CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >  Directions: Read the given information carefu... Start Learning for Free
Directions: Read the given information carefully and answer the questions given beside:
The Centre told the Supreme Court Wednesday that it will form a committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary to address “human concerns” of same-sex couples without legally recognising their relationship as a marriage. Calling it a “very fair suggestion”, a five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, said if what the government says goes through, it “will be a substantial advancement over what we have today” and a “building block for the future” of the movement for gay rights.
It asked the petitioners if, at this stage, they would still like to stick to their demand for a declaration that they have the right to marry under the Special Marriage Act (SMA), 1954. The Bench asked the petitioners to sit with Attorney General R Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta over the weekend and discuss matters. Senior Advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for the petitioners, said he “fully understands what” the court “is saying” and “will reflect on that, and build that into our argument”.
The CJI said “from the drift of the submissions made by the Solicitor General on the last occasion, it appears that the SG also accepts that of course people do have a right to cohabit and the right to cohabit itself is something which is now an accepted social reality at least.
[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from: “Will form committee on concerns of same-sex couples: Centre to Supreme Court”, by Ananthakrishnan G, The Indian Express]
Q. Homosexuality was legalized by the Supreme Court in 2018 through the -
  • a)
    Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India case
  • b)
    National Legal Services Authority vs Union of India case
  • c)
    Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India case
  • d)
    Suresh Kumar Koushal Case vs Naz Foundation
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Most Upvoted Answer
Directions: Read the given information carefully and answer the questi...
In the year 2018, the Supreme Court of India, in the case of Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India, declared homosexuality legal.
Key Details:
  • In the Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India case, the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court ruled against the validity of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) of 1860. This section criminalized carnal intercourse that was considered to be "against the order of nature" and subjected it to legal penalties.
  • The Judges presiding over this case reached a unanimous decision that Section 377 of the IPC was in violation of several constitutional provisions, including Article 14 (which guarantees equal protection of laws), Article 15(1) (which prohibits discrimination based on sex), Article 19(1)(a) (which safeguards freedom of expression), and Article 21 (which protects the right to life and personal liberty). Consequently, they ruled that this section needed to be partially invalidated.
  • It's important to note that while a significant part of Section 377 was struck down, certain portions of it remained in force. These included the sections pertaining to sexual acts involving minors, non-consensual sexual acts, and bestiality.
Therefore, option C is the correct answer.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:Restricting the Right to Information only to citizens would be contrary to the Constitution of India and Right to Information Act. Right to Information ought to be available to both citizens and non-citizens. RTI Act exempts from disclosure information under Section 8. There is no obligation to disclose such information to any citizen. The categories of information so exempted include:Information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or lead to incitement of an offence; Information, publication of which has been expressly forbidden by Court or tribunal; Information, disclosure of which may amount to contempt of court;Information, the disclosure of which would cause a breach of parliamentary privilege.Commericially sensitive information is also barred under RTI for example, Information including trade secrets, commercial confidence or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would jeopardise a third party’s competitive position. Such information can be furnished if the competent authority determines that it is necessary to disclose such information in the public interest Information accessible to a person in his fiduciary relationship. Such information can be furnished if the competent authority determines that it is necessary to disclose such information in the public interest. Information received in confidence from foreign government; Lastly, Information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes; the information that would obstruct the process of investigating, apprehending, or prosecuting offenders etc.Q.Under the Right to Information Act, a non-citizen living in India requests information from a government organization. The government rejects the request and gives the Section 8 exception as justification. Which of the following options best exemplifies the proper legal justification?

Top Courses for CLAT

Directions: Read the given information carefully and answer the questions given beside:The Centre told the Supreme Court Wednesday that it will form a committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary to address “human concerns” of same-sex couples without legally recognising their relationship as a marriage. Calling it a “very fair suggestion”, a five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, said if what the government says goes through, it “will be a substantial advancement over what we have today” and a “building block for the future” of the movement for gay rights.It asked the petitioners if, at this stage, they would still like to stick to their demand for a declaration that they have the right to marry under the Special Marriage Act (SMA), 1954. The Bench asked the petitioners to sit with Attorney General R Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta over the weekend and discuss matters. Senior Advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for the petitioners, said he “fully understands what” the court “is saying” and “will reflect on that, and build that into our argument”.The CJI said “from the drift of the submissions made by the Solicitor General on the last occasion, it appears that the SG also accepts that of course people do have a right to cohabit and the right to cohabit itself is something which is now an accepted social reality at least.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from: “Will form committee on concerns of same-sex couples: Centre to Supreme Court”, by Ananthakrishnan G, The Indian Express]Q.Homosexuality was legalized by the Supreme Court in 2018 through the -a)Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India caseb)National Legal Services Authority vs Union of India casec)Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India cased)Suresh Kumar Koushal Case vs Naz FoundationCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Directions: Read the given information carefully and answer the questions given beside:The Centre told the Supreme Court Wednesday that it will form a committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary to address “human concerns” of same-sex couples without legally recognising their relationship as a marriage. Calling it a “very fair suggestion”, a five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, said if what the government says goes through, it “will be a substantial advancement over what we have today” and a “building block for the future” of the movement for gay rights.It asked the petitioners if, at this stage, they would still like to stick to their demand for a declaration that they have the right to marry under the Special Marriage Act (SMA), 1954. The Bench asked the petitioners to sit with Attorney General R Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta over the weekend and discuss matters. Senior Advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for the petitioners, said he “fully understands what” the court “is saying” and “will reflect on that, and build that into our argument”.The CJI said “from the drift of the submissions made by the Solicitor General on the last occasion, it appears that the SG also accepts that of course people do have a right to cohabit and the right to cohabit itself is something which is now an accepted social reality at least.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from: “Will form committee on concerns of same-sex couples: Centre to Supreme Court”, by Ananthakrishnan G, The Indian Express]Q.Homosexuality was legalized by the Supreme Court in 2018 through the -a)Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India caseb)National Legal Services Authority vs Union of India casec)Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India cased)Suresh Kumar Koushal Case vs Naz FoundationCorrect answer is option 'C'. 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 Directions: Read the given information carefully and answer the questions given beside:The Centre told the Supreme Court Wednesday that it will form a committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary to address “human concerns” of same-sex couples without legally recognising their relationship as a marriage. Calling it a “very fair suggestion”, a five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, said if what the government says goes through, it “will be a substantial advancement over what we have today” and a “building block for the future” of the movement for gay rights.It asked the petitioners if, at this stage, they would still like to stick to their demand for a declaration that they have the right to marry under the Special Marriage Act (SMA), 1954. The Bench asked the petitioners to sit with Attorney General R Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta over the weekend and discuss matters. Senior Advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for the petitioners, said he “fully understands what” the court “is saying” and “will reflect on that, and build that into our argument”.The CJI said “from the drift of the submissions made by the Solicitor General on the last occasion, it appears that the SG also accepts that of course people do have a right to cohabit and the right to cohabit itself is something which is now an accepted social reality at least.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from: “Will form committee on concerns of same-sex couples: Centre to Supreme Court”, by Ananthakrishnan G, The Indian Express]Q.Homosexuality was legalized by the Supreme Court in 2018 through the -a)Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India caseb)National Legal Services Authority vs Union of India casec)Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India cased)Suresh Kumar Koushal Case vs Naz FoundationCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: Read the given information carefully and answer the questions given beside:The Centre told the Supreme Court Wednesday that it will form a committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary to address “human concerns” of same-sex couples without legally recognising their relationship as a marriage. Calling it a “very fair suggestion”, a five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, said if what the government says goes through, it “will be a substantial advancement over what we have today” and a “building block for the future” of the movement for gay rights.It asked the petitioners if, at this stage, they would still like to stick to their demand for a declaration that they have the right to marry under the Special Marriage Act (SMA), 1954. The Bench asked the petitioners to sit with Attorney General R Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta over the weekend and discuss matters. Senior Advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for the petitioners, said he “fully understands what” the court “is saying” and “will reflect on that, and build that into our argument”.The CJI said “from the drift of the submissions made by the Solicitor General on the last occasion, it appears that the SG also accepts that of course people do have a right to cohabit and the right to cohabit itself is something which is now an accepted social reality at least.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from: “Will form committee on concerns of same-sex couples: Centre to Supreme Court”, by Ananthakrishnan G, The Indian Express]Q.Homosexuality was legalized by the Supreme Court in 2018 through the -a)Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India caseb)National Legal Services Authority vs Union of India casec)Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India cased)Suresh Kumar Koushal Case vs Naz FoundationCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Directions: Read the given information carefully and answer the questions given beside:The Centre told the Supreme Court Wednesday that it will form a committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary to address “human concerns” of same-sex couples without legally recognising their relationship as a marriage. Calling it a “very fair suggestion”, a five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, said if what the government says goes through, it “will be a substantial advancement over what we have today” and a “building block for the future” of the movement for gay rights.It asked the petitioners if, at this stage, they would still like to stick to their demand for a declaration that they have the right to marry under the Special Marriage Act (SMA), 1954. The Bench asked the petitioners to sit with Attorney General R Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta over the weekend and discuss matters. Senior Advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for the petitioners, said he “fully understands what” the court “is saying” and “will reflect on that, and build that into our argument”.The CJI said “from the drift of the submissions made by the Solicitor General on the last occasion, it appears that the SG also accepts that of course people do have a right to cohabit and the right to cohabit itself is something which is now an accepted social reality at least.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from: “Will form committee on concerns of same-sex couples: Centre to Supreme Court”, by Ananthakrishnan G, The Indian Express]Q.Homosexuality was legalized by the Supreme Court in 2018 through the -a)Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India caseb)National Legal Services Authority vs Union of India casec)Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India cased)Suresh Kumar Koushal Case vs Naz FoundationCorrect answer is option 'C'. 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 Directions: Read the given information carefully and answer the questions given beside:The Centre told the Supreme Court Wednesday that it will form a committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary to address “human concerns” of same-sex couples without legally recognising their relationship as a marriage. Calling it a “very fair suggestion”, a five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, said if what the government says goes through, it “will be a substantial advancement over what we have today” and a “building block for the future” of the movement for gay rights.It asked the petitioners if, at this stage, they would still like to stick to their demand for a declaration that they have the right to marry under the Special Marriage Act (SMA), 1954. The Bench asked the petitioners to sit with Attorney General R Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta over the weekend and discuss matters. Senior Advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for the petitioners, said he “fully understands what” the court “is saying” and “will reflect on that, and build that into our argument”.The CJI said “from the drift of the submissions made by the Solicitor General on the last occasion, it appears that the SG also accepts that of course people do have a right to cohabit and the right to cohabit itself is something which is now an accepted social reality at least.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from: “Will form committee on concerns of same-sex couples: Centre to Supreme Court”, by Ananthakrishnan G, The Indian Express]Q.Homosexuality was legalized by the Supreme Court in 2018 through the -a)Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India caseb)National Legal Services Authority vs Union of India casec)Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India cased)Suresh Kumar Koushal Case vs Naz FoundationCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: Read the given information carefully and answer the questions given beside:The Centre told the Supreme Court Wednesday that it will form a committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary to address “human concerns” of same-sex couples without legally recognising their relationship as a marriage. Calling it a “very fair suggestion”, a five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, said if what the government says goes through, it “will be a substantial advancement over what we have today” and a “building block for the future” of the movement for gay rights.It asked the petitioners if, at this stage, they would still like to stick to their demand for a declaration that they have the right to marry under the Special Marriage Act (SMA), 1954. The Bench asked the petitioners to sit with Attorney General R Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta over the weekend and discuss matters. Senior Advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for the petitioners, said he “fully understands what” the court “is saying” and “will reflect on that, and build that into our argument”.The CJI said “from the drift of the submissions made by the Solicitor General on the last occasion, it appears that the SG also accepts that of course people do have a right to cohabit and the right to cohabit itself is something which is now an accepted social reality at least.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from: “Will form committee on concerns of same-sex couples: Centre to Supreme Court”, by Ananthakrishnan G, The Indian Express]Q.Homosexuality was legalized by the Supreme Court in 2018 through the -a)Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India caseb)National Legal Services Authority vs Union of India casec)Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India cased)Suresh Kumar Koushal Case vs Naz FoundationCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: Read the given information carefully and answer the questions given beside:The Centre told the Supreme Court Wednesday that it will form a committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary to address “human concerns” of same-sex couples without legally recognising their relationship as a marriage. Calling it a “very fair suggestion”, a five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, said if what the government says goes through, it “will be a substantial advancement over what we have today” and a “building block for the future” of the movement for gay rights.It asked the petitioners if, at this stage, they would still like to stick to their demand for a declaration that they have the right to marry under the Special Marriage Act (SMA), 1954. The Bench asked the petitioners to sit with Attorney General R Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta over the weekend and discuss matters. Senior Advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for the petitioners, said he “fully understands what” the court “is saying” and “will reflect on that, and build that into our argument”.The CJI said “from the drift of the submissions made by the Solicitor General on the last occasion, it appears that the SG also accepts that of course people do have a right to cohabit and the right to cohabit itself is something which is now an accepted social reality at least.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from: “Will form committee on concerns of same-sex couples: Centre to Supreme Court”, by Ananthakrishnan G, The Indian Express]Q.Homosexuality was legalized by the Supreme Court in 2018 through the -a)Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India caseb)National Legal Services Authority vs Union of India casec)Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India cased)Suresh Kumar Koushal Case vs Naz FoundationCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: Read the given information carefully and answer the questions given beside:The Centre told the Supreme Court Wednesday that it will form a committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary to address “human concerns” of same-sex couples without legally recognising their relationship as a marriage. Calling it a “very fair suggestion”, a five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, said if what the government says goes through, it “will be a substantial advancement over what we have today” and a “building block for the future” of the movement for gay rights.It asked the petitioners if, at this stage, they would still like to stick to their demand for a declaration that they have the right to marry under the Special Marriage Act (SMA), 1954. The Bench asked the petitioners to sit with Attorney General R Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta over the weekend and discuss matters. Senior Advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for the petitioners, said he “fully understands what” the court “is saying” and “will reflect on that, and build that into our argument”.The CJI said “from the drift of the submissions made by the Solicitor General on the last occasion, it appears that the SG also accepts that of course people do have a right to cohabit and the right to cohabit itself is something which is now an accepted social reality at least.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from: “Will form committee on concerns of same-sex couples: Centre to Supreme Court”, by Ananthakrishnan G, The Indian Express]Q.Homosexuality was legalized by the Supreme Court in 2018 through the -a)Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India caseb)National Legal Services Authority vs Union of India casec)Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India cased)Suresh Kumar Koushal Case vs Naz FoundationCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: Read the given information carefully and answer the questions given beside:The Centre told the Supreme Court Wednesday that it will form a committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary to address “human concerns” of same-sex couples without legally recognising their relationship as a marriage. Calling it a “very fair suggestion”, a five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, said if what the government says goes through, it “will be a substantial advancement over what we have today” and a “building block for the future” of the movement for gay rights.It asked the petitioners if, at this stage, they would still like to stick to their demand for a declaration that they have the right to marry under the Special Marriage Act (SMA), 1954. The Bench asked the petitioners to sit with Attorney General R Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta over the weekend and discuss matters. Senior Advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for the petitioners, said he “fully understands what” the court “is saying” and “will reflect on that, and build that into our argument”.The CJI said “from the drift of the submissions made by the Solicitor General on the last occasion, it appears that the SG also accepts that of course people do have a right to cohabit and the right to cohabit itself is something which is now an accepted social reality at least.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from: “Will form committee on concerns of same-sex couples: Centre to Supreme Court”, by Ananthakrishnan G, The Indian Express]Q.Homosexuality was legalized by the Supreme Court in 2018 through the -a)Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India caseb)National Legal Services Authority vs Union of India casec)Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India cased)Suresh Kumar Koushal Case vs Naz FoundationCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev