All Exams >
BPSC (Bihar) >
Indian Polity for State PSC Exams >
All Questions
All questions of Supreme Court for BPSC (Bihar) Exam
Consider the following pairs:1. Regulating Act of 1773: Established Supreme Court of Judicature at Calcutta2. India High Courts Act 1861: Created High Courts for various provinces3. Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Bill of 2019: Increased judicial strength from 31 to 344. Government of India Act 1935: Created High Courts in Bombay and MadrasHow 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:
1. Regulating Act of 1773: Established Supreme Court of Judicature at Calcutta
2. India High Courts Act 1861: Created High Courts for various provinces
3. Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Bill of 2019: Increased judicial strength from 31 to 34
4. Government of India Act 1935: Created High Courts in Bombay and Madras
How many pairs given above are correctly matched?
a)
Only one pair
b)
Only two pairs
c)
Only three pairs
d)
All four pairs
|
Ias Masters answered |
1. Regulating Act of 1773: Established Supreme Court of Judicature at Calcutta - Correct. The Regulating Act of 1773 indeed established the Supreme Court of Judicature at Calcutta, marking the beginning of a structured judicial system in British India.
2. India High Courts Act 1861: Created High Courts for various provinces - Correct. The India High Courts Act of 1861 was responsible for creating High Courts in various provinces, replacing the Supreme Courts and Sadar Adalats that existed in the Presidency towns.
3. Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Bill of 2019: Increased judicial strength from 31 to 34 - Correct. The Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Bill, 2019, increased the number of judges in the Supreme Court from 31 to 34, including the Chief Justice of India.
4. Government of India Act 1935: Created High Courts in Bombay and Madras - Incorrect. The Government of India Act 1935 did not create High Courts in Bombay and Madras. High Courts in Bombay and Madras were established much earlier, in 1800 and 1823 respectively, by King George III. The Government of India Act 1935 established the Federal Court of India.
Thus, three pairs are correctly matched.
Consider the following statements.
1. Article 143 authorises the President to seek an advisory opinion from the Supreme Court
2. The advice of the supreme court is binding in this case
Which of these statements is/are not correct?
- a)1 Only
- b)2 Only
- c)Both 1 and 2
- d)Neither 1 nor 2
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Consider the following statements.
1. Article 143 authorises the President to seek an advisory opinion from the Supreme Court
2. The advice of the supreme court is binding in this case
Which of these statements is/are not correct?
a)
1 Only
b)
2 Only
c)
Both 1 and 2
d)
Neither 1 nor 2
|
Rahul Choudhury answered |
The President of India can refer any matter that is of public importance or that which involves interpretation of Constitution to Supreme Court for advice. However, the Supreme Court is not bound to give advice on such matters and the President is not bound to accept such an advice. So, Statement 2 in wrong.
Consider the following statements:Statement-I:
The President can appoint a judge of the Supreme Court as an acting Chief Justice of India under specific circumstances.Statement-II:
An ad hoc judge can be appointed by the Chief Justice of India in the absence of a quorum of permanent judges in the Supreme Court.
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 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Consider the following statements:
Statement-I:
The President can appoint a judge of the Supreme Court as an acting Chief Justice of India under specific circumstances.
The President can appoint a judge of the Supreme Court as an acting Chief Justice of India under specific circumstances.
Statement-II:
An ad hoc judge can be appointed by the Chief Justice of India in the absence of a quorum of permanent judges in the Supreme Court.
Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?
An ad hoc judge can be appointed by the Chief Justice of India in the absence of a quorum of permanent judges in the Supreme Court.
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
|
K.L Institute answered |
Statement-I correctly explains that the President can appoint a judge of the Supreme Court as an acting Chief Justice of India under specific conditions like vacancy, temporary absence, or inability of the Chief Justice of India to perform duties. Statement-II complements this by mentioning the provision for appointing ad hoc judges by the Chief Justice of India when there is a lack of quorum of permanent judges in the Supreme Court. Hence, both statements are accurate, and Statement-II elaborates on the scenarios where an ad hoc judge may be appointed.
Consider the following statements.
1. The Constitution declares Delhi as the seat of the Supreme Court
2. It also authorises the CJI to appoint other place or places as the seat of the Supreme Court but with the prior approval of President.
3. He can make a decision in this regard only with the approval of the Parliament
Which of these statements are correct?
- a)1 and 2 Only
- b)2 and 3 Only
- c)1 and 3 Only
- d)All of them
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Consider the following statements.
