UPSC Exam > UPSC Questions > In which case did two dissenting judges remar...
Start Learning for Free
In which case did two dissenting judges remark whether the fundamental rights of citizens could become a plaything of the majority party in Parliament?
- a)Shankari Prasad Case (1951)
- b)Sajjan Singh case (1965)
- c)Golaknath case (1967)
- d)Kesavananda Bharati case (1973)
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
| FREE This question is part of | Download PDF Attempt this Test |
Most Upvoted Answer
In which case did two dissenting judges remark whether the fundamental...
Sajjan Singh case (1965)
The Sajjan Singh case of 1965 was a landmark judgment by the Supreme Court of India. Two dissenting judges in this case remarked on the possibility of the fundamental rights of citizens becoming a plaything of the majority party in Parliament.
Background
In this case, the Supreme Court was faced with the issue of whether the abolition of the Privy Purse, which was guaranteed to the rulers of former Indian princely states by the Constitution, was constitutional. The majority of the judges in the case held that the abolition of the Privy Purse was constitutional, but two judges dissented from this decision.
Concerns raised by dissenting judges
The two dissenting judges in the Sajjan Singh case expressed concerns about the potential misuse of power by the majority party in Parliament. They raised the question of whether fundamental rights, which are supposed to protect the individual against the state, could be compromised by the will of the majority party. They highlighted the importance of safeguarding fundamental rights as an essential aspect of a democratic society.
Significance
The remarks made by the dissenting judges in the Sajjan Singh case raised important questions about the balance of power between the legislature and the judiciary, and the need to protect fundamental rights from potential abuse. This case underscored the crucial role of the judiciary in upholding the rights of citizens and ensuring the rule of law in a democratic society.
The Sajjan Singh case of 1965 was a landmark judgment by the Supreme Court of India. Two dissenting judges in this case remarked on the possibility of the fundamental rights of citizens becoming a plaything of the majority party in Parliament.
Background
In this case, the Supreme Court was faced with the issue of whether the abolition of the Privy Purse, which was guaranteed to the rulers of former Indian princely states by the Constitution, was constitutional. The majority of the judges in the case held that the abolition of the Privy Purse was constitutional, but two judges dissented from this decision.
Concerns raised by dissenting judges
The two dissenting judges in the Sajjan Singh case expressed concerns about the potential misuse of power by the majority party in Parliament. They raised the question of whether fundamental rights, which are supposed to protect the individual against the state, could be compromised by the will of the majority party. They highlighted the importance of safeguarding fundamental rights as an essential aspect of a democratic society.
Significance
The remarks made by the dissenting judges in the Sajjan Singh case raised important questions about the balance of power between the legislature and the judiciary, and the need to protect fundamental rights from potential abuse. This case underscored the crucial role of the judiciary in upholding the rights of citizens and ensuring the rule of law in a democratic society.
Free Test
FREE
| Start Free Test |
Community Answer
In which case did two dissenting judges remark whether the fundamental...
In the Sajjan Singh case (1965), the Supreme Court held that the Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution, including the Fundamental Rights. However, two dissenting judges in this case remarked whether the fundamental rights of citizens could become a plaything of the majority party in Parliament.
Attention UPSC Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed UPSC study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in UPSC.
|
Explore Courses for UPSC exam
|
|
Similar UPSC Doubts
Top Courses for UPSCView all
In which case did two dissenting judges remark whether the fundamental rights of citizens could become a plaything of the majority party in Parliament?a)Shankari Prasad Case (1951)b)Sajjan Singh case (1965)c)Golaknath case (1967)d)Kesavananda Bharati case (1973)Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
In which case did two dissenting judges remark whether the fundamental rights of citizens could become a plaything of the majority party in Parliament?a)Shankari Prasad Case (1951)b)Sajjan Singh case (1965)c)Golaknath case (1967)d)Kesavananda Bharati case (1973)Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for UPSC 2024 is part of UPSC preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the UPSC exam syllabus. Information about In which case did two dissenting judges remark whether the fundamental rights of citizens could become a plaything of the majority party in Parliament?a)Shankari Prasad Case (1951)b)Sajjan Singh case (1965)c)Golaknath case (1967)d)Kesavananda Bharati case (1973)Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for UPSC 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for In which case did two dissenting judges remark whether the fundamental rights of citizens could become a plaything of the majority party in Parliament?a)Shankari Prasad Case (1951)b)Sajjan Singh case (1965)c)Golaknath case (1967)d)Kesavananda Bharati case (1973)Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.
In which case did two dissenting judges remark whether the fundamental rights of citizens could become a plaything of the majority party in Parliament?a)Shankari Prasad Case (1951)b)Sajjan Singh case (1965)c)Golaknath case (1967)d)Kesavananda Bharati case (1973)Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for UPSC 2024 is part of UPSC preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the UPSC exam syllabus. Information about In which case did two dissenting judges remark whether the fundamental rights of citizens could become a plaything of the majority party in Parliament?a)Shankari Prasad Case (1951)b)Sajjan Singh case (1965)c)Golaknath case (1967)d)Kesavananda Bharati case (1973)Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for UPSC 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for In which case did two dissenting judges remark whether the fundamental rights of citizens could become a plaything of the majority party in Parliament?a)Shankari Prasad Case (1951)b)Sajjan Singh case (1965)c)Golaknath case (1967)d)Kesavananda Bharati case (1973)Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for In which case did two dissenting judges remark whether the fundamental rights of citizens could become a plaything of the majority party in Parliament?a)Shankari Prasad Case (1951)b)Sajjan Singh case (1965)c)Golaknath case (1967)d)Kesavananda Bharati case (1973)Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for UPSC.
Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for UPSC Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of In which case did two dissenting judges remark whether the fundamental rights of citizens could become a plaything of the majority party in Parliament?a)Shankari Prasad Case (1951)b)Sajjan Singh case (1965)c)Golaknath case (1967)d)Kesavananda Bharati case (1973)Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of
In which case did two dissenting judges remark whether the fundamental rights of citizens could become a plaything of the majority party in Parliament?a)Shankari Prasad Case (1951)b)Sajjan Singh case (1965)c)Golaknath case (1967)d)Kesavananda Bharati case (1973)Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for In which case did two dissenting judges remark whether the fundamental rights of citizens could become a plaything of the majority party in Parliament?a)Shankari Prasad Case (1951)b)Sajjan Singh case (1965)c)Golaknath case (1967)d)Kesavananda Bharati case (1973)Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of In which case did two dissenting judges remark whether the fundamental rights of citizens could become a plaything of the majority party in Parliament?a)Shankari Prasad Case (1951)b)Sajjan Singh case (1965)c)Golaknath case (1967)d)Kesavananda Bharati case (1973)Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an
ample number of questions to practice In which case did two dissenting judges remark whether the fundamental rights of citizens could become a plaything of the majority party in Parliament?a)Shankari Prasad Case (1951)b)Sajjan Singh case (1965)c)Golaknath case (1967)d)Kesavananda Bharati case (1973)Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice UPSC tests.
|
|
Explore Courses for UPSC exam
|
|
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
|
© EduRev
|
Education Revolution
|
Follow Us
|
Signup to see your scores
go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup