Question Description
Read the given passage and answer the question that follows.The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Right to Equality is the first fundamental right assured to the people of India. Each citizen of India is guaranteed the Right to Equality by Articles 14 to 18 of the Constitution. Article 14 encapsulates the general standards of equality under the watchful eyes of the law and restricts nonsensical and baseless separation between people. The succeeding articles layout explicit utilisation of the general standards set down in Article 14. This article goes over the Right to Equality in India, covering every one of the articles that this right exemplifies. According to Article 14, it is an obligation of the state to not deny to any person equality before the law or equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Equality is one of the magnificent corner-stones of the Indian democracy.Equality before the law or equal protection of the laws does not mean a similar treatment to everybody. As no two individuals are equal in all regards, a similar treatment to them in each regard would bring about unequal treatment.What Article 14 precludes is class-legislation; however, it doesnt prohibit reasonable classification. The classification, under all circumstances, must not be discretionary or fake or shifty but should be founded on some genuine and significant qualification bearing a fair and reasonable connection to the objective looked to be accomplished by the legislation. Article 14 applies where people who are equal are dealt with contrastingly on no reasonable grounds. In a situation where equals and unequals are treated differently, Article 14 does not come into the picture. As such, this right was considered to be a negative right of an individual not to be discriminated in access to public offices or places or in public matters generally. It did not take account of the existing inequalities arising even from public policies and exercise of public powers. The makers of the Indian Constitution were not satisfied with such type of undertaking. They knew of the widespread social and economic inequalities in the country sanctioned for thousands of years by public policies and exercise of public power supported by religion and other social norms and practices. They were of the opinion that only Article 14 would not be sufficient enough to deal with these inequalities, so they introduced Articles 15-18 which states that nothing shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children.Classification to be sensible must satisfy two conditions, one being that the classification must be established on clear differentia which recognises people or things that are assembled from others which are not part of the group and that the differentiation must have a balanced connection to the article looked to be accomplished by the Act.Q.The Parliament of India made a law stating that all those who have served imprisonment for 12 years in offences where punishment for life is the highest punishment, shall be entitled to file for mercy petition before the President of India. This was challenged by Ram, who was serving imprisonment for theft, as being discriminatory towards those where punishment for life is not the highest punishment. Decide.a)The law is violative of Article 14.b)The law is not violative of Article 14c)Ram being a convict has no right to claim fundamental right.d)Parliament has to receive the assent of the President before such a law.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Read the given passage and answer the question that follows.The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Right to Equality is the first fundamental right assured to the people of India. Each citizen of India is guaranteed the Right to Equality by Articles 14 to 18 of the Constitution. Article 14 encapsulates the general standards of equality under the watchful eyes of the law and restricts nonsensical and baseless separation between people. The succeeding articles layout explicit utilisation of the general standards set down in Article 14. This article goes over the Right to Equality in India, covering every one of the articles that this right exemplifies. According to Article 14, it is an obligation of the state to not deny to any person equality before the law or equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Equality is one of the magnificent corner-stones of the Indian democracy.Equality before the law or equal protection of the laws does not mean a similar treatment to everybody. As no two individuals are equal in all regards, a similar treatment to them in each regard would bring about unequal treatment.What Article 14 precludes is class-legislation; however, it doesnt prohibit reasonable classification. The classification, under all circumstances, must not be discretionary or fake or shifty but should be founded on some genuine and significant qualification bearing a fair and reasonable connection to the objective looked to be accomplished by the legislation. Article 14 applies where people who are equal are dealt with contrastingly on no reasonable grounds. In a situation where equals and unequals are treated differently, Article 14 does not come into the picture. As such, this right was considered to be a negative right of an individual not to be discriminated in access to public offices or places or in public matters generally. It did not take account of the existing inequalities arising even from public policies and exercise of public powers. The makers of the Indian Constitution were not satisfied with such type of undertaking. They knew of the widespread social and economic inequalities in the country sanctioned for thousands of years by public policies and exercise of public power supported by religion and other social norms and practices. They were of the opinion that only Article 14 would not be sufficient enough to deal with these inequalities, so they introduced Articles 15-18 which states that nothing shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children.Classification to be sensible must satisfy two conditions, one being that the classification must be established on clear differentia which recognises people or things that are assembled from others which are not part of the group and that the differentiation must have a balanced connection to the article looked to be accomplished by the Act.Q.The Parliament of India made a law stating that all those who have served imprisonment for 12 years in offences where punishment for life is the highest punishment, shall be entitled to file for mercy petition before the President of India. This was challenged by Ram, who was serving imprisonment for theft, as being discriminatory towards those where punishment for life is not the highest punishment. Decide.a)The law is violative of Article 14.b)The law is not violative of Article 14c)Ram being a convict has no right to claim fundamental right.d)Parliament has to receive the assent of the President before such a law.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Read the given passage and answer the question that follows.The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Right to Equality is the first fundamental right assured to the people of India. Each citizen of India is guaranteed the Right to Equality by Articles 14 to 18 of the Constitution. Article 14 encapsulates the general standards of equality under the watchful eyes of the law and restricts nonsensical and baseless separation between people. The succeeding articles layout explicit utilisation of the general standards set down in Article 14. This article goes over the Right to Equality in India, covering every one of the articles that this right exemplifies. According to Article 14, it is an obligation of the state to not deny to any person equality before the law or equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Equality is one of the magnificent corner-stones of the Indian democracy.Equality before the law or equal protection of the laws does not mean a similar treatment to everybody. As no two individuals are equal in all regards, a similar treatment to them in each regard would bring about unequal treatment.What Article 14 precludes is class-legislation; however, it doesnt prohibit reasonable classification. The classification, under all circumstances, must not be discretionary or fake or shifty but should be founded on some genuine and significant qualification bearing a fair and reasonable connection to the objective looked to be accomplished by the legislation. Article 14 applies where people who are equal are dealt with contrastingly on no reasonable grounds. In a situation where equals and unequals are treated differently, Article 14 does not come into the picture. As such, this right was considered to be a negative right of an individual not to be discriminated in access to public offices or places or in public matters generally. It did not take account of the existing inequalities arising even from public policies and exercise of public powers. The makers of the Indian Constitution were not satisfied with such type of undertaking. They knew of the widespread social and economic inequalities in the country sanctioned for thousands of years by public policies and exercise of public power supported by religion and other social norms and practices. They were of the opinion that only Article 14 would not be sufficient enough to deal with these inequalities, so they introduced Articles 15-18 which states that nothing shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children.Classification to be sensible must satisfy two conditions, one being that the classification must be established on clear differentia which recognises people or things that are assembled from others which are not part of the group and that the differentiation must have a balanced connection to the article looked to be accomplished by the Act.Q.The Parliament of India made a law stating that all those who have served imprisonment for 12 years in offences where punishment for life is the highest punishment, shall be entitled to file for mercy petition before the President of India. This was challenged by Ram, who was serving imprisonment for theft, as being discriminatory towards those where punishment for life is not the highest punishment. Decide.a)The law is violative of Article 14.b)The law is not violative of Article 14c)Ram being a convict has no right to claim fundamental right.d)Parliament has to receive the assent of the President before such a law.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Read the given passage and answer the question that follows.The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Right to Equality is the first fundamental right assured to the people of India. Each citizen of India is guaranteed the Right to Equality by Articles 14 to 18 of the Constitution. Article 14 encapsulates the general standards of equality under the watchful eyes of the law and restricts nonsensical and baseless separation between people. The succeeding articles layout explicit utilisation of the general standards set down in Article 14. This article goes over the Right to Equality in India, covering every one of the articles that this right exemplifies. According to Article 14, it is an obligation of the state to not deny to any person equality before the law or equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Equality is one of the magnificent corner-stones of the Indian democracy.Equality before the law or equal protection of the laws does not mean a similar treatment to everybody. As no two individuals are equal in all regards, a similar treatment to them in each regard would bring about unequal treatment.What Article 14 precludes is class-legislation; however, it doesnt prohibit reasonable classification. The classification, under all circumstances, must not be discretionary or fake or shifty but should be founded on some genuine and significant qualification bearing a fair and reasonable connection to the objective looked to be accomplished by the legislation. Article 14 applies where people who are equal are dealt with contrastingly on no reasonable grounds. In a situation where equals and unequals are treated differently, Article 14 does not come into the picture. As such, this right was considered to be a negative right of an individual not to be discriminated in access to public offices or places or in public matters generally. It did not take account of the existing inequalities arising even from public policies and exercise of public powers. The makers of the Indian Constitution were not satisfied with such type of undertaking. They knew of the widespread social and economic inequalities in the country sanctioned for thousands of years by public policies and exercise of public power supported by religion and other social norms and practices. They were of the opinion that only Article 14 would not be sufficient enough to deal with these inequalities, so they introduced Articles 15-18 which states that nothing shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children.Classification to be sensible must satisfy two conditions, one being that the classification must be established on clear differentia which recognises people or things that are assembled from others which are not part of the group and that the differentiation must have a balanced connection to the article looked to be accomplished by the Act.Q.The Parliament of India made a law stating that all those who have served imprisonment for 12 years in offences where punishment for life is the highest punishment, shall be entitled to file for mercy petition before the President of India. This was challenged by Ram, who was serving imprisonment for theft, as being discriminatory towards those where punishment for life is not the highest punishment. Decide.a)The law is violative of Article 14.b)The law is not violative of Article 14c)Ram being a convict has no right to claim fundamental right.d)Parliament has to receive the assent of the President before such a law.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Read the given passage and answer the question that follows.The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Right to Equality is the first fundamental right assured to the people of India. Each citizen of India is guaranteed the Right to Equality by Articles 14 to 18 of the Constitution. Article 14 encapsulates the general standards of equality under the watchful eyes of the law and restricts nonsensical and baseless separation between people. The succeeding articles layout explicit utilisation of the general standards set down in Article 14. This article goes over the Right to Equality in India, covering every one of the articles that this right exemplifies. According to Article 14, it is an obligation of the state to not deny to any person equality before the law or equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Equality is one of the magnificent corner-stones of the Indian democracy.Equality before the law or equal protection of the laws does not mean a similar treatment to everybody. As no two individuals are equal in all regards, a similar treatment to them in each regard would bring about unequal treatment.What Article 14 precludes is class-legislation; however, it doesnt prohibit reasonable classification. The classification, under all circumstances, must not be discretionary or fake or shifty but should be founded on some genuine and significant qualification bearing a fair and reasonable connection to the objective looked to be accomplished by the legislation. Article 14 applies where people who are equal are dealt with contrastingly on no reasonable grounds. In a situation where equals and unequals are treated differently, Article 14 does not come into the picture. As such, this right was considered to be a negative right of an individual not to be discriminated in access to public offices or places or in public matters generally. It did not take account of the existing inequalities arising even from public policies and exercise of public powers. The makers of the Indian Constitution were not satisfied with such type of undertaking. They knew of the widespread social and economic inequalities in the country sanctioned for thousands of years by public policies and exercise of public power supported by religion and other social norms and practices. They were of the opinion that only Article 14 would not be sufficient enough to deal with these inequalities, so they introduced Articles 15-18 which states that nothing shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children.Classification to be sensible must satisfy two conditions, one being that the classification must be established on clear differentia which recognises people or things that are assembled from others which are not part of the group and that the differentiation must have a balanced connection to the article looked to be accomplished by the Act.Q.The Parliament of India made a law stating that all those who have served imprisonment for 12 years in offences where punishment for life is the highest punishment, shall be entitled to file for mercy petition before the President of India. This was challenged by Ram, who was serving imprisonment for theft, as being discriminatory towards those where punishment for life is not the highest punishment. Decide.a)The law is violative of Article 14.b)The law is not violative of Article 14c)Ram being a convict has no right to claim fundamental right.d)Parliament has to receive the assent of the President before such a law.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Read the given passage and answer the question that follows.The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Right to Equality is the first fundamental right assured to the people of India. Each citizen of India is guaranteed the Right to Equality by Articles 14 to 18 of the Constitution. Article 14 encapsulates the general standards of equality under the watchful eyes of the law and restricts nonsensical and baseless separation between people. The succeeding articles layout explicit utilisation of the general standards set down in Article 14. This article goes over the Right to Equality in India, covering every one of the articles that this right exemplifies. According to Article 14, it is an obligation of the state to not deny to any person equality before the law or equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Equality is one of the magnificent corner-stones of the Indian democracy.Equality before the law or equal protection of the laws does not mean a similar treatment to everybody. As no two individuals are equal in all regards, a similar treatment to them in each regard would bring about unequal treatment.What Article 14 precludes is class-legislation; however, it doesnt prohibit reasonable classification. The classification, under all circumstances, must not be discretionary or fake or shifty but should be founded on some genuine and significant qualification bearing a fair and reasonable connection to the objective looked to be accomplished by the legislation. Article 14 applies where people who are equal are dealt with contrastingly on no reasonable grounds. In a situation where equals and unequals are treated differently, Article 14 does not come into the picture. As such, this right was considered to be a negative right of an individual not to be discriminated in access to public offices or places or in public matters generally. It did not take account of the existing inequalities arising even from public policies and exercise of public powers. The makers of the Indian Constitution were not satisfied with such type of undertaking. They knew of the widespread social and economic inequalities in the country sanctioned for thousands of years by public policies and exercise of public power supported by religion and other social norms and practices. They were of the opinion that only Article 14 would not be sufficient enough to deal with these inequalities, so they introduced Articles 15-18 which states that nothing shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children.Classification to be sensible must satisfy two conditions, one being that the classification must be established on clear differentia which recognises people or things that are assembled from others which are not part of the group and that the differentiation must have a balanced connection to the article looked to be accomplished by the Act.Q.The Parliament of India made a law stating that all those who have served imprisonment for 12 years in offences where punishment for life is the highest punishment, shall be entitled to file for mercy petition before the President of India. This was challenged by Ram, who was serving imprisonment for theft, as being discriminatory towards those where punishment for life is not the highest punishment. Decide.a)The law is violative of Article 14.b)The law is not violative of Article 14c)Ram being a convict has no right to claim fundamental right.d)Parliament has to receive the assent of the President before such a law.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Read the given passage and answer the question that follows.The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Right to Equality is the first fundamental right assured to the people of India. Each citizen of India is guaranteed the Right to Equality by Articles 14 to 18 of the Constitution. Article 14 encapsulates the general standards of equality under the watchful eyes of the law and restricts nonsensical and baseless separation between people. The succeeding articles layout explicit utilisation of the general standards set down in Article 14. This article goes over the Right to Equality in India, covering every one of the articles that this right exemplifies. According to Article 14, it is an obligation of the state to not deny to any person equality before the law or equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Equality is one of the magnificent corner-stones of the Indian democracy.Equality before the law or equal protection of the laws does not mean a similar treatment to everybody. As no two individuals are equal in all regards, a similar treatment to them in each regard would bring about unequal treatment.What Article 14 precludes is class-legislation; however, it doesnt prohibit reasonable classification. The classification, under all circumstances, must not be discretionary or fake or shifty but should be founded on some genuine and significant qualification bearing a fair and reasonable connection to the objective looked to be accomplished by the legislation. Article 14 applies where people who are equal are dealt with contrastingly on no reasonable grounds. In a situation where equals and unequals are treated differently, Article 14 does not come into the picture. As such, this right was considered to be a negative right of an individual not to be discriminated in access to public offices or places or in public matters generally. It did not take account of the existing inequalities arising even from public policies and exercise of public powers. The makers of the Indian Constitution were not satisfied with such type of undertaking. They knew of the widespread social and economic inequalities in the country sanctioned for thousands of years by public policies and exercise of public power supported by religion and other social norms and practices. They were of the opinion that only Article 14 would not be sufficient enough to deal with these inequalities, so they introduced Articles 15-18 which states that nothing shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children.Classification to be sensible must satisfy two conditions, one being that the classification must be established on clear differentia which recognises people or things that are assembled from others which are not part of the group and that the differentiation must have a balanced connection to the article looked to be accomplished by the Act.Q.The Parliament of India made a law stating that all those who have served imprisonment for 12 years in offences where punishment for life is the highest punishment, shall be entitled to file for mercy petition before the President of India. This was challenged by Ram, who was serving imprisonment for theft, as being discriminatory towards those where punishment for life is not the highest punishment. Decide.a)The law is violative of Article 14.b)The law is not violative of Article 14c)Ram being a convict has no right to claim fundamental right.d)Parliament has to receive the assent of the President before such a law.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Read the given passage and answer the question that follows.The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Right to Equality is the first fundamental right assured to the people of India. Each citizen of India is guaranteed the Right to Equality by Articles 14 to 18 of the Constitution. Article 14 encapsulates the general standards of equality under the watchful eyes of the law and restricts nonsensical and baseless separation between people. The succeeding articles layout explicit utilisation of the general standards set down in Article 14. This article goes over the Right to Equality in India, covering every one of the articles that this right exemplifies. According to Article 14, it is an obligation of the state to not deny to any person equality before the law or equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Equality is one of the magnificent corner-stones of the Indian democracy.Equality before the law or equal protection of the laws does not mean a similar treatment to everybody. As no two individuals are equal in all regards, a similar treatment to them in each regard would bring about unequal treatment.What Article 14 precludes is class-legislation; however, it doesnt prohibit reasonable classification. The classification, under all circumstances, must not be discretionary or fake or shifty but should be founded on some genuine and significant qualification bearing a fair and reasonable connection to the objective looked to be accomplished by the legislation. Article 14 applies where people who are equal are dealt with contrastingly on no reasonable grounds. In a situation where equals and unequals are treated differently, Article 14 does not come into the picture. As such, this right was considered to be a negative right of an individual not to be discriminated in access to public offices or places or in public matters generally. It did not take account of the existing inequalities arising even from public policies and exercise of public powers. The makers of the Indian Constitution were not satisfied with such type of undertaking. They knew of the widespread social and economic inequalities in the country sanctioned for thousands of years by public policies and exercise of public power supported by religion and other social norms and practices. They were of the opinion that only Article 14 would not be sufficient enough to deal with these inequalities, so they introduced Articles 15-18 which states that nothing shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children.Classification to be sensible must satisfy two conditions, one being that the classification must be established on clear differentia which recognises people or things that are assembled from others which are not part of the group and that the differentiation must have a balanced connection to the article looked to be accomplished by the Act.Q.The Parliament of India made a law stating that all those who have served imprisonment for 12 years in offences where punishment for life is the highest punishment, shall be entitled to file for mercy petition before the President of India. This was challenged by Ram, who was serving imprisonment for theft, as being discriminatory towards those where punishment for life is not the highest punishment. Decide.a)The law is violative of Article 14.b)The law is not violative of Article 14c)Ram being a convict has no right to claim fundamental right.d)Parliament has to receive the assent of the President before such a law.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Read the given passage and answer the question that follows.The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Right to Equality is the first fundamental right assured to the people of India. Each citizen of India is guaranteed the Right to Equality by Articles 14 to 18 of the Constitution. Article 14 encapsulates the general standards of equality under the watchful eyes of the law and restricts nonsensical and baseless separation between people. The succeeding articles layout explicit utilisation of the general standards set down in Article 14. This article goes over the Right to Equality in India, covering every one of the articles that this right exemplifies. According to Article 14, it is an obligation of the state to not deny to any person equality before the law or equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Equality is one of the magnificent corner-stones of the Indian democracy.Equality before the law or equal protection of the laws does not mean a similar treatment to everybody. As no two individuals are equal in all regards, a similar treatment to them in each regard would bring about unequal treatment.What Article 14 precludes is class-legislation; however, it doesnt prohibit reasonable classification. The classification, under all circumstances, must not be discretionary or fake or shifty but should be founded on some genuine and significant qualification bearing a fair and reasonable connection to the objective looked to be accomplished by the legislation. Article 14 applies where people who are equal are dealt with contrastingly on no reasonable grounds. In a situation where equals and unequals are treated differently, Article 14 does not come into the picture. As such, this right was considered to be a negative right of an individual not to be discriminated in access to public offices or places or in public matters generally. It did not take account of the existing inequalities arising even from public policies and exercise of public powers. The makers of the Indian Constitution were not satisfied with such type of undertaking. They knew of the widespread social and economic inequalities in the country sanctioned for thousands of years by public policies and exercise of public power supported by religion and other social norms and practices. They were of the opinion that only Article 14 would not be sufficient enough to deal with these inequalities, so they introduced Articles 15-18 which states that nothing shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children.Classification to be sensible must satisfy two conditions, one being that the classification must be established on clear differentia which recognises people or things that are assembled from others which are not part of the group and that the differentiation must have a balanced connection to the article looked to be accomplished by the Act.Q.The Parliament of India made a law stating that all those who have served imprisonment for 12 years in offences where punishment for life is the highest punishment, shall be entitled to file for mercy petition before the President of India. This was challenged by Ram, who was serving imprisonment for theft, as being discriminatory towards those where punishment for life is not the highest punishment. Decide.a)The law is violative of Article 14.b)The law is not violative of Article 14c)Ram being a convict has no right to claim fundamental right.d)Parliament has to receive the assent of the President before such a law.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.