secretary state for India was abolished and was taken over by the
secretary of Commonwealth nations.

UNIT II

1. What are the drawbacks of Parliamentary form of Government?

The parliamentary form violates the concept of separation of power as there is a

clubbing between the executive and legislature. There is no biparty system when a
single party does not get a majority in the chamber. The evil of defection is also
another disadvantage in parliamentary democracy. A conflict between the head of
the state and the head of the government on policies and programmes to be
 implemented will adversely affect the schemes. The Indian post bill in 10984 was not
implemented as president Zail Singh pocket vetoed the bill as he had his
disagreement with Rajiv Gandhi.

2. “Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic” – Enumera.

3. Bring out the usefulness of the Preamble in the interpretation of the Constitution.

Copy paste

4. Explain the theory of “Basic Structure”. Refer to decided cases.

Article 368 of the Indian constitution gives the power to make amendments in the
constitution. In the Sankari Prasad v UOI case, a question arose whether
fundamental rights could be amended through Article 368. The court held that the
parliament has the power to amend the constitution including fundamental rights.
This view was again upheld in the Sajan Singh case. The parliament overruled these
two cases in the Golaknath case and held that the parliament could not amend the
fundamental rights. In the year 1973 came the landmark judgement in the Kesava
Nanda Bharati case where the basic structure concept was introduced. The SC held
that the parliament could amend any part of the constitution without altering the
basic structure or framework of the constitution. It held that the amending power
under Article 368 did not give the parliament power to damage, emasculate,
destroy, abrogate, change or alter the basic structure. This basic structure was
defined in different ways by different judges and also later evolved in other
judgements of Minerva Mills case and L Chandrakumar case.

5. Explain the Theory of Separation of Powers. How far this theory has its applicability
in the interpretation of division of powers in India?

The separation of powers doctrine was propounded by Montesquieu in his book

Spirit of Laws. Montesquieu, a French scholar, observed that the concentration of
power on a single authority or ruler led to a tyrannical regime. So, he introduced the
concept of separation of powers whereby the power is in between three organs,
namely the legislature - for making laws, the executive - for enforcing or
implementing the laws, and judiciary - for interpreting the laws. Article 50 of the
Indian constitution directs the state to separate the judiciary from that of the
executive. However, this doctrine cannot be applied in a strict sense in India because
 we follow a parliamentary democracy. But efforts have been made by our
constitution makers to follow this doctrine. Article 122 of the constitution says that
the validity of proceedings in the parliament cannot be called into question in any
court and at the same time, a judicial conduct of a judge cannot be discussed in the
parliament according to Article 121. Same is the case in states as mentioned in
Article 212 and 211. Article 53 and 154 give the president and governor absolute
immunity from civil and criminal liability and Article 361 says that neither the
president nor the governor are answerable to any court. There have been certain
articles and provisions in the constitution that enable one organ to interfere in the
issues of the other to maintain a check and balance system that is when a judge is
proven of misbehaviour and incapacity. He can be impeached by the legislature, and
when the parliament or the executive exceed their limit and violate the basic
structure while framing laws, the laws can be quashed on the grounds of violation of
basic structure by the judiciary.

6. Write a note on the formation of new States under the Indian Constitution.

Article 3 of the Indian constitution deals with the formation of new states, alteration
of areas/boundaries/names of existing states. The parliament may by law form a
new state by separating from any state by uniting two or more states or parts of
states or by uniting any territory to part of any state. It can increase the area,
diminish the area, alter the boundaries and alter the name of any state. However,
any bill of this kind can be introduced only after the recommendation of the
president and have to be referred to the legislature of that state for a specific
period. Article 3 was invoked in 1956 while passing the state reorganization act.

UNIT III

1. Doctrine of Severability.

When a part of a statute is unconstitutional a question arises as to whether the whole of

the statute is to be declared void or only the part that is unconstitutional. To resolve
this problem the SC devised the doctrine of severability or separability. The doctrine
means that if a provision can be separated from that which is constitutional then only
the part which is offending is to be declared as void. Article 13 insists that word to the
extent of such inconsistency which means that the provision of a law is held to be
unconstitutional then only the repugnant provision shall be treated by courts as void. In
the Romesh Thappar vs the state of Madras case, it was held that when a law is made to
impose restrictions on the fundamental right within and without the limits provided by
 the constitution and when it is not possible to separate both then the whole statute
shall be declared as unconstitutional.

2. Doctrine of Waiver.

Doctrine of waiver deals with an important question of whether fundamental rights can
be waived or not. LIn the Baseshernath vs income tax commissioner case the petitioner
was referred to the income tax authorities as he was found to have concealed a large
amount of income and there upon he was told to pay 3 lakhs in monthly installment
under section 5(1) In the Muthiah vs IT commissioner case the section 5(1) was
declared ultra vires of article 14. The petitioner then challenged his settlement. The
respondent contended that through the agreement the petitioner has waived his
fundamental right. The court held that when a citizen waives his fundamental rights,
then he is said to have relieved the state from his obligations to guarantee the
fundamental rights as he has no right to relieve the state from his obligation. Such a
waivement cannot be made.

3. Concept of Judicial Review.

Three dimensions - To protect legality of essential rights under part 3 of the constitution
- to authorise the disinterest of organisational achievement - Interrogation of public
interest.

4. Dicey’s Rule of Law.

The first part of article 14 which guarantees equality before law which was Prof AV
Dicey called as the rule of law in his book law of constitution. Dicey wrote that every
official from the PM to the Constable is under the same responsibility for every act done
contravening the law as any other citizen. Prof Dicey went on to give three meanings of
the rule of law.
1. absence of arbitrary power which meant that there was absolute supremacy of
law as opposed to the arbitrary power of the ruler
2. Equality before law which means that no one is above the law with the sole
exception of the monarch who can do no wrong. Everyone in the state is bound
to obey the same law.
 3. Constitution is the result of the ordinary laws of the land which means that the
source of individual right is not written but defined and enforced by courts

5. What is meant by Protective or Positive Discrimination?

Protective discrimination is the policy of granting special priveleges to the downtrodden
and under priviliged section of the society.
Article 15(3) provides that or benefits of women and children an exception can be made
from the general provision that the state shall not discriminate on the grounds of
religion, race, caste, sex and place of birth.

Article 15(4) enables the state to form any special provision for advancement for
socially, educationally backward sections of the society.

There are several other provisions in the constitution Article 15(5) 15(6), 16(4) etc
The most common criticism raised against these provisions is that it promotes
mediocrity over meritocracy, but the root of the democratic success is social
engineering and empowering the backward sections and striving for their upliftment.

6. Abolition of Untouchability.

Article 17 of the Indian Constitution abolished untouchability and forbade its practice in
any form. The article further made untouchability a punishable offence in accordance
with law. Exercise of this article, the parliament enacted untouchability offences Act
1955 and further amended it by Untouchability Offences amendment act 1975. This act
prohibits any form of untouchability in shops, public restaurants, public places etc..
State of Karnataka Vs appa balu ingale

7. Abolition of titles.
Article 18 of the constitution states that there shall be no titles shall be conferred by a
state not being a military or academic distinction and no citizen is allowed to accept any
title from any foreighn state, adding to that no person who hold a office of profit India
without the consent of the President accept any title present emoluments or office of
any kind from a foreigh state.

Balaji Raghavan Vs Union of India the petitioner challenged the validity of national
awards such as Bharat Ratna, Padma awards, the SC held that they were not violative as
these did not amount to titles.
Indira Jaisingh vs Union of Ubsu
8. Ex post facto law.

Article 20(1) says that no person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of
a law and force at the time of commission of the act charged as an offence not to be
subjected to a penalty greater than what might have been at the time of the
commission. Therefore, no criminal law can have retrospective effect.
Kedarnath Vs State of West Bengal
Ratanlal Vs State of Punjab.

9. Prohibition against self-incrimination.

Article 20(2) states that no person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same
offence more than once.. The essentials for the application of double jeopardy are
1. The person must be accused of an offence
2. The prosecution must have taken place before a court or tribunal
3. The person must have been prosecuted and punished in the previous proceeds
4. the offence must be same for which he was prosecuted

State of Jharkhand Vs Lalu Prasad

Maqbool Hussain Vs State of Bombay

10. Is the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 includes the right to die?

Article 21 of Indian Constitution says that no person shall be deprived of his life or
personal liberties except according to the procedure established by law. However, a
question arises whether the right to life includes the right to die or not. This question
was placed before the high court of Bombay in the State of Maharashtra Vs Maruti
Shripati Dubal. In this case the HC held that right to life includes right to die and struck
down Section 309 of IPC which provides punishment to a person to commit suicide as
unconstitutional. The same view was taken in the case of T Rathinam Vs Union of India.
The issue was again raised in Gian Kaur Vs State of Punjab. A five judge constitution
bench overruled the Rathinam case and held that right to die does not come under
Article 21 and said that Section 309 was constitutionally valid, went on to say that right
to die is inherently in-consistent with the right to life. In 2018 a Five Judge Bench in
Common Cause Vs Union of India unanimously held that the case of Aruna Shaugaug
had wrongfully ruled that passive euthanasia can be made lawful only by legislation. The
 court laid down directive through which terminally ill people have the right to chose not
to remain in a vegetative state and hence making passive euthanasia valid under law.

11. Write briefly on the safeguards provided to preventive detention cases under the
Constitution.

Article 22 provides protection against certain arrests and preventive detention. The
constitutional safeguard available against preventive detention are
● clause 4a of article 22 says that no law framed for preventive detention give the
authority to detain a person for more than 3 months unless the advisory board
reports sufficient cause for detention. The advisory board must have persons
should be qualified as that of judge of a HC and he must submit the report
before expiry of 3 months,
● clause 5 of article 22 states that while detaining the person the reason for his
detention must be communicated to him as soon as possible and the ground of
detention should have a rational connection with the object with which the
detanue is prevented from attaining. The communication should have material
facts and should not be mere statements.The detaining authority has no
obligation to provide grounds of detention prior to the arrest but he is advised to
do so at the earliest. A person already in custody can be detained when there
are reasonable and sufficient causes to do so.
● Clause 5 also mentions the detenu right of representation. The authority
providing the detention order shall afford at the person the earliest opportunity
of making a representation against the order.

12. How workers are protected under the Constitution of India?

Article 23 of the constitution prohibits trafficking of human beings and forced labour.
Article 24 prohibits employment of children in factories. Article 23 says that trafficking
of human beings, begar and other similar forms of forced labour are prohibited and at
the same time punishable in accordance with law. However, nothing in the article
prevents the state from imposing compulsory service for public purposes.
People Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India
13. Write a note on the constitutional safeguards guaranteed to children.

Article 24 prohibits employment of children in factories. Article 24 says that no child

below the age of 14 shall be employed to work in any factory or mine or engaged in any
 other hazardous employment. Though the constitution provides protection of such
children India is yet to ratify two major conventions of the ILO.
MC Mehta Vs State of TN (Sivakasi)

14. Make a comparison between Article 32 and Article 226.

Article 32 and 226 deal about the writ jurisdiction of SC and HC respectively.
Article 226 is wide when it comes to writ jurisdiction as it can issue writs against
fundamental rights or any other purpose.Article 32 can ;b;e suspended if an Emergency
has been proclaimed by the President using Article 359 whereas Article 226 cannot be
suspended at the time of emergency. Article 32 is a fundamental right whereas Article
226 is a constitutional right. HC has a discretionary power whether to issue a writ or
not but this is not the case in the SC as Article 32 is fundamental right and the court
cannot refuse.

15. Public Interest Litigation

PIL refers to Public Interest Litigation and this was introduced by Justice PN Bhagawati
in 1980s. PIL is not defined in any statute but it is interpreted by Judges to consider the
intent of the public at large. PIL can be filed for example violation of basic human
rights, content and conduct of government policy, compel municipal authority to
perform duties, violation of basic fundamental rights. The first PIL was filed in
Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar highlighting the plight of thousands of under trial
prisoners languishing in various jails in Bihar

16. Uniform Civil Code

Article 44 of the Indian constitution directs the state to secure for the citizens a uniform
civil code throughout the territory of India. Uniform civil code is a proposal to formulate
personal laws of the citizens which apply on all citizens equally regardless of their
religion. In the Sarla Mudgal v UOI, the SC had directed the then Prime Minister to take
a fresh look at Article 44 for both protection of the oppressed and promotion of national
unity and integrity. Justice Kuldeep Singh and RM Sahai in a concurrent judgement held
that since 1950, all governments have failed to take any efforts towards implementing
the constitutional mandate under Article 44. In 2006, Seema v Ashwani Kumar case
made the first step towards uniform civil code. The benefits of this ruling are
 1. Prevented child marriage
2. Check polygamy and bigamy
3. Help women to exercise their right under marriage maintenance and custody of
children.
4. Enable widows to claim inheritance.
5. Deter husbands from deserting their wives.

17. Fundamental Duties

Fundamental duties were inserted through the 42nd constitutional amendment act in
1976. A new part, part IV-A, and Article 51A were added to the constitution. Rights and
duties are correlative and the fundamental duties therefore, was intended to serve as a
constant reminder to every citizen that while the constitution specifically conferred on
them certain fundamental rights, it also requires for the citizens to observe certain basic
norms of democratic conduct and behaviour. There are eleven fundamental rights listed
from Article 51A(a) to 51A(k). These include the duties to abide by the constitution and
respect its ideal and institutions the national flag and national anthem to cherish and
follow the noble ideals that inspired our national struggle to uphold and protect the
sovereignty, unity and integrity of India to defend the country when called upon, to
promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood, to value and preserve the
right heritage, to protect the natural environment, to develop scientific temper,
humanism and spirit of enbquiry, to safeguard public property, to strive towards
excellence in all spheres, who is a parent, to provide opportunity for education to his
child.
Bijou Emmanuel v State of Kerala case

UNIT IV

1. How can the President of India be removed from his office?

Article 61 of the constitution deals with the procedure regarding the impeachment of
the president. The president can be removed from his office for the violation of the
constitution. The impeachment charge against him may be initiated from a house of the
parliament. The charge for initiating the impeachment must come in a form of proposal
contained in a resolution signed by not less than 1/4th of the total of the members, and
a notice has to be given at least 14 days in advance. The resolution must be passed by a
majority not less than 2/3rd of the total membership. The charge is then investigated by
 the other house. If the other house, after investigation, passes a resolution by 2/3rd
majority, then that resolution shall give effect to remove the president from his office.

2. Write a note on Parliamentary privileges.

The privileges of the members of the parliament are dealt under article 105. The
privileges available to them are
1. Privilege as to freedom of speech. The fundamental principle of parliamentary
democracy is a free, frank and fearless discussion in parliament and state
legislatures. Whatever is said by the members of the legislature during the
session is not subject to any defamation suit.
2. Privilege as to publication. No person in the parliament can be liable in any court
of any report or proceedings under the authority of the house
3. Privileges as to freedom from arrest. A member of parliament cannot be
arrested or imprisoned on a civil proceeding within a period of 40 days before or
after the session or during the session of the parliament.
4. Privileges as to privacy of debates. The parliament in exceptional cases hold
secret sessions to discuss certain important matters.
5. Privilege to regulate internal proceedings. The house has an exclusive right to
regulate its internal proceedings. The courts will not interfere with any of these
internal proceedings.
6. The parliament has a right to prohibit the publication of its reports or
proceedings or debates.
7. The parliament has power to hold enquiries and summon the records and
witnesses.
8. The parliament has the right to punish its members or outsiders for the breach
of privileges or contempt of the house.

3. What is meant by Collective Responsibility?

Article 75(3) says that the council of ministers shall be collectively responsible to the
house of the people. This is the fundamental principle underlying the working of any
parliamentary form of government. This means that all the ministers own joint
responsibility to the Lok Sabha for all their acts. They work together as a team. When
the Lok Sabha passes a motion of no confidence against the council of ministers, all the
ministers including those in the Rajya Sabha are bound to resign. The principle of
collective responsibility also means that the cabinet decisions bind all the cabinet
 ministers even if they differ in the meeting, and it is the duty of each minister to support
the others within and outside the parliament.

4. Sessions of Parliament.

Article 85 deals with the sessions of parliament, prorogation and dissolution. The
President shall from time to time summon each house of the parliament to meet at such
time and place as he thinks fit. But this right is subject to the condition that six months
should not intervene between its last sitting. This article also gives the right prorogation
and dissolution to the president.

ALL THE BEST