1. The Constitution declares Delhi as the seat of the Supreme Court
2. It also authorises the CJI to appoint other place or places as the seat of the Supreme Court but with the prior approval of President.
3. He can make a decision in this regard only with the approval of the Parliament
Which of these statements are correct?
a)
1 and 2 Only
b)
2 and 3 Only
c)
1 and 3 Only
d)
All of them
|
Meera Singh answered |
1. The Constitution declares Delhi as the seat of the Supreme Court: This statement is correct. Article 130 of the Indian Constitution states, "The Supreme Court shall sit in Delhi or in such other place or places, as the Chief Justice of India may, with the approval of the President, from time to time, appoint."
2. It also authorises the CJI to appoint other place or places as the seat of the Supreme Court but with the prior approval of the President: This statement is also correct. As per the same Article 130, the Chief Justice of India (CJI) has the authority to appoint other places as the seat of the Supreme Court, but only with the prior approval of the President.
3. He can make a decision in this regard only with the approval of the Parliament: This statement is incorrect. The CJI does not require the approval of the Parliament to make a decision in this regard. As mentioned in Article 130, the CJI only needs the approval of the President to appoint other places as the seat of the Supreme Court.
Consider the following pairs:
1. Original Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court decides disputes between the Centre and one or more states.
2. Writ Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court can issue writs for the enforcement of the fundamental rights of an aggrieved citizen.
3. Appellate Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court can hear appeals only in criminal matters.
4. Advisory Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court can provide opinions to the President on any question of law or fact of public importance.
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:
1. Original Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court decides disputes between the Centre and one or more states.
2. Writ Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court can issue writs for the enforcement of the fundamental rights of an aggrieved citizen.
3. Appellate Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court can hear appeals only in criminal matters.
4. Advisory Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court can provide opinions to the President on any question of law or fact of public importance.
How many pairs given above are correctly matched?
a)
Only one pair
b)
Only two pairs
c)
Only three pairs
d)
All four pairs
|
Lohit Matani answered |
1. Original Jurisdiction: Correct. The Supreme Court has the authority to decide disputes between different units of the Indian Federation, including disputes between the Centre and one or more states.
2. Writ Jurisdiction: Correct. The Supreme Court can indeed issue writs like habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo-warranto, and certiorari for the enforcement of the fundamental rights of an aggrieved citizen.
3. Appellate Jurisdiction: Incorrect. The Supreme Court hears appeals in constitutional, civil, and criminal matters, not just criminal matters.
4. Advisory Jurisdiction: Correct. The Supreme Court can provide opinions to the President on any question of law or fact of public importance under Article 143 of the Constitution.
Thus, pairs 1, 2, and 4 are correctly matched, but pair 3 is incorrect.
Answer: Option B
Who is appointed as the Chief Justice of India?- a)The President appoints the Chief Justice of India on his sole discretion
- b)The senior-most judge of the Supreme Court is appointed as the Chief Justice of India
- c)The panel of judges of Supreme Court elect a Chief Justice of India from amongst themselves
- d)The Chief Justice of India is elected by the voting of Lok Sabha members
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Who is appointed as the Chief Justice of India?
a)
The President appoints the Chief Justice of India on his sole discretion
b)
The senior-most judge of the Supreme Court is appointed as the Chief Justice of India
c)
The panel of judges of Supreme Court elect a Chief Justice of India from amongst themselves
d)
The Chief Justice of India is elected by the voting of Lok Sabha members
|
Disha Roy answered |
Appointment of Chief Justice of India
The Chief Justice of India is the head of the Indian judiciary system. The appointment of Chief Justice of India is done according to the Constitution of India. The appointment process of Chief Justice of India is as follows:
Seniority-based appointment
The senior-most judge of the Supreme Court is appointed as the Chief Justice of India. This appointment is made by the President of India on the recommendation of the outgoing Chief Justice of India. The seniority is determined by the date of appointment as a judge in the Supreme Court.
Exceptions to seniority-based appointment
There have been some exceptions to the seniority-based appointment of Chief Justice of India. In some cases, the President has appointed a junior judge as Chief Justice of India over senior judges. This has been done in exceptional cases where the senior judges were not considered suitable for the position.
Conclusion
Thus, option B is the correct answer. The senior-most judge of the Supreme Court is appointed as the Chief Justice of India. The appointment is made by the President of India on the recommendation of the outgoing Chief Justice of India.
The Chief Justice of India is the head of the Indian judiciary system. The appointment of Chief Justice of India is done according to the Constitution of India. The appointment process of Chief Justice of India is as follows:
Seniority-based appointment
The senior-most judge of the Supreme Court is appointed as the Chief Justice of India. This appointment is made by the President of India on the recommendation of the outgoing Chief Justice of India. The seniority is determined by the date of appointment as a judge in the Supreme Court.
Exceptions to seniority-based appointment
There have been some exceptions to the seniority-based appointment of Chief Justice of India. In some cases, the President has appointed a junior judge as Chief Justice of India over senior judges. This has been done in exceptional cases where the senior judges were not considered suitable for the position.
Conclusion
Thus, option B is the correct answer. The senior-most judge of the Supreme Court is appointed as the Chief Justice of India. The appointment is made by the President of India on the recommendation of the outgoing Chief Justice of India.
If the removal motion is admitted then the Speaker/Chairman constitutes a three-member committee to investigate the allegations charged against the judge. The three-member committee comprises of
1. The Chief Justice of session court
2. Senior most judge of Supreme Court
3. Chief justice of the High Court
Choose from the following options.
- a)1 and 2 Only
- b)2 and 3 Only
- c)1 and 3 Only
- d)All of them
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
If the removal motion is admitted then the Speaker/Chairman constitutes a three-member committee to investigate the allegations charged against the judge. The three-member committee comprises of
1. The Chief Justice of session court
2. Senior most judge of Supreme Court
3. Chief justice of the High Court
1. The Chief Justice of session court
2. Senior most judge of Supreme Court
3. Chief justice of the High Court
Choose from the following options.
a)
1 and 2 Only
b)
2 and 3 Only
c)
1 and 3 Only
d)
All of them
|
|
Kavita Mehta answered |
The three-member committee comprises (1). The Chief Justice or senior-most judge of the Supreme Court (2). Chief justice of the High Court and (3). A prominent jurist
Consider the following statements.1. Special leave to appeal is granted by SC if it is satisfied that the case does not involve any question of law2. It can be passed in case of the judgment passed by a court or tribunal of armed forces Which of these statements is/are correct?- a) 1 Only
- b) 2 Only
- c) Both 1 and 2
- d) None of them
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Consider the following statements.
1. Special leave to appeal is granted by SC if it is satisfied that the case does not involve any question of law
2. It can be passed in case of the judgment passed by a court or tribunal of armed forces
Which of these statements is/are correct?
a)
1 Only
b)
2 Only
c)
Both 1 and 2
d)
None of them
|
Aarav Saini answered |
Understanding Special Leave to Appeal
Special Leave to Appeal (SLA) is a provision under Article 136 of the Indian Constitution that empowers the Supreme Court (SC) to grant appeal in certain cases. Let’s analyze the statements provided.
Statement 1: Special leave to appeal is granted by SC if it is satisfied that the case does not involve any question of law
- This statement is incorrect.
- The SC can grant special leave to appeal even if the case involves questions of law.
- The key aspect is that the SC must be satisfied that the case warrants its intervention, irrespective of whether it involves a question of law or not.
Statement 2: It can be passed in case of the judgment passed by a court or tribunal of armed forces
- This statement is correct.
- The SC has the authority to grant special leave to appeal against judgments from military courts or tribunals.
- This ensures that service members have access to the highest court for redressal of grievances.
Conclusion
Given the analysis, the correct answer is option 'A': Only the second statement is correct, while the first statement is incorrect regarding the conditions under which special leave to appeal is granted.
Special Leave to Appeal (SLA) is a provision under Article 136 of the Indian Constitution that empowers the Supreme Court (SC) to grant appeal in certain cases. Let’s analyze the statements provided.
Statement 1: Special leave to appeal is granted by SC if it is satisfied that the case does not involve any question of law
- This statement is incorrect.
- The SC can grant special leave to appeal even if the case involves questions of law.
- The key aspect is that the SC must be satisfied that the case warrants its intervention, irrespective of whether it involves a question of law or not.
Statement 2: It can be passed in case of the judgment passed by a court or tribunal of armed forces
- This statement is correct.
- The SC has the authority to grant special leave to appeal against judgments from military courts or tribunals.
- This ensures that service members have access to the highest court for redressal of grievances.
Conclusion
Given the analysis, the correct answer is option 'A': Only the second statement is correct, while the first statement is incorrect regarding the conditions under which special leave to appeal is granted.
Chapter doubts & questions for Supreme Court - 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 Supreme Court - 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