All Exams >
BPSC (Bihar) >
Indian Polity for State PSC Exams >
All Questions
All questions of Emergency Provisions for BPSC (Bihar) Exam
Consider the following statements:Statement-I:
During a National Emergency in India, Article 358 automatically suspends the Fundamental Rights under Article 19.Statement-II:
During a National Emergency in India, the President is authorized to suspend the right to move any court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights under Article 21.Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?- a)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I
- b)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-I
- c)Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrect
- d)Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correct
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Consider the following statements:
Statement-I:
During a National Emergency in India, Article 358 automatically suspends the Fundamental Rights under Article 19.
During a National Emergency in India, Article 358 automatically suspends the Fundamental Rights under Article 19.
Statement-II:
During a National Emergency in India, the President is authorized to suspend the right to move any court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights under Article 21.
During a National Emergency in India, the President is authorized to suspend the right to move any court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights under Article 21.
Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?
a)
Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I
b)
Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-I
c)
Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrect
d)
Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correct
|
T.S Academy answered |
Statement-I states that during a National Emergency in India, Article 358 automatically suspends the Fundamental Rights under Article 19. This is accurate as Article 358 does indeed suspend these rights during a National Emergency.
However, Statement-II claims that during a National Emergency in India, the President is authorized to suspend the right to move any court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights under Article 21. This statement is incorrect. Article 21 deals with the protection of life and personal liberty and is not subject to suspension during a National Emergency. Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 21 cannot be suspended even during an Emergency. Therefore, Statement-II is incorrect, making option c the correct answer.
Consider the following pairs regarding the scope of judicial review and proper/improper use of President's Rule (Article 356) in India:1. Sarkaria Commission: Recommends President's Rule in case of a hung assembly after general elections.2. Bommai Case: Establishes that the President's satisfaction in invoking Article 356 is final and not subject to judicial review.3. 44th Amendment Act of 1978: Allows for judicial review of the President's satisfaction in invoking Article 356.4. Anti-secular politics by state government: Grounds for invoking President's Rule as per the Bommai case.How many pairs given above are correctly matched?- a)Only one pair
- b)Only two pairs
- c)Only three pairs
- d)All four pairs
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Consider the following pairs regarding the scope of judicial review and proper/improper use of President's Rule (Article 356) in India:
1. Sarkaria Commission: Recommends President's Rule in case of a hung assembly after general elections.
2. Bommai Case: Establishes that the President's satisfaction in invoking Article 356 is final and not subject to judicial review.
3. 44th Amendment Act of 1978: Allows for judicial review of the President's satisfaction in invoking Article 356.
4. Anti-secular politics by state government: Grounds for invoking President's Rule as per the Bommai case.
How many pairs given above are correctly matched?
a)
Only one pair
b)
Only two pairs
c)
Only three pairs
d)
All four pairs
|
Capstone Ias Learning answered |
1. Sarkaria Commission: Recommends President's Rule in case of a hung assembly after general elections. Correct. The Sarkaria Commission indeed recommended that President's Rule can be imposed in the case of a hung assembly.
2. Bommai Case: Establishes that the President's satisfaction in invoking Article 356 is final and not subject to judicial review. Incorrect. The Bommai Case established that the President's satisfaction in invoking Article 356 is subject to judicial review, contrary to the statement.
3. 44th Amendment Act of 1978: Allows for judicial review of the President's satisfaction in invoking Article 356. Correct. The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 indeed allowed for judicial review of the President's satisfaction in invoking Article 356.
4. Anti-secular politics by state government: Grounds for invoking President's Rule as per the Bommai case. Correct. The Bommai case concluded that anti-secular activities by a state government could be grounds for invoking President's Rule, as secularism is a basic feature of the Constitution.
Thus, pairs 1, 3, and 4 are correctly matched, while pair 2 is incorrectly matched. Therefore, the correct answer is Option B: Only two pairs.
Consider the following statements:1. During a National Emergency, Parliament can legislate on any subject in the State List.2. Article 358 allows for the automatic suspension of Fundamental Rights under Article 19 during a National Emergency.3. The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 restricted Article 359, ensuring the right to move the court for enforcement of Fundamental Rights guaranteed by Articles 20 and 21.Which of the statements given above is/are correct?- a)1 Only
- b)1 and 2 Only
- c)1 and 3 Only
- d)1, 2 and 3
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Consider the following statements:
1. During a National Emergency, Parliament can legislate on any subject in the State List.
2. Article 358 allows for the automatic suspension of Fundamental Rights under Article 19 during a National Emergency.
3. The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 restricted Article 359, ensuring the right to move the court for enforcement of Fundamental Rights guaranteed by Articles 20 and 21.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
a)
1 Only
b)
1 and 2 Only
c)
1 and 3 Only
d)
1, 2 and 3
|
Lohit Matani answered |
All three statements are correct based on the provisions outlined in the Indian Constitution regarding the effects of a National Emergency:
1. Statement 1: Correct. During a National Emergency, Parliament is empowered to legislate on any subject in the State List, overriding the normal distribution of legislative powers between the Centre and the states.
2. Statement 2: Correct. Article 358 allows for the automatic suspension of Fundamental Rights under Article 19 during a National Emergency. This means that laws and executive actions inconsistent with Article 19 cannot be challenged during the Emergency.
3. Statement 3: Correct. The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 did restrict Article 359, ensuring that the President cannot suspend the right to move the court for enforcement of Fundamental Rights guaranteed by Articles 20 and 21, even during a National Emergency. This safeguard ensures protection from conviction for offences and upholds the right to life and personal liberty.
Thus, the correct answer is Option D.
Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?Statement I:Instances of National Emergency were proclaimed three times in India: in 1962, 1971, and 1975, each under different circumstances and with varying durations and implications.Statement II:President's Rule, governed by Article 356 of the Indian Constitution, is a mechanism through which the central government can take control of a state's administration in exceptional circumstances when the state machinery fails to function as per the constitutional provisions.- a)Both Statement I and Statement II are correct and Statement II explains Statement I.
- b)Statement I is correct, but Statement II is incorrect.
- c)Both Statement I and Statement II are correct, but Statement II does not explain Statement I.
- d)Statement I is incorrect, but Statement II is correct.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?
Statement I:
Instances of National Emergency were proclaimed three times in India: in 1962, 1971, and 1975, each under different circumstances and with varying durations and implications.
Statement II:
President's Rule, governed by Article 356 of the Indian Constitution, is a mechanism through which the central government can take control of a state's administration in exceptional circumstances when the state machinery fails to function as per the constitutional provisions.
a)
Both Statement I and Statement II are correct and Statement II explains Statement I.
b)
Statement I is correct, but Statement II is incorrect.
c)
Both Statement I and Statement II are correct, but Statement II does not explain Statement I.
d)
Statement I is incorrect, but Statement II is correct.
|
Valor Academy answered |
Statement -1 is Correct
India has experienced three instances of National Emergency:
India has experienced three instances of National Emergency:
- 1962: Declared due to external aggression by China during the Sino-Indian War.
- 1971: Declared due to external aggression by Pakistan during the Indo-Pak war leading to the liberation of Bangladesh.
- 1975: Declared on the grounds of "internal disturbance," a term later replaced with "armed rebellion" by the 44th Amendment Act.
Statement -2 is also Correct
Article 356 allows the President to impose President's Rule in a state when the constitutional machinery fails. This enables the central government to take over the legislative and executive functions of the state.
Article 356 allows the President to impose President's Rule in a state when the constitutional machinery fails. This enables the central government to take over the legislative and executive functions of the state.
While both statements are accurate, they address distinct provisions of the Constitution. National Emergency under Article 352 (as in Statement I) is unrelated to President’s Rule under Article 356 (as in Statement II). Therefore, Statement II does not explain Statement I.
Therefore,Correct Answer- Option C
Therefore,Correct Answer- Option C
Consider the following pairs:1. 1962 Emergency: Proclaimed due to Chinese aggression in NEFA (now Arunachal Pradesh)
2. 1971 Emergency: Proclaimed due to internal disturbances
3. 1975 Emergency: Proclaimed due to an attack by Pakistan
4. Shah Commission: Appointed to investigate the circumstances of the 1975 Emergency
How many pairs given above are correctly matched?- a)Only one pair
- b)Only two pairs
- c)Only three pairs
- d)All four pairs
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Consider the following pairs:
1. 1962 Emergency: Proclaimed due to Chinese aggression in NEFA (now Arunachal Pradesh)
2. 1971 Emergency: Proclaimed due to internal disturbances
3. 1975 Emergency: Proclaimed due to an attack by Pakistan
4. Shah Commission: Appointed to investigate the circumstances of the 1975 Emergency
How many pairs given above are correctly matched?
2. 1971 Emergency: Proclaimed due to internal disturbances
3. 1975 Emergency: Proclaimed due to an attack by Pakistan
4. Shah Commission: Appointed to investigate the circumstances of the 1975 Emergency
How many pairs given above are correctly matched?
a)
Only one pair
b)
Only two pairs
c)
Only three pairs
d)
All four pairs
|
Upsc Rank Holders answered |
1. 1962 Emergency: Correctly matched. It was proclaimed due to Chinese aggression in NEFA (now Arunachal Pradesh).
2. 1971 Emergency: Incorrectly matched. It was proclaimed due to an attack by Pakistan, not due to internal disturbances.
3. 1975 Emergency: Incorrectly matched. It was proclaimed due to internal disturbances, not due to an attack by Pakistan.
4. Shah Commission: Correctly matched. It was appointed to investigate the circumstances of the 1975 Emergency.
Hence, only tw0 pair is correctly matched.
Consider the following pairs:1. National Emergency: Declared during war, external aggression, or armed rebellion2. President's Rule: Declared in response to a threat to India's financial stability or credit3. Financial Emergency: Requires a written recommendation from the cabinet4. National Emergency: Grounds include 'armed rebellion' and 'internal disturbance'How many pairs given above are correctly matched?- a)Only one pair
- b)Only two pairs
- c)Only three pairs
- d)All four pairs
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Consider the following pairs:
1. National Emergency: Declared during war, external aggression, or armed rebellion
2. President's Rule: Declared in response to a threat to India's financial stability or credit
3. Financial Emergency: Requires a written recommendation from the cabinet
4. National Emergency: Grounds include 'armed rebellion' and 'internal disturbance'
How many pairs given above are correctly matched?
a)
Only one pair
b)
Only two pairs
c)
Only three pairs
d)
All four pairs
|
K.L Institute answered |
1. National Emergency: Declared during war, external aggression, or armed rebellion
This is correctly matched. According to Article 352, a National Emergency can be declared during war, external aggression, or armed rebellion.
2. President's Rule: Declared in response to a threat to India's financial stability or credit
This is incorrectly matched. President's Rule (Article 356) is declared due to the failure of the constitutional machinery in states, not in response to a financial threat.
3. Financial Emergency: Requires a written recommendation from the cabinet
This is incorrectly matched. Financial Emergency (Article 360) is declared in response to a threat to India's financial stability or credit, but it does not specifically require a written recommendation from the cabinet. It is the National Emergency that requires a written recommendation from the cabinet under Article 352.
4. National Emergency: Grounds include 'armed rebellion' and 'internal disturbance'
This is incorrectly matched. The original term 'internal disturbance' was replaced by 'armed rebellion' by the 44th Amendment Act of 1978. Hence, 'internal disturbance' is no longer a ground for declaring National Emergency.
Thus, only the first pair is correctly matched.
Which of the following statements is/are true?(1) Critics claim that emergency provisions undermine the Fundamental Rights.(2) President becomes dictator by emergency provisions as per the critics.Choose from the following options.- a) 1 Only
- b) 2 Only
- c) Both 1 and 2
- d) Neither 1 nor 2
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Which of the following statements is/are true?
(1) Critics claim that emergency provisions undermine the Fundamental Rights.
(2) President becomes dictator by emergency provisions as per the critics.
Choose from the following options.
a)
1 Only
b)
2 Only
c)
Both 1 and 2
d)
Neither 1 nor 2
|
Vijay Kumar answered |
Some members of the Constituent Assembly criticized the incorporation of emergency provisions in the Constitution on the following grounds - (a) The federal character of the Constitution will be destroyed and the Union will become all. (b) powerful. (c) The powers of the State - both the Union and the units - will entirely be concentrated in the hands of the Union executive. (d) The President will become a dictator. (e) The financial autonomy of the state will be nullified. (f) Fundamental rights will become meaningless and, as a result, the democratic foundations of the Constitution will be destroyed. However, there were also protagonists of the emergency provisions in the Constituent Assembly. Sir Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar labelled them as ‘the very life-breath of the Constitution’. Mahabir Tyagi opined that they would work as a ‘safety-valve’ and thereby help in the maintenance of the Constitution. While defending the emergency provisions in the Constituent Assembly, Dr B. R. Ambedkar also accepted the possibility of their misuse. He observed, ‘I do not altogether deny that there is a possibility of the Articles being abused or employed for political purposes’.
Consider the following statements:Statement-I:
During a National Emergency in India, the President's power to declare the emergency can be exercised in the face of imminent danger.Statement-II:
The geographical scope of a National Emergency proclamation in India can apply only to the entire country and not to specified parts.Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?- a)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I
- b)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-I
- c)Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrect
- d)Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correct
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Consider the following statements:
Statement-I:
During a National Emergency in India, the President's power to declare the emergency can be exercised in the face of imminent danger.
During a National Emergency in India, the President's power to declare the emergency can be exercised in the face of imminent danger.
Statement-II:
The geographical scope of a National Emergency proclamation in India can apply only to the entire country and not to specified parts.
The geographical scope of a National Emergency proclamation in India can apply only to the entire country and not to specified parts.
Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?
a)
Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I
b)
Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-I
c)
Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrect
d)
Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correct
|
Lakshya Ias answered |
Statement-I correctly reflects the provision that during a National Emergency in India, the President can indeed exercise the power to declare the emergency in the face of imminent danger. This is a valid provision as outlined in the Indian Constitution under Article 352.
However, Statement-II is incorrect. The geographical scope of a National Emergency proclamation in India is not limited to applying only to the entire country. In fact, as per the Constitution, a National Emergency proclamation can apply to the entire country or a specified part of it. This provision allows for a more targeted response to specific situations where a localized emergency might require attention, rather than imposing emergency measures nationwide.
Consider the following statements:1. The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 introduced safeguards against the misuse of Emergency powers.2. The 1975 Emergency was proclaimed due to external aggression.3. During the operation of President's Rule, the Parliament assumes the power to legislate for the state.Which of the statements given above is/are correct?- a)1 Only
- b)1 and 3 Only
- c)2 and 3 Only
- d)1, 2 and 3
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Consider the following statements:
1. The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 introduced safeguards against the misuse of Emergency powers.
2. The 1975 Emergency was proclaimed due to external aggression.
3. During the operation of President's Rule, the Parliament assumes the power to legislate for the state.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
a)
1 Only
b)
1 and 3 Only
c)
2 and 3 Only
d)
1, 2 and 3
|
Upsc Toppers answered |
1. The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 introduced safeguards against the misuse of Emergency powers: This statement is correct. The 44th Amendment Act was enacted to prevent the misuse of Emergency provisions, which was a significant issue during the 1975 Emergency. It introduced several safeguards, including stricter requirements for declaring an Emergency and protecting citizens' fundamental rights.
2. The 1975 Emergency was proclaimed due to external aggression: This statement is incorrect. The 1975 Emergency was declared on the grounds of 'internal disturbance,' not external aggression. It was a controversial period marked by the suspension of civil liberties and political opposition.
3. During the operation of President's Rule, the Parliament assumes the power to legislate for the state: This statement is correct. When President's Rule is imposed under Article 356, the President can declare that the powers of the state legislature shall be exercisable by or under the authority of the Parliament. This allows the central government to legislate on behalf of the state.
Therefore, the correct statements are 1 and 3 only.
Chapter doubts & questions for Emergency Provisions - Indian Polity for State PSC Exams 2025 is part of BPSC (Bihar) exam preparation. The chapters have been prepared according to the BPSC (Bihar) exam syllabus. The Chapter doubts & questions, notes, tests & MCQs are made for BPSC (Bihar) 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, notes, meanings, examples, exercises, MCQs and online tests here.
Chapter doubts & questions of Emergency Provisions - Indian Polity for State PSC Exams in English & Hindi are available as part of BPSC (Bihar) exam.
Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for BPSC (Bihar) Exam by signing up for free.
Indian Polity for State PSC Exams
144 videos|544 docs|207 tests
|
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Study with 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos & Tests
10M+ students study on EduRev
|
© EduRev
|
Education Revolution
|
|
Signup to see your scores
go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup